Then…don’t make him.
Franken might be able to shake this off if he could depend on conflicting memories. But he can’t. Because of that photo. The sex-abuse scandal is becoming, to cultural history, what Watergate was to political history. It is gigantic. It is era-defining. And among the dozens of famous people implicated in it, the Franken photo is the most damning and irrefutable evidence yet to emerge. It’s a tableau of our time. It is the photo of our moment. It’s the kind of smoking gun you couldn’t use in a Law & Order episode because it would be too blatant. It will never disappear from the national consciousness. Powered by Consider the breathtaking way each detail reinforces the horror of the others: A Hollywood celebrity who will soon be a Democratic senator is molesting a woman. While she’s asleep. And in military gear, because she’s traveling to support our troops. In a war zone. And Franken is smiling. While shamelessly posing for the photographer. How can we ever cease to be amazed and appalled by this photo? It is to the sex war what the picture of the summary execution of that Viet Cong prisoner was to the Vietnam War.
And for the future?
Democrats who just this week were saying they would no longer tolerate Bill Clinton–type behavior can prove it.
We are getting plenty of Clinton-era behavior. But that’s not the same thing.
Bill Clinton only acknowledged extra-marital affairs with two women, Gennifer Flowers and Monica Lewinsky (he did not admit anything when he settled the Paula Jones case against him). Clinton never made any positive admissions. He merely stopped making denials, and in both the Flowers and Lewinsky affairs he only did that when irrefutable evidence of the affairs became public.
Bill Clinton, in other words, behaved and continues to behave exactly as Roy Moore is now behaving when he is accused.
Bill Clinton should resign.
A more appropriate post, eTASS would be, Frankenstein should resign. But you are proving yet again that if not for double standard, your hypocritical brethren would have no standards at all. Keep digging, cupcake.
“Bill Clinton should resign.”
That’s the new left wwing talking point. See, it’s funny! Becvause Bill Clinton holds no office!
In other words, no accountability.
The goal of comparing Clinton’s sexual assault accusations with those currently leveled at some GOP figures is to point out the double standard and rank partisanship of some Democratic leaders and left wing pundits. If feminist complaints against Republicans are simply partisan attacks, they should be ignored. The problem they have with Moore isn’t the accusations made against him, the problem they have with Moore is that he is a Republican.
I emailed my senator “Al” and told him not to resign. He’s much more harmful to the Democrats while still holding office.
Where can I order my Frankenweinstein for President bumper stickers? I’ve got a feeling they’re going to be collector’s items.
Al won’t resign. He’ll merely change the pronounciation of his hame to “Fronk-en”.
You see, PM, that was eTASS’ feeble attempt at humor. The poor sod does not realize he has become a caricature of himself. The irony that libturds are now throwing Clintoon under the bus which highlights and magnifies the utter depravity and hypocrisy of the left is completely lost on eTASS-BFL-SPM. It must be tough to go through life without self-awareness.
heh, heh… right on cue. look up “Air F**k One”
Maybe Mike Pence’s refusal to be alone with any woman besides his wife is not so ridiculous after all.
Woah! Hit me with a rhythm stick! Did we just witness a flying pig moment?
I may have made a similar comment to this before, but the reason the Victorians were so keen on separating men and women in private places was because they knew that one party could take advantage of the other. That doesn’t mean that they would rut like rabbits (probably), but the fact that they were alone together would give one or both the opportunity to claim that the other had done something they should not have.
Welcome back to the 19th century.
All heterosexual men check out all women. Studies with high speed cameras and PET scans have shown that men scan a woman’s body and come up with an initial judgment as to mating potential within 0.25 seconds. This happens in the more primitive, unconscious part of the brain which is much faster than the cerebral cortex where the “thinking” or conscious part of our brain lies. In fact it happens before the conscious part of the brain has a chance to react. So all men look at all women’s breasts. It’s just a question of how long they linger, as that is where there is a conscious decision made. Well brought up young men are taught that it is impolite to stare, to ogle, because it makes a woman uncomfortable. But all men realize that the act of looking at a woman’s breasts, and the rest of her body, is almost impossible to stop doing. Those more considerate just try to be civilized about it, and make it quick, or when she’s not looking. I think that is why there is a larger separation on that question between men and women that with the others. Men have trouble seeing checking out a woman as harassment, as they really can’t help themselves. Yes, ogling is a different thing from glancing, but the question is not entirely clear.
