Welcome Guest!
Create an Account
login email:
password:
site searchwhere to watchcontact usabout usadvertise with ushelp
Message Board
BobcatAttack.com Message Board
General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events
Topic:  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?

Topic:  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
Author
Message
DelBobcat
General User



Member Since: 8/26/2010
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 1,135

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/20/2017 5:29:54 PM 
I think this is a fairly accurate take, and I'd like to hear RP or OCF provide their perspective on it:

https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2017/12/13/167607...

BA OHIO 2010, BS OHIO 2010, MA Delaware 2012
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/20/2017 7:08:23 PM 
David Roberts? Are you presenting him as a centrist? Do you think he might have a bit of a bias?

This is the same David Roberts who once called for "Nuremberg" trials for anyone who denied climate change?
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/20/2017 8:04:11 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
David Roberts? Are you presenting him as a centrist? Do you think he might have a bit of a bias?

This is the same David Roberts who once called for "Nuremberg" trials for anyone who denied climate change?



He said nothing about centrism. He posted an opinion piece and asked for opinions from folks here.



Back to Top
  
Kevin Finnegan
General User

Member Since: 2/4/2005
Location: Rockton, IL
Post Count: 1,103

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/20/2017 8:23:22 PM 
No, he may not be a centrist, but we shouldn't discount somebody's opinion on one thing because you may disagree with their opinion on another thing. It is an interesting point, but know that the democrats are not fully acting on morals and higher standards. They're trying to fake higher standards to the voters, but it's truly politics, not ethics. Plus, as long as Bob Menendez is a democratic senator, they'll have a hard time convincing anybody that their standards are impeccable.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 9:19:55 AM 
finnOhio wrote:
No, he may not be a centrist, but we shouldn't discount somebody's opinion on one thing because you may disagree with their opinion on another thing. It is an interesting point, but know that the democrats are not fully acting on morals and higher standards. They're trying to fake higher standards to the voters, but it's truly politics, not ethics. Plus, as long as Bob Menendez is a democratic senator, they'll have a hard time convincing anybody that their standards are impeccable.


I think this is basically true. It's undoubtedly politics.

But in this case the political move also happens to run parallel to the ethical/moral standard we all should uphold.

This entire national discussion centered around accusations against Franken, Moore, etc. is about setting the bar for Trump. The RNC's support wasn't about Moore as a candidate, or even about their feelings on the veracity of the claims against Moore. It was about setting the tone of the national conversation that's inevitable about Trump's past sexual improprieties. It was one party -- the Democrats -- trying to set a standard of decency (and gaining politically in the process) and another making it very, very clear that politics take priority over decency.

Victim blaming will continue to be the norm, credible accusations will be ignored in favor of claiming a media witch hunt, and so on. That's the GOP's standard on a Russia investigation that's led to three arrests. The FBI and CIA and Media are conspiring to take down the President. It's their standard on Trump's sexual assault claims, in which 20 women and dozens of media organizations joined forces to take down Trump. Hell, it's even the playbook for elections. Roy Moore was cheated by illegal voting, Trump says however many million illegal votes were cast for Clinton, etc. and the media and the Democrats are lying if they say otherwise. No evidence has to be shown. You just have to loudly, and angrily insist there's fraud, or that the FBI is out to get you, or whatever.

So yes, the Franken resignation and moral high ground Dems are staking on this issue is a political move. That doesn't make them any less right, it doesn't make Roy Moore or Donald Trump better people, and it doesn't mean that voters who support them aren't making a moral decision.

Last Edited: 12/21/2017 9:48:31 AM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
DelBobcat
General User



Member Since: 8/26/2010
Location: Cincinnati, OH
Post Count: 1,135

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 10:26:06 AM 
Robert Fox wrote:
David Roberts? Are you presenting him as a centrist? Do you think he might have a bit of a bias?

This is the same David Roberts who once called for "Nuremberg" trials for anyone who denied climate change?



Where did I say that he wasn't biased? I know nothing about David Roberts or his political leanings, but from reading the piece I would guess that he is liberal. But there are no facts in that piece that are false as far as I can tell. If you know of anything he said that is a lie, please point it out. I happen to agree with his opinion that "whataboutism" and delegitimization are being used as tools by the GOP and he presents some very good facts to back up that opinion. Maybe you look at those facts and come to a different opinion, that's why I shared and that's why I wanted input from others--especially those who tend to disagree with me.

