No. of Recommendations: 0
Ah, I didn't know that. So it's not disqualifying at all.

But Bill is old news now anyway. And it's not relevant to Hillary. Just as I don't blame Camille Cosby for Bill's apparent drugging of women.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
So what is a proper response to Al Franken's "sexual assault" on a reporter?

Depends if the reporter was underage or not. If she was, then Republicans will be lining up around the block to support Franken.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<So what is a proper response to Al Franken's "sexual assault" on a reporter?>>



I'll provide an opinion on that!


1. This was rehearsing for a skit. If you aren't comfortable rehearsing for a skit with a man, don't do it.


2. If you choose to do it and it's getting more personal than you like, get out of there, or object strenuously enough to make it clear you don't like it.


3. If someone refuses to leave you alone after you object, such as a United States Senator, get out of there using whatever physical force is reasonably necessary to do so.


If you fail to do #1, #2 and #3, you really have no one to blame but yourself.


You should realize that when you put yourself in the arms of a man, you are engaging in risky behavior. That may lead to something you don't want to have happen.


AQ prudent lady will probably refuse to engage in such risky behavior, and thus will have avoided the problem.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 12
A prudent lady will probably refuse to engage in such risky behavior, and thus will have avoided the problem.

Wait - are you saying that a prudent woman won't enter the performing arts, because otherwise she is accepting the risk of being sexually assaulted?

I don't think I understand. This woman had every right - and legitimate expectation - that she could participate in sketch comedy with a man in a professional setting and not have him kiss her against her will or touch her breasts while she was sleeping. Why is this a situation that she should avoid, rather than a situation that the man should be completely responsible for?

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
Why is this a situation that she should avoid, rather than a situation that the man should be completely responsible for?

Albaby


Think of him to whom you are speaking. The answer to your question will come with a blinding light replicating that produced by the detonation of a 20 megaton thermonuclear device.

It's one of those self-evident truths.

Churchy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<A prudent lady will probably refuse to engage in such risky behavior, and thus will have avoided the problem.

Wait - are you saying that a prudent woman won't enter the performing arts, because otherwise she is accepting the risk of being sexually assaulted?

I don't think I understand. This woman had every right - and legitimate expectation - that she could participate in sketch comedy with a man in a professional setting and not have him kiss her against her will or touch her breasts while she was sleeping. Why is this a situation that she should avoid, rather than a situation that the man should be completely responsible for?

Albaby >>


Yes, I suggest that a prudent person, woman or man, would not put himself/her self in a position where another person has a LICENSE to embrace them, kiss them or otherwise act physically with them.

If you choose to do so, you are engaging in a form of risky behavior.


Similarly, when I was a gas fitter for a utility, I welded fittings on live gas mains. To do that, I had to get the 3/16" steel pipe white hot, and the outer 1/8" nice and liquid steel to weld on fittings. That left 1/16" of white hot but still solid steel between me a the burn unit at a near by hospital.

I was engaging in risky behavior while doing an ordinary job as a skilled employee.


Engaging in risky behavior is something people can choose to do often enough. Better learn how to do it safely or risk being injured, though.

Sounds like this woman got herself into a risky situation without knowing how to deal with it.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
I don't think I understand. This woman had every right - and legitimate expectation - that she could participate in sketch comedy with a man in a professional setting and not have him kiss her against her will or touch her breasts while she was sleeping. Why is this a situation that she should avoid, rather than a situation that the man should be completely responsible for?

Because by blaming the victim, you can deflect responsibility for your own actions.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<I don't think I understand. This woman had every right - and legitimate expectation - that she could participate in sketch comedy with a man in a professional setting and not have him kiss her against her will or touch her breasts while she was sleeping. Why is this a situation that she should avoid, rather than a situation that the man should be completely responsible for?

Albaby >>



A prudent woman wont be sleeping in a public area, which I'd describe as a risky behavior. To do so is foolish because you can't protect yourself from the behavior of other people, men or women.