If any woman must be believed if she claims harrassment, and men must be made to work in privacy with women, well, there is an obvious power imbalance, and it is not the man who has the advantage.
Mike Pence is going to be the last man standing. The mother rule is the only thing that can keep us safe. :^)
Robert Mugabe is running the Franken play.
If he carries it too far, he will be wearing a burning tire necklace in the center of Harare.
Hmmmm. Nah.
Who kidnapped Emery and replaced him? He’s making sense today!
(sorry, just couldn’t resist….)
Seriously, one thing that strikes me is that I’ve been telling my daughters that if a man needs to see a lady in skin tight apparel to figure out she’s attractive, he’s not marriage material. We might also say that ogling–requiring ten or twenty seconds to figure out if a lady is attractive–is offensive because it’s a sign of deficient manhood as well.
Not that we ought to “mentally undress” a woman, but even if a gal is wearing a burqa, it’s straightforward to get enough information to figure out basic attractiveness through the general silhouette, posture, etc..
Not that we ought to “mentally undress” a woman, but even if a gal is wearing a burqa, it’s straightforward to get enough information to figure out basic attractiveness through the general silhouette, posture, etc..
I’ll go that one better.
Back when I did a bunch of online dating (which was back about the time this blog launched, in 2002-2006), having photos on online dating profiles was still sort of rare – not everyone had access to a digital camera or scanners, much less a phone that could take 500 selfies a day. It was in a sense the ultimate burqua.
So you wound up actually emailing, talking on the phone, communicating with women before you asked them out. As a result, many many many online dates were “blind dates”, back then.
And I found a bit of a pattern:
“insanity”.
Not to say it was entirely a cerebral thing; I’m a guy, and it’s a biological and social fact that physical attractiveness is important to us. Just saying, the mental picture I formed talking to someone almost never steered me wrong.
I can tie you, Mitch. I’ve personally watched people flirt in class 100 cleanrooms–full bunny suit, the workers in there can’t recognize you if they see your whole face. Cover up your mouth, and then they figure out who you are.
But ya, ya did well, and I am still wondering what the kidnappers did with the real Emery. :^) (I hope he’s OK!)
It is interesting that most of the harrasment complaints so far have come from women in workplace situations. We are not talking about office women being cat-called or propositioned as they walk past all-male construction crews, we are talking about office women at their place of work. The abuse seems to happen when men & women work together in close proximity, in hierarchial organizations. It’s a good bet that, although show biz and journalism are where prominent accusations are now being made, any similar organization may be next — academia, law, retail, non-profits, etc.
show biz and journalism are where prominent accusations are now being made
MP, you forgot politicians. Now if we add academia, we have the entire libturd and establishment elite set covered. Coincidence? Don’t think so.
But ya, ya did well, and I am still wondering what the kidnappers did with the real Emery. :^) (I hope he’s OK!)
bb, don’t worry, eTASS always has his sock puppet he can trot out in case his handle gets hijacked.
Mitch, do you wonder if Leann Tweeden, given the other videos which have now surfaced of her kissing others on the tour, including soldiers who weren’t asking for it, of her grabbing other men’s asses, and who recently inked a deal with Sinclair, maybe JUST MAYBE embellished slightly? She claimed to have avoided him afterward but was photographed 3 year later at a gala with him. Her boyfriend was their when the photo was taken, do you think her boyfriend allowed Franken to grope her?
The point is, there are political actors and there are the innocent/uninvolved, Franken MAY be guilty of misconduct, but based on what is coming out about Tweeden, I’m beginning to doubt her impartiality. Do you blame me?
On the other hand, but more important than Franken, while you may call questioning Tweeden “slut shaming”, which it most certainly isn’t, it’s questioning whether someone who is a right-wing radio host may exaggerate, but by contrast to what has gone on with the President, the left has pilloried Charlie Rose, Harvey Weinstein, and generally, Al Franken.