But it's funny that you come at it with the response you did. Mostly because you're doing exactly the thing he is talking about. His opinion isn't valid because, in your mind, he's a leftist and he once said something that was appalling (I guess, I'm not familiar with his comments). Instead of engaging in the substance of the opinion you're trying to delegitimize it by shooting the messenger.

BA OHIO 2010, BS OHIO 2010, MA Delaware 2012
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 10:55:07 AM 
DelBobcat wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
David Roberts? Are you presenting him as a centrist? Do you think he might have a bit of a bias?

This is the same David Roberts who once called for "Nuremberg" trials for anyone who denied climate change?



But it's funny that you come at it with the response you did. Mostly because you're doing exactly the thing he is talking about. His opinion isn't valid because, in your mind, he's a leftist and he once said something that was appalling (I guess, I'm not familiar with his comments). Instead of engaging in the substance of the opinion you're trying to delegitimize it by shooting the messenger.


At this point, we shouldn't be surprised. The entirety of this conversation has been about conservative posters being unwilling to engage in conversation. They shoot the messenger when Colin Kaepernick's the messenger -- because of his methodology. They shoot the messenger when it's David Roberts, because of previous opinions. They won't engage in a conversation about why they support Roy Moore and Donald Trump because Bill Clinton was the President 30 years ago.

Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 12:06:08 PM 
DelBobcat wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
David Roberts? Are you presenting him as a centrist? Do you think he might have a bit of a bias?

This is the same David Roberts who once called for "Nuremberg" trials for anyone who denied climate change?



Where did I say that he wasn't biased? I know nothing about David Roberts or his political leanings, but from reading the piece I would guess that he is liberal. But there are no facts in that piece that are false as far as I can tell. If you know of anything he said that is a lie, please point it out. I happen to agree with his opinion that "whataboutism" and delegitimization are being used as tools by the GOP and he presents some very good facts to back up that opinion. Maybe you look at those facts and come to a different opinion, that's why I shared and that's why I wanted input from others--especially those who tend to disagree with me.

But it's funny that you come at it with the response you did. Mostly because you're doing exactly the thing he is talking about. His opinion isn't valid because, in your mind, he's a leftist and he once said something that was appalling (I guess, I'm not familiar with his comments). Instead of engaging in the substance of the opinion you're trying to delegitimize it by shooting the messenger.


His premise is that Trump and Moore are both guilty of sexual harassment and/or child abuse. That's a pretty big leap and breezes past due process. I have no problem with the writer believing that to be true, but he should at least admit that takes some degree of guesswork on his part. Plenty of other people--people from another political persuasion--are not convinced of one or the other or both. They just don't know. But they DO associate some skepticism about the timing of these attacks. Does that, alone, destroy the left's argument? No, but it's certainly a reasonable question.

Since the voting public doesn't know the truth of the matter, I would say many ignored it or assigned there own degree of guilt or innocents. Ask yourself this: If there was absolute, airtight evidence of Moore's guilt, do you think he would have had any prayer of winning that election? What about Trump, could he?

I think if you're honest with yourself, you'll agree that some voters just don't know the truth, so they chose their candidate based upon their political preference.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 12:47:46 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
DelBobcat wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
David Roberts? Are you presenting him as a centrist? Do you think he might have a bit of a bias?

This is the same David Roberts who once called for "Nuremberg" trials for anyone who denied climate change?



Where did I say that he wasn't biased? I know nothing about David Roberts or his political leanings, but from reading the piece I would guess that he is liberal. But there are no facts in that piece that are false as far as I can tell. If you know of anything he said that is a lie, please point it out. I happen to agree with his opinion that "whataboutism" and delegitimization are being used as tools by the GOP and he presents some very good facts to back up that opinion. Maybe you look at those facts and come to a different opinion, that's why I shared and that's why I wanted input from others--especially those who tend to disagree with me.

But it's funny that you come at it with the response you did. Mostly because you're doing exactly the thing he is talking about. His opinion isn't valid because, in your mind, he's a leftist and he once said something that was appalling (I guess, I'm not familiar with his comments). Instead of engaging in the substance of the opinion you're trying to delegitimize it by shooting the messenger.


His premise is that Trump and Moore are both guilty of sexual harassment and/or child abuse. That's a pretty big leap and breezes past due process. I have no problem with the writer believing that to be true, but he should at least admit that takes some degree of guesswork on his part. Plenty of other people--people from another political persuasion--are not convinced of one or the other or both. They just don't know. But they DO associate some skepticism about the timing of these attacks. Does that, alone, destroy the left's argument? No, but it's certainly a reasonable question.