Feminists have been telling women for half a century that they are POWERFUL! That they can do just what they please!


Fine, but if you put yourself into risky situations, you may come to harm.

I might add that men get injured and killed FAR more often than women because men do far more risky things than women, and reap the consequences often enough.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I am reminded of the "Tailhook" episode where female Navy officers, trained killers, were completely unable to protect themselves from the drunken advances of their fun loving fellow officers at a party the women attended.


That was a pathetic commentary on the ability of female officers to defend themselves against drunken men, and indicted the judgment of those women attending a party of drunken men just returned from long combat tour of duty.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
To do that, I had to get the 3/16" steel pipe white hot, and the outer 1/8" nice and liquid steel to weld on fittings. That left 1/16" of white hot but still solid steel between me a the burn unit at a near by hospital.

I was engaging in risky behavior while doing an ordinary job as a skilled employee.


I still don't understand. How is this analogous?

If you are working with exceedingly hot steel, there is an inherent and unavoidable risk of being burned.

Are you saying that if you are working with another human being in the performing arts, there is an inherent and unavoidable risk of being sexually assaulted - such that a person who doesn't want to bear the risk of being sexually assaulted should not be in the performing arts?

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 5
Are you saying that if you are working with another human being in the performing arts, there is an inherent and unavoidable risk of being sexually assaulted - such that a person who doesn't want to bear the risk of being sexually assaulted should not be in the performing arts?

That's exactly what he is saying. Same as a woman wearing sexy clothing. Blame the victim.

PSU
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 10
that she could participate in sketch comedy with a man in a professional setting and not have him kiss her against her will or touch her breasts while she was sleeping.

I have to admit I've been in many skits and never went to sleep as part of it.

Why is this a situation that she should avoid, rather than a situation that the man should be completely responsible for?

I don't know that she should "avoid" it, then again I'm not sure I suggest sleeping in a public place, especially in a room full of boisterous comedians. I've seen monologues by Amy Schumer and by Sarah Silverman where they joke about "jumping on a guy" or other, less Motley Fool friendly euphemisms. I guess I see a difference between doing a tasteless joke once (Franken) and using your platform and power to repeatedly harass underlings into unwanted sex. But maybe that's just me.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
disappointing--liked Al Franken as a senator.
Why do men keep doing this crap?It will be sad if this indiscretion ends his senate seat. Maybe he deserves it. We all need to behave as if there are consequences for bad behavior and abuse of power. That standard needs to trickle up to the top.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I’m probably on the hawk side of this issue.

IMO, Sen. Franken should take this as an opportunity to lead by example. He should apologize directly to the woman he groped and issue an apology to his constituents for his initial “apology.” Then he should resign from the Senate.

The I’m-sorry-you-were-offended apology is worse than no apology to me.

I did not like typing that because I agree with him politically.

PF
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1

To do that, I had to get the 3/16" steel pipe white hot, and the outer 1/8" nice and liquid steel to weld on fittings. That left 1/16" of white hot but still solid steel between me a the burn unit at a near by hospital.

I was engaging in risky behavior while doing an ordinary job as a skilled employee.

I still don't understand. How is this analogous?

If you are working with exceedingly hot steel, there is an inherent and unavoidable risk of being burned.

Are you saying that if you are working with another human being in the performing arts, there is an inherent and unavoidable risk of being sexually assaulted - such that a person who doesn't want to bear the risk of being sexually assaulted should not be in the performing arts?


It isn't analogous, but he thinks he can sneak it by even though he's essentially comparing farting in an elevator to whipping up a strawberry shortcake. They're incommensurable.

Churchy
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
I’ve now read Franken’s complete apology. It is not as I portrayed it. It is one where he takes full responsibility. I am glad that he is asking for an ethics hearing, but I still think that it is inadequate. He should resign.

PF
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Roger Stone is a known dirty tricks operative and a slimy dude.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/360726-stone-app...
Stone appeared to know Franken allegation was coming
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
SeattlePioneer asks,

So what is a proper response to Al Franken's "sexual assault" on a reporter?