Do I think Franken should resign? Well, the jury is still out. Tweeden’s complaints are now somewhat questionable. The complaint of the other woman actually, to me, holds FAR more significance. As I’ve said, 3 strikes and you’re out. Will Franken resign if a third person comes forward, I don’t know. I know he won’t have my support, so I’m not “slut shaming” Tweeden, I’m counting her complaint, however tainted/questionable, as one of those three, and I think the left is doing the same.
Where are you on Trump?
Should Donald Trump resign?
Should Roy Moore leave the race (in effect, resign)?
Moore? Sure.
Trump? Why? Be specific.
Pen
“Kissing others on the tour” implies NO consent for Franken to kiss her. Just because Scarlett Johannson banged Benicio Del Toro doesn’t give me a shot.
and who recently inked a deal with Sinclair
So – her employer and status justifies bad things happening to her?
based on what is coming out about Tweeden, I’m beginning to doubt her impartiality.
Last week, when she accepted Franken’s excuse, people were praising her impartiality. Now that Franken’s career is in the balance, she’s an eeevul conservative who needs to be slut-shamed?
while you may call questioning Tweeden “slut shaming”, which it most certainly isn’t
Now, it’s your partiality in question, Pen – because much of the narrative about Tweeden (she was a pinup/cheesecake model!) IS, precisely, slut-shaming.
Got news for you, Pen – if a woman works as a stripper, it doesn’t allow you to touch her, even though she’s sitting on your lap in a g-string, and the bouncers will inform you if you don’t know that (if the club has any integrity, and most but not all do) with extreme prejudice.
Doesn’t matter if Tweeden kissed every other guy on that stage, or if she posed in Playboy, or if she ran for office as a Republican; No is no, every time, all the time.
Even if she’s accusing a vital Democrat legislator!
Funny how the narrative of “no woman deserves this” disappears when it’s a liberal doing the abuse, Penigma. Hypocrisy much? And of course it would be slut-shaming if the accuser of a conservative were treated like you’ve just treated Ms. Tweeden, but of course it would not be if it’s a liberal.
One might also suggest that young soldiers putting their rear ends on the line for their country might be a little more deserving of a kiss from Ms. Tweeden than an aging, overweight “comedian”. Just sayin’.
Moore? Sure.
Why, Mitch? have you also succumbed to the j’accuse mentality? If there were lawsuits filed, yes, absolutely. But in absence of discovery and lack of any objective proof other than hearsay, and so far seemingly at least one proven fabrication, why?
Mitch, do you wonder if Leann Tweeden, given the other videos…, blah, blah, blah, tl;dr
In other words, “she was asking for it”. Right, pen. You prove yourself how deep the hypocrisy runs within you. No other fisking is even required – your comments are self-fisking.
. . . I’m beginning to doubt her impartiality.
Impartiality? Who the Hell cares about her impartiality? I have never heard anyone on the Left say that the believibility of a woman’s testimony about sexual assault requires her to be impartial. No one is impartial. Monica Lewinsky was certainly not impartial. The truth of her statements had nothing to do with imartiality.
It is a signature move of the Left to say that truth relies on a testifier’s “impartiality” — but only when that impartiality can be described (true or false) as anti-Democrat.
JPA,
I’ve succumbed to nothing. I would like to believe Moore, but I’m not sure I do. I can be convinced.
You see MP, demoncRats expect their women to be compliant and quiet. Hence indeed, the only ones who dare to speak up MUST be partial. No wonder libturds’ goal is to enslave all of us. Then they can rape and grope with impunity.
Why would a person who believes that Franken would do what he is shown doing in the photograph believe him incapable of sticking his tongue in the mouth of the same person?
I suspect impartiality on the part of Peev.
I suppose the woman that Franken groped at the DFL booth at the Fair was a covert Republican hussy, deliberately trolling the booth in her just-asking-for-it yoga pants.
Merg opined: “Moore? Sure.”
Why? Please be specific.
His chief accusor’ s lawyer has said she cannot vouch for the authenticity of her evidence, but refuses to release it for 3rd party inspection.
Multiple witnesses have come forward to refute the other accusor’s story.
Sack check buddy.
Do not let your penchant for giving reprobate leftists the bene of doubt sink you into the stew.