Since the voting public doesn't know the truth of the matter, I would say many ignored it or assigned there own degree of guilt or innocents. Ask yourself this: If there was absolute, airtight evidence of Moore's guilt, do you think he would have had any prayer of winning that election? What about Trump, could he?

I think if you're honest with yourself, you'll agree that some voters just don't know the truth, so they chose their candidate based upon their political preference.


As I pointed out earlier, 71% of Roy Moore voters believed the allegations against him were made up. There may have been some percentage of his voters who felt that due process was warranted, but 71% decided they knew the answer already. That's not due process, it's blind loyalty.

The evidence against Moore is overwhelming. Maybe not airtight. But very close to it: http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/politics/... . Do you think that Moore's voters digested all of that information and decided the allegations were completely made up? Or do you think it's much more likely that they don't actually know the details and calling the allegations made up is just an easy way to justify their vote?

As for the timing of the accusations against Trump, I've asked others who question his accusers to actually engage on the specifics of each accuser's claim. I've also pointed out that many claims against Trump pre-date his candidacy. They've decided not to do so. But I'm sure you will, right? Because this is about due process and examining the facts and not just another convenient way to avoid a conversation that you don't want to have.

It's really easy to adopt a blanket excuse like "the timing seems suspicious" until you look at the details. So it's not surprising to me at all that none of Trump's supporters seem interested in doing so.
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,687

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 1:13:45 PM 
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame wrote:
DelBobcat wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
David Roberts? Are you presenting him as a centrist? Do you think he might have a bit of a bias?

This is the same David Roberts who once called for "Nuremberg" trials for anyone who denied climate change?



But it's funny that you come at it with the response you did. Mostly because you're doing exactly the thing he is talking about. His opinion isn't valid because, in your mind, he's a leftist and he once said something that was appalling (I guess, I'm not familiar with his comments). Instead of engaging in the substance of the opinion you're trying to delegitimize it by shooting the messenger.


At this point, we shouldn't be surprised. The entirety of this conversation has been about conservative posters being unwilling to engage in conversation. They shoot the messenger when Colin Kaepernick's the messenger -- because of his methodology. They shoot the messenger when it's David Roberts, because of previous opinions. They won't engage in a conversation about why they support Roy Moore and Donald Trump because Bill Clinton was the President 30 years ago.



+1
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 1:31:06 PM 
Some of the "evidence" against Moore is sketchy at best, namely that coming from Gloria Allred.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/11/16/allred-on-wheth... /

Now, whether or not Moore had a habit of chasing teenage girls back in the 70s? Most people have no idea if that's true. If you're a conservative living in Alabama, and your candidate gets a slew of attacks just before an election, you probably smell a Democratic rat.
Back to Top
  
BillyTheCat
General User

Member Since: 10/6/2012
Post Count: 9,687

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 1:41:53 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Some of the "evidence" against Moore is sketchy at best, namely that coming from Gloria Allred.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/11/16/allred-on-wheth... /

Now, whether or not Moore had a habit of chasing teenage girls back in the 70s? Most people have no idea if that's true. If you're a conservative living in Alabama, and your candidate gets a slew of attacks just before an election, you probably smell a Democratic rat.


I just got my Soros supplement check yesterday.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 1:42:46 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Some of the "evidence" against Moore is sketchy at best, namely that coming from Gloria Allred.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/11/16/allred-on-wheth... /

Now, whether or not Moore had a habit of chasing teenage girls back in the 70s? Most people have no idea if that's true. If you're a conservative living in Alabama, and your candidate gets a slew of attacks just before an election, you probably smell a Democratic rat.


That's some solid due process. Ignore everything but the one piece of evidence you have a rebuttal to.

You're a truth seeker of the highest order.

Anytime you want to examine all of the evidence and make an argument that Roy Moore and Donald Trump are innocent victims of a Democatic/Media witch hunt, I'm happy to have that conversation. Let me know. Feel free to start by responding to all of the evidence against Moore, instead of just posting a Breitbart link about a lawyer you distrust. You're responding to "sketchy evidence" with a link to a news source that's run by a Roy Moore campaign advisor. And you're the one using scare quotes around the word evidence?



Last Edited: 12/21/2017 1:46:58 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 1:47:32 PM 
I didn't ignore the rest of it, I said I didn't know. I also don't know what crime he's being accused of in the Salon article. That he chased teenage girls? Is that off-putting? Yep. Is it illegal. Don't know. That would depend on what physical interaction there was, if any.

