Should Al Franken Resign?

[Cow Poke]

I have no idea what this is in reference to...?

Hillary comes up with these little focus group quotes she likes to use - like "vast right wing conspiracy" and "politics of destruction" (of which she was a master) and "weaponized" information.

Umm...every government I have ever encountered has had a few people take inappropriate steps.

We're not talking about some schmuck in the mail room, Carpe.

Yes - I beleive the responsibility ultimately falls on the leadership - and Obama said as much. But there is no evidence that Obama caused the IRS thing to happen.

It happened under his watch, by people he oversees.

All evidence I know of shows it was an internal decision and, when it was brought to light, steps were taken to address it.

You have this unique ability to only see the evidence that supports your conclusion. And, yeah, after the horses are out of the barn, by all means, let's get those doors closed!

It's like what is going on with Meuller today. Someone on Meuller's team posts anti-Trump language in texts - and is immediately fired when it comes to light.

Just a "someone", eh? And, why was it not "brought to light" until 5 months after the fact?

But the emphasis is not on the action taken when the information was revealed - it is on the fact this person texted these things to begin with.

Actually, it goes to intent, your honor. The guy most definitely had an axe to grind.

When the "priest scandal" broke out a few years ago - I was not one of those who went gaga over the fact that some priests abused children. Yes - it's horrific. Yes, it needs to be addressed. But the incidence of pedophelia within the clewrgy, as best I could tell, was not significantly different than the rest of the world. Yes - we expect more from "men of god," but they are men/human and humans are flawed. They need to be held accountable, punished, and whatever that can be done to amend the harm needs to be done. I did not fault the catholic church as a whole for the bad actions of a few of its members. I DID fault the catholic church for the persistent choice to hide the truth, shuffle these men around, and expose even MORE children to harm. THAT was FAR more reprehensible than the moral failings of several men. THAT, to me, indicated an institutional malevolence that was unacceptable for an organization making a claim to moral leadership.

Agreed - the buck stops at the top. In the case of the IRS scandals, the buck should stop with Obama.

Lightweight...

I'm multi-tasking, and only here to be a thorn in your side.

CP - you watched a hacked-up video. Did you actually go back to the ENTIRE speech, and see what he actually was saying?

Yes, and other long long speeches where he boasts about himself. He is a classic "it's all about me" kind of dude.

[rogue06]

My dislike for him, my refusal to refer to him as "president,"

You reminded me of this...

0000000000000ffa.jpg

[Cow Poke]

Umm...not proof. Just anecdotal evidence

VERY anecdotal - kinda like those "man on the street" interviews --- wasn't that you complaining about those? (I'll apologize if I'm wrong - all you libs look alike! )

from a reasonably wide sampling.

Of people who happened to find your facebook page and comment....

If a poll can assess the preferences of a nation with 1500 sample points, my 500 followers are a reasonable fraction of that - enough for me to come to some conclusions.

The polls, particularly of late, have often been wildly inaccurate. Trump was going to lose the presidential race in a landslide.

OK - I resemble that...

(Now it's my turn to make some big blunder )

[Cow Poke]

But Trump does not represent the "right" (he actually holds many liberal views and many of his other ones are populist). He actually left the Republican Party because he thought that their opposition to partial-birth abortion was too extreme. And prior to running for president he had a lot, and I mean a lot, of fans and support in Hollywood (hardly a conservative bastion by any sane measure).

EGGzactly - he actually angered a number of Republicans by the way he campaigned.

[rogue06]

And he used to post here as a Christian under another name a long time ago, so his insistence that he came here to see the "perspective of US religious conservatives" is actually a lie.

That ^^^

[carpedm9587]

Can you cite the post where they told you that it was not "politically correct"? I find that...amazing. I mean, like I said, there will always be outliers, and those on the fringe who reject any label they find offensive. That doesn't mean the label is arbitrary or meaningless.

Umm... I'd have to do some digging. The discussion was last summer and is buried pretty deep. You can look for it, accept my word for it, or simply dismiss me as a "false claimant." I just don't put that search high on my list - given how poorly Facebook searches seem to function.

