• Changing RCF's index page, please click on "Forums" to access the forums.

The Trump Administration (just Trump) Thread

Do Not Sell My Personal Information
Status
Not open for further replies.
Clinton whataburger.

Pok7CtX.jpg


But, to address the larger point:

1) Only a month or so has passed since the Weinstein thing broke, but, it might as well have been a decade. It is a different world now. This sexual assault shit no longer flies. If Clinton was an active political today, it is likely he would have met with the same fate as Franken, Conyers, Wes Goodman etc.

2) The GOP painted themselves into a corner, no one else. They did do the right thing two weeks ago when the White House and the Senate GOP denounced Moore.

They did the absolute worst thing possible by now openly supporting him when the seat looks like it is in jeopardy. It appears that, upon further consideration, and after more credible evidence has come in, that they are willing to seat a Pedo for political reasons. And the NRA is now also willing to support him. No one forced them to make that error, and, quite frankly, I don't think it helps Moore's chances at all. It is a really stupid move because now they are saddled with him no matter what happens.

3) The notion that having a sitting Senator resign to make the GOP look bad, by claiming the high ground, is simply a very dubious argument. You do not risk Senate seats, no matter how safe they seem, for a moral victory. No sane party leadership would ever follow that strategy.

4) Somethings should be above politics and that is why people on both sides of the aisle are not ok with that POTUS and the RNC did yesterday regarding Moore.

I dunno Stannis....

Look at Kirsten Gillibrand....the first female senator to call for Franken's resignation. I'm not tech savvy enough to start loading all her tweets supporting Bill Clinton over the years, or all of her pics with Bill during the 2016 election......but it's not like any new information has come to light on Ole Slick Willie.

2013 - Kirsten wishes Bill a happy birthday on twitter and thanks him for his friendship and support, and his incredible leadership!

April 2016 - She tweets she is "honored" to campaign next to Bill Clinton.

July 2016 - She tweets a beautiful picture of her and Bill at the DNC convention together, with Bill's arm wrapped around her.


Gillibrand in the last week has now called Bill a sexual predator who should've resigned during his presidency. It's just tough to take this seriously.....Bill was accused by a very credible witness of forcible rape. It was cool with Dems until last week. Now Al Franken is accused of 7-8 instances of being a creep, a week ago he had the support of those on the left, and now a week before a highly contested Alabama seat is up, Gillibrand has found her conscious. Not only with Al, but with William Jefferson as well......a guy with no new information coming out at all. Just timing and convenience....

It looks contrived.

Not wrong, but contrived.
 
I dunno Stannis....

Look at Kirsten Gillibrand....the first female senator to call for Franken's resignation. I'm not tech savvy enough to start loading all her tweets supporting Bill Clinton over the years, or all of her pics with Bill during the 2016 election......but it's not like any new information has come to light on Ole Slick Willie.

2013 - Kirsten wishes Bill a happy birthday on twitter and thanks him for his friendship and support, and his incredible leadership!

April 2016 - She tweets she is "honored" to campaign next to Bill Clinton.

July 2016 - She tweets a beautiful picture of her and Bill at the DNC convention together, with Bill's arm wrapped around her.


Gillibrand in the last week has now called Bill a sexual predator who should've resigned during his presidency. It's just tough to take this seriously.....Bill was accused by a very credible witness of forcible rape. It was cool with Dems until last week. Now Al Franken is accused of 7-8 instances of being a creep, a week ago he had the support of those on the left, and now a week before a highly contested Alabama seat is up, Gillibrand has found her conscious. Not only with Al, but with William Jefferson as well......a guy with no new information coming out at all. Just timing and convenience....

It looks contrived.

Not wrong, but contrived.

And, in the past week we've seen talk-show co-hosts canoodling with Charlie Rose and Matt Lauer one morning, and then having to almost tearfully condemn their friends the next.

Shit is happening fast. Not everything is a conspiracy. Indeed, the vast majority of things is not a conspiracy.