</snip>


Leeann Tweeden was a Playboy model at the time of the assault. Not that that makes a difference, but I doubt she was carrying a reporter's notebook at the time.

intercst
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
are you saying that a prudent woman won't enter the performing arts, because otherwise she is accepting the risk of being sexually assaulted?

Therefore, female roles on the stage should be played by cross-dressers, and vocal parts sung by castrati, right? That's the way it was in the good, (very) old days.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 4
I guess I see a difference between doing a tasteless joke once (Franken) and using your platform and power to repeatedly harass underlings into unwanted sex.

NO you don't. The entire left, democrats stood by Bill Clinton, including Hillary. You championed Hillary as role model for women. She defended Bill Clinton and you defended Hillary.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 16
The entire left, democrats stood by Bill Clinton, including Hillary.

It's true, I did. Because what goes on between consenting adults is not my business. When there is sexual coercion involved, that's legal and that's different. Wheat just Bill Clinton did was gross, but it was not in the same ballpark of Roger Ailes saying "give me oral sex and I'll make your a star on my network." It was vastly different than Bill O'Reilly saying "Let's screw in the office and I'll make you a guest on my TV show."

What Bill Clinton did with Lewinsky was crude, but she was the instigator, not him. He may have sexually harassed Paula Jones, although the court threw the case out. That's on a different scale than Bill Cosby drugging his victims, Kevin Spacey groping men in his dressing room, or Harvey Weinstein playing the casting couch game against unwilling actresses.

I understand that you would like to draw perfect equivalence here, but it's not. Indeed, it's not close. Franken kissed an actress in a rehearsal for a skit *which required her to be kissed.*. He made fun of groping her (look at the picture: there is a shadow under his hands) and she was wearing a FLAK JACKET. Who gropes someone through a flak jacket? It was in poor taste, certainly, but it hardly rises to the same level as these others.

Oh, and Hillary "defended" Bill, which is true. She stood by her man. Usually people on the Right are thrilled when the little woman does that. Not when it's with a liberal, I guess.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
What Bill Clinton did with Lewinsky was crude, but she was the instigator, not him

I disagree with this characterization. Bill Clinton had a history of sexual misbehavior, questionable conduct, etc. He was President, most powerful guy on earth at that time, and She was an intern. There is something more than "consenting adults" going on there. Also, while you may think there is no abuse but clearly what Monica suffered is abuse.

Oh, and Hillary "defended" Bill, which is true. She stood by her man. Usually people on the Right are thrilled when the little woman does that. Not when it's with a liberal, I guess.

Hillary standing by her man is for his last name and for her own political calculation. And what you mean by "standing by" she actively abused Monica. Don't try to gloss over it. It is not just Monica. All Bill's abuses happened when he was in a position of power. You have to have twisted brain to believe somehow Bill is a victim and Hillary stood by her man through his challenging periods or Roy Moore is sexual predator but Bill Clinton is not.

Whether it is Bill Clinton, Bill o'Riley or Roger Ailes all of them used their position and power. When you argue that Bill Clinton's actions are not same as the others.. your argument sounds much similar to "legitimate rape" argument.

Anyone criticizing Bill doesn't automatically make them republicans. That just shows how myopic and partisan your views are.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<Are you saying that if you are working with another human being in the performing arts, there is an inherent and unavoidable risk of being sexually assaulted - such that a person who doesn't want to bear the risk of being sexually assaulted should not be in the performing arts?

Albaby >>


Yes. There are risks to many occupations.

If you want to avoid or minimize those risks, you need to take appropriate actions to protect yourself.

For a woman to place herself in the arms of a strange man is inviting a possible problem.

Personally, I don't like the custom I see being promoted by women of greeting people with a hug. It's an invitation to a problem.

Keep in mind that the custom of shaking hands originated with the desire to keep a man's hand occupied so that his ability to stick a knife in you was impaired. Inviting "hugs" is to invite a problem.


Want to rehearse hugging and kissing for a play? To avoid problems, a wise person who chose to engage in that kind of risky behavior would insure that such activity was carefully supervised and that the license to engage in such behavior was supervised.

The woman in question didn't like Franken's behavior, but she continued to give him additional opportunities to do even more. By doing so, she really gave him permission to do more.


FOOLS are careless about engaging in risky behaviors. If you choose to do so, you take the risk of being harmed. That goes for ANY risky behavior, and for any person.

Unfortunately, feminists have been encouraging women to engage in risky behaviors for many decades now. It's hardly surprising that that results in bad outcomes on some occasions.


Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 8
I disagree with this characterization. Bill Clinton had a history of sexual misbehavior, questionable conduct, etc. He was President, most powerful guy on earth at that time, and She was an intern. There is something more than "consenting adults" going on there.

Yes, he has such a history. Agreed. And yes, she was a "subordinate", although not paid, and she was the aggressor (as both have said), so I think that changes the dynamic.

You have to have twisted brain to believe somehow Bill is a victim and Hillary stood by her man through his challenging periods or Roy Moore is sexual predator but Bill Clinton is not.

Down, Simba! Roy Moore shoved his hands down the pants of a 14 year old, took her non-consenting self to a private room and physically abused her. Again, I see that as different. You see it as "partisan", but that only belies your prejudice.

I am as appalled when liberals abuse people, like Harvey Weinstein, Kevin Spacey, and (for gawd's sakes) Bill Cosby as I am when conservatives do it (like Roger Ailes, Bill O'Reilly, and their ilk.) However shooting a tasteless photograph and *not* grabbing her breasts through a flak jacket is very, very different. I am not viewing this through a partisan lens, I am calibrating the difference between the incidents. I do not think someone who causes a fatal traffic accident is the same as a First Degree Murderer, nor do I think a 13 year old deserves the same punishment for vandalism as a 30 year old.

Hillary "stood by her man", it's true. It may (and probably was) for her own political calculation, but so what? She believed her husband and didn't believe the accuser. That's hardly something new; how many of these Press Conferences have I seen with the wife stoically staring straight ahead while the errant husband does a mea culpa? Dozens! That doesn't make them evil women, it makes them loyal, and perhaps fools.

That just shows how myopic and partisan your views are.

No, it just shows the ability to see gradations of grey. Not everything is black and white.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 6
For a woman to place herself in the arms of a strange man is inviting a possible problem.

But that's not what you said. You said that a prudent person would not put herself in a position where they were in the arms of stranger. You said that a prudent woman wouldn't fall asleep in a public place (on a military aircraft?).

Everything carries risk. You run the risk of injury every time you drive, every time you eat food in a restaurant, every time you get in an elevator. We would never say that a prudent woman should avoid all of those activities, merely because a risk exists.

Are you suggesting that only men can be in the performing arts without being "imprudent," or that only men are allowed to fall asleep on airplanes without being "imprudent," because being in those situations might result in someone assaulting them? Or that women are being "imprudent" if they go into those situations without a chaperone?

Albaby
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
The entire left, democrats stood by Bill Clinton, including Hillary. You championed Hillary as role model for women. She defended Bill Clinton and you defended Hillary.

there's something wrong with your memory, dude.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
she was the aggressor

She is a 22 year old intern. Clinton was the President and the most powerful person on earth with full secret service coverage. And Clinton has a history of sexual misbehavior over many decades. And that doesn't change the dynamic?

I see that as different.

That's why we disagree. That's why left has no credibility. That's why "Grape'em by P..." had no impact on the election. Because for many there is no real difference. Hillary is an enabler of Sexual predatory behavior of Clinton and Trump is Clinton.

She believed her husband and didn't believe the accuser.. That doesn't make them evil women, it makes them loyal, and perhaps fools.

But it makes Hillary evil, because she stood their silently women after woman, year after year, decade after decade.

How many accusations? At what point Hillary would wake-up and say there is something wrong with Bill?
How could you claim to be a champion of women causes, when you cannot believe women who are victims of your husband's sexual abuse come forward? Especially when Bill had left a multi-decade trail?

No, it just shows the ability to see gradations of grey. Not everything is black and white.

Sexual abuse is a crime. I hold those who defend the abusers also abusers. There is no grey area. You can self congratulate yourself all you want, in my view you are not nothing but an apologist.

I see no difference between you and the defenders of Roy Moore.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 11
And that doesn't change the dynamic?

Nope. His position may have made him more attractive, but she has said she was the aggressor. And an adult. He did not rape her, he just had an affair. Which is between Bill and Hillary. None of my business. Just like I don't care that Gingrich had an affair (actually several it appears). It's not a partisan thing at all.

Hillary is an enabler of Sexual predatory behavior of Clinton and Trump is Clinton.

So was Mrs Gingrich an "enabler"? Granted he ended up divorcing her, but I believe that was his call.

Again, this is all private marital stuff. Now you come up with an underage girl, or several women all claiming that Clinton raped them, that's a different matter entirely. Thus far the accusation is Bill was unfaithful and Hillary didn't leave him over it. Big deal.

How could you claim to be a champion of women causes, when you cannot believe women who are victims of your husband's sexual abuse come forward? Especially when Bill had left a multi-decade trail?

What does any of that have to do with women's pay, women's health, or practically any other women's issue? He was a philanderer. Maybe he still is (don't know). That is so drastically different from locking girls in your car and trying to rape them, cruising teen girl hangouts (e.g. the mall), groping without consent, etc. Just as Gingrich's indiscretions aren't in the same league with Moore either.

No, Moore is "special" here. With any luck at all he'll get his day in court and, if found guilty, serve some serious time.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 3
What does any of that have to do with women's pay

You cannot come out and pretend that I care about women, while enabling a husband who had decades of sexual affair's, trashing women who were his victims. It just sounds so phony.

He was a philanderer

Not so fast. "Mr. Trump may have said some bad words, but Bill Clinton raped me, and Hillary Clinton threatened me," Broaddrick added

You dismiss, ridicule the rape victims and cannot turn around and claim that you care about women. What kind of a perverted world, you can have such compartmentalization?

You cannot get outraged over Trump's hollywood video's and simultaneously dismiss Clinton's rape victim's and all his decades of sexual behavior, Hillary cannot abuse all Clinton's accuser's and claim she advocates for women.

It is about time democrats and left accept Clintons' behavior and move past them. You cannot defend it.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 9
You cannot come out and pretend that I care about women, while enabling a husband who had decades of sexual affair's, trashing women who were his victims. It just sounds so phony.

Broaddrick testified under oath Clinton never touched her, UNDER OATH.

Willey's story was considered a lie by the Starr commission because it changed every five minutes.

All the other contacts Clinton had were with consenting adults. What abuse are you talking about.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
I never voted for Bill. So you're already wrong. I don't support him specifically.

And with such allegations I would not vote for him now. However, if you want to make rape stick as a criminal charge then he has to be convicted. Innocent until proven guilty, you know. I do not ridicule any alleged victim. I dismiss nothing except that Bill's infidelity is any of your business, and smears Hillary.

Similarly, Trump's grabbing comments aren't even a crime. He appears to have committed numerous crimes, but that isn't one of them. However they are disqualifying to be elected to any office. As are crimes, of course.

This really isn't that complicated. It would take a mindless partisan not to be able to see the nuance.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ah, I didn't know that. So it's not disqualifying at all.

But Bill is old news now anyway. And it's not relevant to Hillary. Just as I don't blame Camille Cosby for Bill's apparent drugging of women.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Hillary is an enabler of Sexual predatory behavior

Ivana and Marla trump both wanted to keep their husband after he had affairs (and both Marla and trump admitted the only reason he left Ivana was becasue he got Marla pregnant--he was perfectly content to keep cheating on his wife). In fact, wives typically stay with cheating husbands--it's the husbands who most often leave.