I also said the validity of the claims--30 years later--is a valid reason to distrust the source. You can hate that fact. But it's a fact nonetheless.
Back to Top
  
Kevin Finnegan
General User

Member Since: 2/4/2005
Location: Rockton, IL
Post Count: 1,103

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 1:58:40 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Some of the "evidence" against Moore is sketchy at best, namely that coming from Gloria Allred.

http://www.breitbart.com/video/2017/11/16/allred-on-wheth... /

Now, whether or not Moore had a habit of chasing teenage girls back in the 70s? Most people have no idea if that's true. If you're a conservative living in Alabama, and your candidate gets a slew of attacks just before an election, you probably smell a Democratic rat.


I'm confused as to why the word evidence is in quotes. And the link you shared (interesting that somebody opposed to reading a slanted viewpoint shared a Breitbart link) says that the woman's lawyer wants it verified by an independent source. I'm not sure what about that is salacious. She doesn't know definitively anything about the information, but she is willing to have it verified. I think that seems like rather level-headed thinking rather than being boisterous and accusatory.

As to whether Mr. Moore had a habit of chasing teenage girls...this is a man who said that he first noticed his wife when she was a teenager and remembered her from a dance. This is a man that numerous sources have said was banned or asked not to go to a mall because of his encounters with teenage girls. This is a man who wouldn't definitively answer on Sean Hannity's radio show whether he dated teenage girls. I think you'd have to be pretty blind to the truth to assume there isn't enough smoke to have a fire.

Again, this is the easy stuff. We're anti-sexual assaulters. We're anti-sexual molesters. It's not partisan. It's not controversial.

Think of it this way. If you're in a leadership position, and you hear these things about a possible job candidate, are you going to hire them? I'd imagine the answer would simply be, "No". Know that this was a job interview and yet 48.5 percent of Alabama voters wanted this person hired for the position.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:02:42 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
I didn't ignore the rest of it, I said I didn't know. I also don't know what crime he's being accused of in the Salon article. That he chased teenage girls? Is that off-putting? Yep. Is it illegal. Don't know. That would depend on what physical interaction there was, if any.

I also said the validity of the claims--30 years later--is a valid reason to distrust the source. You can hate that fact. But it's a fact nonetheless.



And why wouldn't women want to come forward with allegations sooner? They're treated so well when they do.

Basically what your stance boils down to is that you're fine with GOP voters voting for guys that dated teenage girls, so long as they didn't touch the teenage girls? Cool party.

Look, I know your news sources have been telling you for 15 years that Democrats are the greatest enemy known to man. And that makes it super easy to convince yourself that charges against Roy Moore are a scheme cooked up by the world's greatest force for evil.

But maybe for a minute you should consider NOT siding with a child molester over your neighbors and colleagues. Just a thought.

Last Edited: 12/21/2017 2:06:12 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Kevin Finnegan
General User

Member Since: 2/4/2005
Location: Rockton, IL
Post Count: 1,103

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:04:23 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
I didn't ignore the rest of it, I said I didn't know. I also don't know what crime he's being accused of in the Salon article. That he chased teenage girls? Is that off-putting? Yep. Is it illegal. Don't know. That would depend on what physical interaction there was, if any.

I also said the validity of the claims--30 years later--is a valid reason to distrust the source. You can hate that fact. But it's a fact nonetheless.



Please tell me you at least see the irony of wanting to discredit claims made decades later but are happy with viewing Juanita Broaddrick's claims against Bill Clinton as having merit. Broaddrick first gave a sworn affidavit in 1998 denying the charges but then she aired the story in Dateline in 1999 for an alleged assault from 1978. I'm not discrediting the claims, I just find the differing litmus tests interesting.
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:11:34 PM 
Nice character assassination. Of me.

Once again, I don't know what Roy Moore is guilty of. Maybe something, maybe nothing. But the truth is, you don't know either.

And Finn, the Breitbart article is a good companion to the Salon article, don't ya think?
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:13:04 PM 
finnOhio wrote:
Robert Fox wrote:
I didn't ignore the rest of it, I said I didn't know. I also don't know what crime he's being accused of in the Salon article. That he chased teenage girls? Is that off-putting? Yep. Is it illegal. Don't know. That would depend on what physical interaction there was, if any.

I also said the validity of the claims--30 years later--is a valid reason to distrust the source. You can hate that fact. But it's a fact nonetheless.