Frankly, that certain people here always lead with the conspiracy theory is troubling to me on some level I have not yet articulated to myself.
 
And, in the past week we've seen talk-show co-hosts canoodling with Charlie Rose and Matt Lauer one morning, and then having to almost tearfully condemn their friends the next.

Shit is happening fast. Not everything is a conspiracy. Indeed, the vast majority of things is not a conspiracy.

Frankly, that certain people here always lead with the conspiracy theory is troubling to me on some level I have not yet articulated to myself.

I understand your position....i feel like you are giving Gillibrand the benefit of the doubt.

I just disagree....it looks way too politically expedient to me. Her "180" looks motivated by wanting the high ground in a very combustible environment.

Nothing new has come out on Bill since 2016. It's just hypocritical to be his best pal less than a year ago, and calling for his "resignation" today. It minimizes the actual abuse that is happening IMO. If she truly feels Bill should've resigned as president today, she was certainly quite the enabler over the last several years she has championed him online.
 
Don't take this personally but taking a moral position means sometimes you don't get what you want.

They're both positions based on morality. I'm not getting exactly what I want either way, so it's a question of balancing those competing moral interests.

I don't believe that an individual's personal moral fitness is the consideration that always should trump all others when it comes to choosing political leaders.
 
I understand your position....i feel like you are giving Gillibrand the benefit of the doubt.

I just disagree....it looks way too politically expedient to me. Her "180" looks motivated by wanting the high ground in a very combustible environment.

Nothing new has come out on Bill since 2016. It's just hypocritical to be his best pal less than a year ago, and calling for his "resignation" today. It minimizes the actual abuse that is happening IMO. If she truly feels Bill should've resigned as president today, she was certainly quite the enabler over the last several years she has championed him online.

Perhaps in a vacuum I could see your point of view. But, in context this isn't any different that what we have seen unfold time and again the past month.

This is where the whole "politically motivated timing" argument falls apart. Anything that happened before the Weinstein, for lack of a better word, revolution, cannot be seen in the same light as the current environment. Women are coming out now because it is safe to do so. As a consequence it is also safe to go after these predators.

People have adopted a zero-tolerance policy regarding sexual malfeasance since Weinstein. We have seen this play out between long-time colleagues, and in multi-million dollar businesses. Entire movies are being shut-down due to allegations.

To consistently see everything in a political light is just ignoring the totality of the reality of things post-Weinstein. And contrary to your assertion, that Gillibrand condemning sexual predators lessens the abuse that occurred, claiming the timing of these events is nothing more than a nefarious Democratic scheme to make the GOP look bad is tantamount to a cynical discrediting of the victim's experiences. You are basically saying that the victims only came forward for political reasons. That is a disappointing position to take.
 
Last edited:
Looksh like The Preshident did hish besht Lou Holtz impression today.
 
They're both positions based on morality. I'm not getting exactly what I want either way, so it's a question of balancing those competing moral interests.

I don't believe that an individual's personal moral fitness is the consideration that always should trump all others when it comes to choosing political leaders.

Specifically, I'm talking about the theory that GOP leadership is promoting Moore now with the intent of ousting him after he wins.
I think that strategy is immoral. It betrays the victims if Moore is guilty of pedophelia. It betrays Moore and the Alabama voters if Moore is innocent. Do you disagree? Can the GOP leadership follow that strategy with moral integrity? I don't see how.
 
If a person can vote for a pedophile, they could vote for a traitor or a murderer. Its disgusting.
 
Perhaps in a vacuum I could see your point of view. But, in context this isn't any different that what we have seen unfold time and again the past month.

This is where the whole "politically motivated timing" argument falls apart. Anything that happened before the Weinstein, for lack of a better word, revolution, cannot be seen in the same light as the current environment. Women are coming out now because it is safe to do so. As a consequence it is also safe to go after these predators.

