Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jbluhm86

Scraping the bottom of the Partisanship barrel

Recommended Posts

Red State: David Horowitz: Sure, Roy Moore Is A Child Molester, But Vote For Him Anyway!

untitled.JPG.fe1b031b4bec093ab4c5077766c4504f.JPG

 

And, like clockwork, some of the faithful among us never fail to use their religious beliefs to justify immoral behavior:

Washington Examiner: Alabama state auditor defends Roy Moore against sexual allegations, invokes Mary and Joseph:

“Take the Bible. Zachariah and Elizabeth for instance. Zachariah was extremely old to marry Elizabeth and they became the parents of John the Baptist,” [Alabama State Auditor Jim] Ziegler said choosing his words carefully before invoking Christ. “Also take Joseph and Mary. Mary was a teenager and Joseph was an adult carpenter. They became parents of Jesus.”

“There’s just nothing immoral or illegal here,” Ziegler concluded. “Maybe just a little bit unusual.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I would say that anyone have a fear of mind would be most struck by the very first line in the man's post. In my mind the man is guilty.

WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Im having issues with this too. How on earth can we lower the burden of proof so low for politicians that u can now find a couple people that knew a guy back during the disco era, to accuse him/her of something without a single shred of circumstantial evidence? If these women can be verified as having spoken about this decades ago, ok...now we have something.

this lowered burden if proof will usher in an era of political circus the likes of which have never been seen. It WILL be turned around on democrats. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But the statement by this horowitz guy is slack jawing. He's better off saying im not sure i beleive the women. But by saying "yeah moores prob guilty"...but "so what"? That man is a true piece of human sht. 

The only way his statement would even begin to make the slightest sense is if the democrat running against moore had raped more underage girls. Thats the only 1 to 1 comparison. Because if y beleive roy moore is a child rapist, electing a democrat that is "not" a child rapist is far far more palatable.......IF ur a decent god fearing individual. If not thats fine but dont go to church on sunday

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

It WILL be turned around on democrats. 

You’re right, if the Dems can sling Sheet like this to influence an election the Republicans will be taking notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Canton Dawg said:

You’re right, if the Dems can sling Sheet like this to influence an election the Republicans will be taking notes.

Ofc im right. Im always right

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You are softening it up. He didn't say probably guilty. He said he was guilty.

The MSM should be throwing a fit about that but they aren't and they won't. Like the chick that said Trump groped her on an airplane until it was proved to be untrue.

Personally I think she should have been prosecuted. 

WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Westside Steve said:

I would say that anyone have a fear of mind would be most struck by the very first line in the man's post. In my mind the man is guilty.

WSS

I understand and agree with you on this point. Legally, everyone should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

However, that is not my issue with what Mr. Horowitz and others are saying here. The issue is that, even though Horowitz admits that he believes Moore is guilty of what he is accused of, he is willing to overlook the alleged molestation of an underage child in order to defeat Democrats. That is truly morally repugnant to me. That would be akin to saying something like "well, Dennis Hastert is an admitted pederast, but we're willing to overlook it so that he can retain his position as Speaker of the House, because having a Democrat Speaker would be way worse". Its an absurd and morally bankrupt position to have, to me. And, for the record, I would still feel that way if it was reversed and it was a Democrat saying the same thing, for those of you who want to play the Bill Clinton card.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jbluhms batting .1000

under no curcumstances do i vote for anthony weiner fir anything.....and he just sent pics. With a gun to my head i have to vite fir so eine, theres pretty much no republican save naybe the guy who said women shoyld relax and enjoy a good rape every now and then, pretty much no one except that guy and maybe a few ithers who trivialized some heinous sht do i vite for weiner over them. I wear maga tassles and vite for trump before i vote weiner for street cleanup

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, jbluhm86 said:

I understand and agree with you on this point. Legally, everyone should be presumed innocent until proven guilty.

However, that is not my issue with what Mr. Horowitz and others are saying here. The issue is that, even though Horowitz admits that he believes Moore is guilty of what he is accused of, he is willing to overlook the alleged molestation of an underage child in order to defeat Democrats. That is truly morally repugnant to me. That would be akin to saying something like "well, Dennis Hastert is an admitted pederast, but we're willing to overlook it so that he can retain his position as Speaker of the House, because having a Democrat Speaker would be way worse". Its an absurd and morally bankrupt position to have, to me. And, for the record, I would still feel that way if it was reversed and it was a Democrat saying the same thing, for those of you who want to play the Bill Clinton card.

Gotta love the timing on this. It allegedly happened 34 years ago, and these accusations crop up just before the election. I smell money and bullish!t.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It  is easier to set aside any morals or principles you may have and just  blindly vote for party.

 

Plus this guy is pretty terrible for plenty of other reasons

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Canton Dawg said:

Gotta love the timing on this. It allegedly happened 34 years ago, and these accusations crop up just before the election. I smell money and bullish!t.

I do too. I kind of think bills accusers were the same way. At least sime of them. Theres a couple im positive he raped

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Canton Dawg said:

Gotta love the timing on this. It allegedly happened 34 years ago, and these accusations crop up just before the election. I smell money and bullish!t.

I mean, its just about as timely as lining up all of Bill Clinton's accusers in the front row of a presidential debate.

Also, some of Moore's accusers are registered Republicans, who voted for Trump in the 2016 election, so it'd seem to me to be an odd political play to falsely accuse a congressional candidate in your own party, to the benefit of the opposing Democrat party:

"[Beverly Young] Nelson, who gave a tearful recollection of the events she said took place, explained that her decision to go public was not political. She said she and her husband supported Donald Trump for president. “This has nothing whatsoever to do with the Republicans or the Democrats,” she said. “It has everything to do with Mr. Moore’s sexual assault when I was a teenager.”