Many on the left were furious with Clinton, including his own vice-president. In fact, many believe that Gore lost his election *because* he distanced himself from the more popular Clinton.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Broaddrick testified under oath Clinton never touched her, UNDER OATH.


First of all I don't see anywhere that Broaddrick denied anything under oath. All I see is Starr didn't put under oath.

If you have the link please provide.


Here is Broaddrick story. In fact it touches other affairs too.

https://www.npr.org/2016/10/09/497291071/a-brief-history-of-...

https://www.vox.com/2016/1/6/10722580/bill-clinton-juanita-b...
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
Ivana and Marla trump both wanted to keep their husband after he had affairs

This is pathetic. Why you think Hillary's behavior is acceptable and justified by some others? Democrats willingness to accept Bill's behavior and defend it enabled Donald Trump. Now it is leading to Roy Moore.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
It would take a mindless partisan not to be able to see the nuance.

You may want to be careful here. Those questioning Bill are not partisan's rather people who are disgusted with the apologist's. It is not just me, but there are many democrats are coming out. I think half the party is going to question Hillary and Bill.
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 1
<<For a woman to place herself in the arms of a strange man is inviting a possible problem.

But that's not what you said. You said that a prudent person would not put herself in a position where they were in the arms of stranger. You said that a prudent woman wouldn't fall asleep in a public place (on a military aircraft?).

Everything carries risk. You run the risk of injury every time you drive, every time you eat food in a restaurant, every time you get in an elevator. We would never say that a prudent woman should avoid all of those activities, merely because a risk exists.>>


Everything does carry risk. A prudent person will aim to avoid such risks, or to take steps to minimize the risks.

If you decide to accept the risk, the possibility of being harmed goes right along with that.


<<Are you suggesting that only men can be in the performing arts without being "imprudent," or that only men are allowed to fall asleep on airplanes without being "imprudent," because being in those situations might result in someone assaulting them? Or that women are being "imprudent" if they go into those situations without a chaperone?

Albaby >>


Men take risks too---- a lot more than women do, I would say judging from the relative numbers in jail or hospitals from suffering injuries.

People who act like ladies or gentlemen are likely to minimize their risk of being harmed. If Al Franken had been acting like a gentleman, he wouldn't be the subject of these stories. Had the woman making the accusations been acting like a lady, she wouldn't have had anything to complain about.


Feminists are supposing that women can be free to act in risky ways but that men are expected to act like gentleman, not exploiting the vulnerabilities women expose themselves too.

In my view, both men and women should be held responsible for foolish or reckless behavior.



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 0
<<No, Moore is "special" here. With any luck at all he'll get his day in court and, if found guilty, serve some serious time. >>


Hasn't happened in forty years.


For some odd reason, it happened just in time to try to convict the man in the newspapers just before an election.


A coincidence, do your suppose?



Seattle Pioneer
Print the post Back To Top
No. of Recommendations: 2
Actually, I realized something alstro. We fell for the classic Faux News diversion tactic of "but what about". Ever notice how when one of their own does something horrible they come back with "but what about Hillary and Benghazi?!" (for example). Faux News evidently is working overtime trying to say "but what about uranium" when Russian collusion by Trump comes up. It's one of the first tools they pull out of their box.

Hillary is not relevant in this thread. She (and Bill) are not relevant to the allegations against Moore. They are not relevant to the allegations against Weinstein. They are not relevant to this thread about Franken. Each may be worthy of discussion, but they are not related to each other.

I for one do not intend to respond to any further comments about Hillary (or Bill) when discussing Moore or Franken. It's a diversion. And often a false equivalency. Like trying to equate consensual adult infidelity with molesting a minor (which is what that other poster is doing). I am not playing that game any further.
Print the post Back To Top
Advertisement