Please tell me you at least see the irony of wanting to discredit claims made decades later but are happy with viewing Juanita Broaddrick's claims against Bill Clinton as having merit. Broaddrick first gave a sworn affidavit in 1998 denying the charges but then she aired the story in Dateline in 1999 for an alleged assault from 1978. I'm not discrediting the claims, I just find the differing litmus tests interesting.


Where did I bring up Clinton or Broaddrick? Or are you conflating people on here?
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:14:21 PM 
So in your own words, Moore is a child molester. End of story. No reason to investigate. Game. Set. Match.

Glad you're not a judge.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:17:41 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Nice character assassination. Of me.

Once again, I don't know what Roy Moore is guilty of. Maybe something, maybe nothing. But the truth is, you don't know either.

And Finn, the Breitbart article is a good companion to the Salon article, don't ya think?


Is the editor of Slate a campaign advisor to Doug Jones?

And again, dispute the facts. We always end up in the exact same place; me asking you to engage around facts, you refusing. It's happened on three different topics in this thread alone.

Until you do that, all of your 'due process' garbage is just avoidance and you know it.

Edit: And it's because I'm not a judge thatI feel comfortable making assessments based on the evidence I have available. My opinion carries no weight. I'm not held to the standard of a judge and neither are you. The only reason you're pretending that's the standard of this conversation is because you know there's no rational way to interpret the evidence we do have that supports the opinion you're blindly supporting.

Further, you're not even asking the right question. You're not judging whether or not Roy Moore should go to prison. You're judging whether or not he should be a US Senator. We have more than enough evidence to answer that question definitively.

Last Edited: 12/21/2017 2:30:21 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:31:19 PM 
Wrong. You're jumping to conclusions that fit your left-wing narrative. Simple as that. You don't know the facts of these accusations. There are very few who actually do. So we're left with making a judgement call. To the surprise of NO ONE on BA.com, you choose the liberal side of the argument: Moore is a child molester, and Trump is pond scum.

Got it.

If I thought you had real insight as to the accusations made against either man, you might be an interesting guy to engage. As it is, you don't know. So you post left-wing narratives that neatly fit your political notions. So what? That's not interesting or worth wasting time with.

What's the BEST evidence against Moore? I know you say there are dozens. Which one is the most lock-solid?
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:35:59 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
Wrong. You're jumping to conclusions that fit your left-wing narrative. Simple as that. You don't know the facts of these accusations. There are very few who actually do. So we're left with making a judgement call. To the surprise of NO ONE on BA.com, you choose the liberal side of the argument: Moore is a child molester, and Trump is pond scum.

Got it.

If I thought you had real insight as to the accusations made against either man, you might be an interesting guy to engage. As it is, you don't know. So you post left-wing narratives that neatly fit your political notions. So what? That's not interesting or worth wasting time with.

What's the BEST evidence against Moore? I know you say there are dozens. Which one is the most lock-solid?


You're harping on about due process and then asking me to choose a single piece of evidence against Roy Moore rather than reviewing all of the evidence and the story it tells? I'm not sure you understand what due process is.

I posted the Slate article. It lays out much of the evidence, and numbers it and everything. You're welcome to address the points in it, and as asked, address the points in this Washington Post article: https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2017/... /.

You call them left-wing narratives, and say that I have no insight. I'm citing the sources that I used to inform my opinion. I've asked you, repeatedly, to address them. I see all sorts of smoke, hear recordings of Trump saying sketchy things, and I think "huh, there's probably some fire there." You read those things and think "well, I need to have witnessed these things personally to have an opinion, unlike liberals." And then you put the word evidence in scare quotes and post articles insinuating victims are lying. Because, you know, you care about due process and uncovering the truth. Just like all people who put evidence in scare quotes and claim not to have opinions.

Knock yourself out. Address the claims. There are 20 accusations against the President, and 6 Roy Moore accusers. You're into due process. Give them their due process.


Last Edited: 12/21/2017 2:49:48 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Robert Fox
General User

Member Since: 11/16/2004
Location: Knoxville, TN
Post Count: 2,039

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:50:56 PM 
I don't know why I bother with you. You have no capability to hold a normal conversation or demonstrate a basic level of respect. Any more BS like what you just posted, and I'm out.