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, jbluhm86 said:

I mean, its just about as timely as lining up all of Bill Clinton's accusers in the front row of a presidential debate.

Also, some of Moore's accusers are registered Republicans, who voted for Trump in the 2016 election, so it'd seem to me to be an odd political play to falsely accuse a congressional candidate in your own party, to the benefit of the opposing Democrat party:

"[Beverly Young] Nelson, who gave a tearful recollection of the events she said took place, explained that her decision to go public was not political. She said she and her husband supported Donald Trump for president. “This has nothing whatsoever to do with the Republicans or the Democrats,” she said. “It has everything to do with Mr. Moore’s sexual assault when I was a teenager.”

Was Bill running for president when that happened...nah.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can u guys at least acknowledge that its pretty shameful to say im still voting for a child rapist cause #he'sRepublican.  ?

can we just establish baseline morals? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

Can u guys at least acknowledge that its pretty shameful to say im still voting for a child rapist cause #he'sRepublican.  ?

can we just establish baseline morals? 

I've sort of touched base on this in a thread I posted earlier yesterday. Still waiting to hear the board's views on it

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Daily Wire: Ben Shapiro: Moore Denies Knowing Latest Sexual Assault Accuser, Despite Apparently Signing Her Yearbook

"On Monday afternoon, embattled Alabama Republican Senate candidate Roy Moore adamantly denied that he knew his latest sexual assault accuser, Beverly Young Nelson: “This is absolutely false. I never did what she said I did. I don’t even know the woman. I don’t know anything about her. I don’t even know where the restaurant is or was.”

Earlier today, Nelson accused Moore of groping her and attempting to force her head down into his crotch in 1977, when she was 16 years old, while she was working at a restaurant in Gadsden, Alabama. She also showed her yearbook, which Moore had signed. Moore’s denial that he didn’t even know Nelson or the restaurant is certainly less credible given the fact that Nelson presented the yearbook to the press".

 

NY Daily NewsRoy Moore reportedly banned from Alabama mall after harassing teen girls in the 1980s

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Now we've got some meat!!!

"

A police officer named J.D. Thomas told mall employees to be on the lookout for Moore because he was “banned from the mall,” Legat said.

“If you see Moore here, tell me. I’ll take care of him,” the cop reportedly told Legat.

Police officers who spoke with the New Yorker said Moore’s presence at the mall was a problem."

 

u have cops corroborating habitual behavior from roughly the same time period.....now u've got my attention

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Horowitz is agreeing by his judgment that Moore was/is a pedo but apparently that is fine so long as the party wins. Sounds like Horowitz will be flying in “the party supplies” from SE Asia if Moore wins.

These shitbirds are the reason why some people believe in pitchforks and dragging out some politicians to face a rope.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LogicIsForSquares said:

Horowitz is agreeing by his judgment that Moore was/is a pedo but apparently that is fine so long as the party wins. Sounds like Horowitz will be flying in “the party supplies” from SE Asia if Moore wins.

These shitbirds are the reason why some people believe in pitchforks and dragging out some politicians to face a rope.

correctamundo.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

That alabama state auditor needs to be assassinated im dead serious. He really did pull out the bible on this didnt he? Im going to jail if i ever hear someone defend child rape with bible verses. I will tear those verses out if the bible and fist the person anally with them, before i kill them. 

Jim Zeigler's statement is moronic and reprehensible, for sure. However, I for sure don't as far as advocating the assassination of a state official because of their views. I don't believe you do either, and i'm hoping this was just poorly worded by you. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

...I mean...wow...

The Hill: Alabama rep: I'm still backing Moore because he'll 'vote right'

"Rep. Mo Brooks (R-Ala.) said Monday that he will still back GOP candidate Roy Moore, who is facing mounting allegations of sexual misconduct, in the Alabama Senate special election because Moore will “vote right” on Capitol Hill.

“There are major issues facing the United States of America, deficit and debt that can lead to insolvency and bankruptcy, funding for national security, border security, abortion, appointment of Supreme Court justices — Doug Jones will vote wrong on each of those issues, Roy Moore will vote right on each of those issues,” Brooks said in a statement Monday.

“That’s why I am voting for Roy Moore,” he said."

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

No anyone that's become so bureaucratic and caught up in partisanship that they can whip the ole bible out to justify forcible sexual assault against minors, has to go.

I promise if u had a 14 yr old girl who was raped by an older man and some dude pylled bible verses to ur face rationalizing his buddy raping ur 14 yr ild daughter, you'd snap and kill him. Dont try to pretend otherwise.

Cleve, everyone here knows my views on religion in general, and I can state with 100% certainty that I would not kill someone trying to use the Bible to rationalize rape. A swift backhand to the face wouldn't be out of the question, but murdering someone for being a moron definitely would be.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Clevfan4life said:

Principles gave no meaning anymore. The russians dont need to do sht, we're imploding on our own. I hope some of these oeoples daughters get savagely gang raped

And this, I'm afraid, is where we have to part ways on this subject, because I for sure do not advocate the rape of someone else's daughter because we have differing political principals.

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, MLD Woody said:

It  is easier to set aside any morals or principles you may have and just  blindly vote for party.

 

Plus this guy is pretty terrible for plenty of other reasons

Exactly. Meaning that the moral thing to do would be to not accuse somebody of something offencive, unless you had reason to believe it was true. Especially since the accusations seemed baseless and vague and came from an operative from the party that opposes you and was from decades ago. Even if it helped your political party.

That is what you meant right?

WSS

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×