People have adopted a zero-tolerance policy regarding sexual malfeasance since Weinstein. We have seen this play out between long-time colleagues, and in multi-million dollar businesses. Entire movies are being shut-down due to allegations.

To consistently see everything in a political light is just ignoring the totality of the reality of things post-Weinstein. And contrary to your assertion, that Gillibrand condemning sexual predators lessens the abuse that occurred, claiming the timing of these events is nothing more than a nefarious Democratic scheme to make the GOP look bad is tantamount to a cynical discrediting of the victim's experiences. You are basically saying that the victims only came forward for political reasons. That is a disappointing position to take.

I agree about the Weinstein factor - the timing isn't a scheme to make the GOP look bad.

But that doesn't make those like Gillibrand any less hypocritical for being buddy-buddy with Bill for all these years and only turning on him after the winds shifted.
 
Specifically, I'm talking about the theory that GOP leadership is promoting Moore now with the intent of ousting him after he wins.
I think that strategy is immoral. It betrays the victims if Moore is guilty of pedophelia.

I don't understand why booting him out after the election and an investigation isn't an appropriate remedy.

The GOP voters did not have the opportunity to have an informed choice when they voted in the primary. You think saddling them with a Senator they do not want for the next three years is an non-issue that should be given no weight. I disagree.

How your Senator votes can have national impact on the laws under which we live. In many cases, those laws reflect some pretty fundamental moral choices. There has been major legislation this term that has turned on just one vote. Those are laws that directly affect the lives of hundreds of millions.

Giving the voters of Alabama a do-over next November seems to me the best balance of those competing interests, with the Governor appointing who serves between the booting of Moore and the election.
 
Last edited:
I still think we have a problem with sexual assault, abuse and harassment in this country. Entertainment, media, military, religion, and college sports have all seen scandals this century.

I work for a Catholic school. Even though the priest scandal broke well before I started working, the Church still has all employees do training on recognizing and dealing with sexual assault/abuse victims. One thing that was stressed early on is that if someone comes forth with an allegation, you have to make it clear that you are willing to believe them. That doesn't mean you don't vet their claims afterwards, but if you are not going to believe them when they come forth, then you run the risk of them staying silent for years. That's partially what allowed the Catholic Church to get away with their cover up for so long.

If we're still at a point that people think calling for accused sexual harassers and abusers to step down is merely a way to take the political high road....then we're a lot further away than I thought.

And yes, people's heads were in the sand before on this issue. Fortunately, recent events have FORCED people to re-examine their views on what is acceptable. If you want to call them hypocrites, then do that if it helps you. I think it's more than people were ignorant, maybe even willfully before, but now they are adjusting their attitudes. That's called progress, and we need more of it on this issue.
 
Can we have a different thread for all these right-wing conspiracies? It feels like there is a conspiracy for every single newsworthy action right now.

As opposed to the usual daily diet of left-wing conspiracies for every single newsworthy action?

Franken is resigning because he SHOULD.

He's resigning because of pressure from other Democrats, and the pressure is this intense because they know that he's going to be replaced by another Democrat. There's no downside to booting him. Same with Conyers.

If the Moore revelations came before the primary, he wouldn't have been nominated. If they came after he was elected, he'd be booted and there'd be a special election to fill out his term. That's what will happen with both Franken and Conyers - there will be another set of primaries, two new nominees, and then a general election for voters to pick new representatives next year.

But because the information about Moore "happened" to break in that short period between the primary and the election, there won't be another special election. There's just this election, and the seat would get handed to Jones by default until 2021, with the voters being told that's Jones is the choice they have to make because Moore is a scumbag.

Which is why I don't believe voters who say "I'd rather just pick again in 2018" are making an immoral choice. Being compelled to help elect someone's whose morality-based political views are the antithesis of your own isn't a "moral" choice either.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Video

Episode 3-13: "Backup Bash Brothers"

Rubber Rim Job Podcast Spotify

Episode 3:11: "Clipping Bucks."
Top