Will the Ethics Committee be accused of “slut shaming” when they watch the USO video of that tour? Both the committee and Franken need to address the allegations. The committee will have an opportunity to watch video (available on YouTube) of this USO show featuring both Franken and Tweeden. They will see Tweeden performing on stage while she humps and gropes various musicians and performers. They will see Tweeden humping Robin Williams, playing grab @ss with the musicians and enthusiastically kissing Franken during the skit, with her arms tightly embracing him. Hardly the behavior of a woman who thinks a guy is a pervert or who objected to the rehearsal kiss at the time. He was a comedian, she was a hired Playmate sex object on a raunchy USO tour. Context matters. Perhaps it’s not quite everything Ms. Tweeden claims it is.
MAGA = Making All Groping Acceptable
All of these harrasment activities took place long before Trump was prez, Emery.
It turns out that “Make All Groping Acceptable” should have been the Democrat slogan in 1996. Accusations aren’t enough — no one but extreme hard core feminists want to take away an accused person’s right to the presumption of innocence. This, FYI, is why the complaints against trump have vaporized. There is no tangible proof that he groped anyone (Tangible! Ha! Get it?).
Yes, we’ll done sir!
Awhole lot of Senators, Congressmen and State Legislators are calling former interns right now to see if they need anything. 💵💰
I love these scandals, Emery, because it reinforces the idea that you cannot trust your fellow man with power. Republican, Democrat, I don’t want to give any politician power over my decisions unless it is neccessary to preserve our republic. They are overgrown teenagers, fer God’s sake.
“I don’t want to give any politician power over my decisions unless it is necessary to preserve our republic.”™
You should consider registering that phrase. That (or a variation of it) would be a very clever campaign slogan.
If I’m not mistaken the Tweeden matter occurred before the DFL gamed the Franken election to the Senate and therefore it doesn’t give rise to ethics violations for Congress critters. Now the accusation that he groped and diddled a woman at the state fair while serving in Congress is a whole different matter.
Apparently opposition research was not a priority for the Coleman campaign.
Either it wasn’t a priority, or Coleman had something in his past that he knew Franken knew, and it would have been a “Mutually Assured Destruction” that would have put Franken over the top.
Really, the left didn’t give a rip about Franken’s lack of experience and his two book length personal attacks. Nor did they care about his history of gross perversion at SNL. Why would they have cared about Ms. Tweeden? They’d just have ended up “slut-shaming” her in the same way the left is doing today.
I’m hoping that by Trump endorsing a pedophile for the US Senate will be his low point, but somehow I doubt it.
Hey eTASS, which pedophile would that be? Got proof? I thought you have reached a low point, but somehow I doubt it.
One can see these crimes in various ways. For some, it’s enough that someone is accused of sexual assault by a woman who can’t remember she didn’t actually have a phone in her room, or that someone was accused of general creepiness with a false claim he’d been banned from a mall. For others, securing taxpayer funding for the dismembering of millions of pre-born babies is the bigger offense.
So what it all boils down to is: If you like a guy’s politics you find reasons to give him the benefit of the doubt. If you don’t like his politics you’re more inclined to believe the accuser(s).
If you don’t like his politics you’re more inclined to blindly believe the accuser(s).
There fixed it for you, sock puppet #1. Have you seen reports on cases filed yet? Of course you did not! But hey, keep believing, ’cause that’s all you got, cupcake.
Emery: not at all. It’s simply that where the more salacious accusations against Moore can be tested against known data, there is a contradiction. With Franken, the known data confirm the accusers’ accounts.
#basic_rule_of_evidence, buddy.
Which is my point regarding Franken. Aside from his ham fisted photo, should Tweeden claims, unsupported by evidence, should be enough to set in motion a process of punishment. And that runs afoul of basic American concepts of justice, eg. innocent until proven guilty. One can certainly argue the issue, and claim that the circumstances are such that women’s testimony in these situations should carry more weight. But one needs to make that claim and have that argument, and not rest everything on this facile notion that this is a binary choice: an accuser is always believed or society is discounting her opinion and worth utterly. A similar argument can be made for concepts like proportionality. Eg. if you take what Franken did at face value does this offense merit his destruction?