How is that significantly different from saying that the phrase is arbitrary and meaningless? How could arbitrariness not be the end result of anything "I don't want to hear/do/say"?

It's not arbitrary or meaningless to the person in question. It reflects their priorities. It IS arbitary/meaningless when taken as a whole - because there is no alignment. That was my entire point.

Who?

Where do I start? How about my scouts (when I was scoutmaster) and called them to account when they swore in any fashion - but especially using religious terms. I was actually accused of being PC by one of them. BTW - I faced the same accusation from another scoutmaster - and I was the freaking atheist in the group! How about my extended family, the kids on our Odyssey of the Mind team, the kids on our high school service trip, the parents leading that trip, several people on facebook who I asked to keep their language under control on my page, and the list goes on.

Our society is increasing secular, so swearing in the name of god, or using a reference to Jesus, is increasingly commonplace - and when I challenge people on it as being disrespectful of the beliefs of others - I am told I am being "PC" on a regular basis.

Yes, you are redefining things, carpe. The term "politically correct" actually has a real meaning, and while people may use it as way to dismiss someone else's concern, that's not the only or even the primary reason it's used.

Historically? Maybe. Today? Not so much. Today - PC has come to mean exactly what I reflected: something I don't want to hear or be bothered with. That someone might be offended if someone wishes them "Merry Christmas" when they are Jewish or Islamic is "politically correct." That someone who is transgender might not want to be referred to as "he" or "she" is "politically correct." That someone finds "Jesus H. (you can fill in the rest) offensive is "politically correct." That someone beleives heads of state should not be referred to by adolescent nicknames is "politically correct." That someone thinks responding to even imagined slights with insults and attacks is childish is "politically correct." The list goes on.

Politically correct, today, is used exactly as I described it: to label something people don't want to hear as "unacceptable" and "unneccessary."

[carpedm9587]

from my experience people who are politically correct don't think they are. They think they are just being normal and accommodating equality and tolerance in all of it's forms and will burn anyone at the stake who disagrees.

No one thinks they are being politically correct, Sparko. That's my point. Because how each of us uses language is FINE with US. We only think people are being PC when they want us to use language in a way we don't want ot use it. Then, suddenly, they're PC.

[rogue06]

EGGzactly - he actually angered a number of Republicans by the way he campaigned.

Some of his staunchest opponents are from the Never Trump crowd in the Republican Party. I mean Chuck Schumer and Nancy Pelosi were willing to deal with Trump which is something that most of those in the Never Trump crowd would never do.

[Cow Poke]

Umm... I'd have to do some digging. The discussion was last summer and is buried pretty deep. You can look for it, accept my word for it, or simply dismiss me as a "false claimant." I just don't put that search high on my list - given how poorly Facebook searches seem to function.

Lightweight!

[carpedm9587]

But Trump does not represent the "right" (he actually holds many liberal views and many of his other ones are populist). He actually left the Republican Party because he thought that their opposition to partial-birth abortion was too extreme. And prior to running for president he had a lot, and I mean a lot, of fans and support in Hollywood (hardly a conservative bastion by any sane measure).

Don't get me wrong, Rogue - I don't think Trump is a "true" Republican by any stretch of the imagination. But the man is hijacking the Republican party at an amazing rate. Look - we all know that most congressional districts in the U.S. (partially due to gerrymandering) face more challenge in the primaries than they do in the general election. Trump/Bannon are threatening every mainstream Republican who in any way opposes them with challenges in the primaries. Because Trump has a significant base in the places that tend to be Republican - that's a significant challenge. So most Republican leaders are caving...and the party is becoming the Republican Party of Trump.

If that trend is not reversed...it does not bode well for the Republican party, IMO. Could I be wrong? Possibly. But if I AM wrong, and it DOES bode well for the Republican party - then we are headed down the road of admiration for leaders who are dictators and overlords. From there is a short step to Nazi Germany.

[rogue06]

So, now that Jones has won, and it's no longer necessary to hound Moore about his creepiness, I wonder if the left will relax and allow Franken to rethink his resignation.