The slate article is full of little.
Story 1. Corfman claims Moore is wrong when he says he never met her. So what? Where's the crime? Benefit of the doubt for the left: Let's say Moore is guilty of... having a bad memory. Oh, she also claims he wore tight white underwear. Wow. That's a stretch and surely locks-down her accusations. Right? Hell, I wear tight white underwear. Uh Oh.
Story 2. Moore said he never dated anyone in their teens. Three women say he "asked them out." Now, we don't know that happened, or if a date of any kind happened. Benefit of the doubt: Moore is guilty of asking a teenager out on a date. A date that may or may not have actually happened.
Story 3. Corfman says Moore gave her alcohol, but Moore says it was a dry county, so that's not possible. Oh, but Aha! The county passed alcohol sales in 1971, so Moore is LYING!!!!!!! This MUST mean Moore is a child molester.
Story 4. Moore is married to a woman 14 years younger. Therefore, he prayed on little girls.
Story 5. This is the Gloria Allred thing we just discussed. There is MUCH to distrust about this whole sordid story. One handwriting expert has already said that at least some of the yearbook writing WAS tampered with and was much newer than 30 years old. Hmmmm.
That's it. From that, you are satisfied Moore is a child molester. I'm not. Now, let's go on about our regularly scheduled business.
Back to Top
  
Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
General User

Member Since: 7/30/2010
Post Count: 3,410

Status: Offline
  Message Not Read  RE: How many will kneel at 1:00 today?
   Posted: 12/21/2017 2:57:22 PM 
Robert Fox wrote:
I don't know why I bother with you. You have no capability to hold a normal conversation or demonstrate a basic level of respect. Any more BS like what you just posted, and I'm out.

The slate article is full of little.
Story 1. Corfman claims Moore is wrong when he says he never met her. So what? Where's the crime? Benefit of the doubt for the left: Let's say Moore is guilty of... having a bad memory. Oh, she also claims he wore tight white underwear. Wow. That's a stretch and surely locks-down her accusations. Right? Hell, I wear tight white underwear. Uh Oh.
Story 2. Moore said he never dated anyone in their teens. Three women say he "asked them out." Now, we don't know that happened, or if a date of any kind happened. Benefit of the doubt: Moore is guilty of asking a teenager out on a date. A date that may or may not have actually happened.
Story 3. Corfman says Moore gave her alcohol, but Moore says it was a dry county, so that's not possible. Oh, but Aha! The county passed alcohol sales in 1971, so Moore is LYING!!!!!!! This MUST mean Moore is a child molester.
Story 4. Moore is married to a woman 14 years younger. Therefore, he prayed on little girls.
Story 5. This is the Gloria Allred thing we just discussed. There is MUCH to distrust about this whole sordid story. One handwriting expert has already said that at least some of the yearbook writing WAS tampered with and was much newer than 30 years old. Hmmmm.
That's it. From that, you are satisfied Moore is a child molester. I'm not. Now, let's go on about our regularly scheduled business.


Note: Here's what the accuser's said about the yearbook: http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2017/d... /

But to the larger point, you see 5 accusations against Moore, none of which he could rebut without inconsistencies (at best) or lies (at worst) and don't become more suspicious?

And again, the question we need to answer is not if Roy Moore is guilty of a crime and deserves to go to jail, but whether you think he should be a US Senator. There's enough unexplained sketchy behavior, and witnesses with no reason at all to lie, for me to make that determination in a way I'm comfortable with. 6 women accused Roy Moore of similar behavior. Many of them have corroborating witnesses. Roy Moore's rebuttals contain inconsistencies. For him to be completely innocent, I'd have to believe that 6 people who are strangers to Roy Moore arbitrarily decided to concoct very similar lies to discredit him and got family members and friends to support them. What's their motivation to do so? Why should I believe that when believing 6 similar stories with witness accounts is 1000% more logical and likely?

And I'm sorry I hurt your feelings by asking you to review facts. You might want to take a look at your previous response to me though. I'm not sure how it demonstrates an appropriate level of respect.


Last Edited: 12/21/2017 3:22:13 PM by Bobcat Love's Sense of Shame
Back to Top
  
Showing Replies:  526 - 550  of 708 Posts
Jump to Page:  < Previous    1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10 | 11 | 12 | 13 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 17 | 18 | 19 | 20 | 21 | 22 | 23 | 24 | 25 | 26 | 27 | 28 | 29    Next >
View Other 'General Ohio University Discussion/Alumni Events' Topics
                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                             



WHO'S ONLINE
There are 261 Active Visitors on BobcatAttack.com
260 Guests
1 Registered User:
 colobobcat66
There are no other users looking at this page.




Copyright ©2024 BobcatAttack.com. All rights reserved.  |  Privacy Policy  |  Terms of Use
Partner of USA TODAY Sports Digital Properties