My guess is - no. I'm thinking the Democrats will now feel emboldened to do everything in their power to drive Trump out of office over his alleged indiscretions.

That is why they were so quick to throw folks like Franken and Conyers under the bus. This is all about going after Trump and if they have to sacrifice a few pawns - well so be it.

The problem here for the left is that the public was aware of Trump's behavior before the election and voted him in despite it.

[Sparko]

No one thinks they are being politically correct, Sparko. That's my point. Because how each of us uses language is FINE with US. We only think people are being PC when they want us to use language in a way we don't want ot use it. Then, suddenly, they're PC.

no.

Being PC is coming up with artificially polite terms that are meant not to offend someone or some group. Even if you have to invent the offense that you are "fixing"

[Cow Poke]

no.

Being PC is coming up with artificially polite terms that are meant not to offend someone or some group. Even if you have to invent the offense that you are "fixing"

And, again, comedians are probably noticing this the most....

I need to find that clip of the guy who starts....

"OK, so there was this fat guy ... oh, wait, I can't say 'fat'... um... This Jew, an Italian and a German... nope, can't say "Jew"... ok, There's an old Indian.. uhoh... can't say Indian......"

Meanwile....

correctness is killing comedy: “We are addicted to the rush of being offended”

7 famous comedians who said political correctness is killing comedy

[Adrift]

Umm... I'd have to do some digging. The discussion was last summer and is buried pretty deep. You can look for it, accept my word for it, or simply dismiss me as a "false claimant." I just don't put that search high on my list - given how poorly Facebook searches seem to function.

Yeah, I mean, that just sounds wacky. If that's not PC, then I don't know what is. I know plenty of people on the far left who find that particular view "PC", even if they half-heartedly endorse it.

It's not arbitrary or meaningless to the person in question. It reflects their priorities. It IS arbitary/meaningless when taken as a whole - because there is no alignment. That was my entire point.

Are you screwing with me? You're screwing with me, right? When I stated, "I think you're going too far in thinking that the concept of PC is completely arbitrary and meaningless," I meant precisely the view when taken as a whole.

Where do I start? How about my scouts (when I was scoutmaster) and called them to account when they swore in any fashion - but especially using religious terms. I was actually accused of being PC by one of them. BTW - I faced the same accusation from another scoutmaster - and I was the freaking atheist in the group! How about my extended family, the kids on our Odyssey of the Mind team, the kids on our high school service trip, the parents leading that trip, several people on facebook who I asked to keep their language under control on my page, and the list goes on.

Our society is increasing secular, so swearing in the name of god, or using a reference to Jesus, is increasingly commonplace - and when I challenge people on it as being disrespectful of the beliefs of others - I am told I am being "PC" on a regular basis.

Unless you can provide a direct quote, I'm going to assume you're just making this up. I find it incredible that anyone would call someone PC for not using "Jesus of Nazareth as an oath", or "swearing using the name of god". If someone is asserting this some place, it's extremely uncommon, or some sort of one off.

Historically? Maybe. Today? Not so much. Today - PC has come to mean exactly what I reflected: something I don't want to hear or be bothered with. That someone might be offended if someone wishes them "Merry Christmas" when they are Jewish or Islamic is "politically correct." That someone who is transgender might not want to be referred to as "he" or "she" is "politically correct." That someone finds "Jesus H. (you can fill in the rest) offensive is "politically correct." That someone beleives heads of state should not be referred to by adolescent nicknames is "politically correct." That someone thinks responding to even imagined slights with insults and attacks is childish is "politically correct." The list goes on.

Politically correct, today, is used exactly as I described it: to label something people don't want to hear as "unacceptable" and "unneccessary."

Politically correct is a well defined and well understood term. Most people don't have issues figuring out what it means or who it applies to. You may be confused about it, but I assure you, most people aren't.

[Zymologist]

Here's a video I saw a while back that shows a German member of Parliament prefacing his (very brief) address to Parliament by greeting 60 different genders: