Should Al Franken Resign?

[rogue06]

Absolutely. He's a politician - why wouldn't my view of him be influenced by politics? Moore was a judge who defied two superior court orders, and continues to insist that an Islamic representative should not be seated on the basis of his religion, despite Article VI of the Constitution. IMO, he does not respect "rule of law" and has no place as a "law maker."

But that view is separate from the sexual allegations. On those I have to withhold judgment as to their veracity, but I object to his treatment of his accusers.

If not for his position on "rule of law," and his treatment of those women, I would take the position "I would not vote for him because he does not support policies I advocate and he resists policies I support," but I would not take the position "he is unfit for office."

(just realized you didn't ask a question - and I answered anyway. So much for "I will withdraw." - but your statement was a good one, and opened new territory in the discussion, so I plead guilty to succumbing to temptation... )

Correct me if I wrong but weren't you earlier chiding others for basing their reactions to Trump, Moore, Franken et al. on their political affiliations, yet here you are doing the same and seeking to justify it.

[Mountain Man]

A fair question. My position on Moore is mixed. As to the accusations themselves, I still cannot claim to know what happened, so I am leery about passing judgment on his actions. The sheer number of people stepping forward, coupled with the comments of others who knew him from that period and acknowledge his tendency to date teenagers, coupled with his very poor performance on Hannity raise serious questions for me, but I still cannot claim to know. I wasn't there, and we have another he/she said situation. For the accusations, I have to suspend judgment until an investigation is had.

But his attack of the women accusing him I find unacceptable. I also find his position on religion and politics, in defiance of Article VI of the constitution, unacceptable in a politician, especially one with a legal background. For those reasons, I do not think Moore should be running for, or elected to, office. For the record, I felt the same way about both Trump and Clinton when they used the same strategy of publicly attacking their accusers.

That Moore dated young women 4-decades ago is hardly a secret, and he hasn't denied it, but it wasn't illegal, so who cares? It in now way substantiates or otherwise bolsters the accusations made against him, accusations which have considerable credibility problems due to a complete lack of corroborating details and witnesses (the supposed victims apparently kept it to themselves for decades), no specifics than can be independently investigated, and in the one case, a yearbook signature which appears to be at least partially forged and which the attorney refuses to allow Moore's legal team to examine. Furthermore, a number of character witnesses, including co-workers and women that Moore dated, have come forward to say that they don't believe the accusations for a second.

But I'm not sure why you pretend the evidence even matters when we have Al Franken literally caught in the act, and you're saying that we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

So now I'm curious: you express a distaste for "attacking the accusers", but if the accusations are false then why shouldn't the accusers be attacked? If we were to look at false accusations as an attack in their own right then attacking the accusers in return would seem to be a prudent defense. I suppose you might think it creates an atmosphere where legitimate victims will be afraid to come forward, but I think, rather, the lesson is that you shouldn't come forward unless you can actually prove your case. Perhaps victims could start by getting their case on record immediately instead of waiting years or decades to try and drop an unprovable bombshell on a high-profile figure.

[carpedm9587]

Correct me if I wrong but weren't you earlier chiding others for basing their reactions to Trump, Moore, Franken et al. on their political affiliations, yet here you are doing the same and seeking to justify it.

Ahh... no. My responses to Moore, Trump, Clinton, and Franken with respect to their handling of accusations of sexual inappropriateness are separate from my reaction to them for political issues. All four men have been accused and (so far) no compelling evidence has been shown for any of the accusations, so I am forced to withhold judgment on those issues. Of the four accused, three have attacked their accusers (Moore, Trump, Clinton) which I find unacceptable. One has not (Franken), which I applaud. Three have issued no form of apology (Trump, Clinton, Moore), and one has (Franken). So for the one thing Franken apologized for (the picture) I am secure drawing the conclusion that he acted inappropriately.

On the political side, I abhor Trump for character reasons, find Moore unsuited to office for constitutional issues, am aligned with many (but not all) of Clinton's political stands, and I find I am very aligned with a lot of Franken's political positions.

The two things are not conflated in my mind - and my response to the sexual allegations has nothing to do with my response to the political issues.

[carpedm9587]

So now I'm curious: you express a distaste for "attacking the accusers", but if the accusations are false then why shouldn't the accusers be attacked?

That Moore apparently has a different memory of what happened than these women is clear. That they knew one another and there was involvement is also clear. To treat women respectfully in such a situation, and acknowledge the possibility that people may walk away from the same encounter with different memories is not demanding over-much. It is the action I would expect of a gentleman. Trump, Moore, and Clinton have shown themselves to be nothing of the kind, IMO.

If we were to look at false accusations as an attack in their own right then attacking the accusers in return would seem to be a prudent defense. I suppose you might think it creates an atmosphere where legitimate victims will be afraid to come forward, but I think, rather, the lesson is that you shouldn't come forward unless you can actually prove your case. Perhaps victims could start by getting their case on record immediately instead of waiting years or decades to try and drop an unprovable bombshell on a high-profile figure.

Moore was a person of power at that time. That individual women would be hesitant to step forward knowing they were facing a powerful man in the south in the 70s is not a stretch. The 2010's is a different time, and we are in the midst of an explosion of people "stepping forward." That women would find safety in numbers and a different climate is not unreasonable.

To simply expect a victim to set aside fear and "come out" is a form of blaming the victim, IMO.

I recognize this is a complex issue. False accusations are harmful. So too are true accusations that are not believed. The rush, today, to conclude who is lying and who is telling the truth when the fact is, we simply do not know - is potentially damaging to either party.

[Cow Poke]

It is the action I would expect of a gentleman.

Like this?

franken.jpg

How gentlemanly is that?

[carpedm9587]

Like this?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24988[/ATTACH]

How gentlemanly is that?

I am not sure how many times I need to say this: the picture shows an unacceptable, condescending, disrespectful action. I have not defended it - I have not suggested it is OK. I HAVE noted that Franken's response is to apologize and specifically to NOT attack the woman making the accusations. I accept his apology as genuine because I have no cause to do otherwise, and I cannot imagine someone apologizing for something they do not believe was inappropriate.

Now you can suspect me of being biased because I am left of center and Franken is clearly left. You can accuse me of being dishonest if you wish. That, of course, requires you to look into my heart and make a judgment. I know what is in my heart, and I know both of those things are not true. If you believe otherwise, so be it.

[One Bad Pig]

Moore was a person of power at that time. That individual women would be hesitant to step forward knowing they were facing a powerful man in the south in the 70s is not a stretch.

A deputy DA?

[Mountain Man]

Like this?

[ATTACH=CONFIG]24988[/ATTACH]

How gentlemanly is that?

Now now, we shouldn't jump to conclusions.

[carpedm9587]

A deputy DA?

Yes

To a mouse - a house cat looks powerful. To a man, it does not.

[rogue06]

Ahh... no. My responses to Moore, Trump, Clinton, and Franken with respect to their handling of accusations of sexual inappropriateness are separate from my reaction to them for political issues. All four men have been accused and (so far) no compelling evidence has been shown for any of the accusations, so I am forced to withhold judgment on those issues. Of the four accused, three have attacked their accusers (Moore, Trump, Clinton) which I find unacceptable. One has not (Franken), which I applaud. Three have issued no form of apology (Trump, Clinton, Moore), and one has (Franken). So for the one thing Franken apologized for (the picture) I am secure drawing the conclusion that he acted inappropriately.

On the political side, I abhor Trump for character reasons, find Moore unsuited to office for constitutional issues, am aligned with many (but not all) of Clinton's political stands, and I find I am very aligned with a lot of Franken's political positions.

The two things are not conflated in my mind - and my response to the sexual allegations has nothing to do with my response to the political issues.

It isn't that Franken took the high road here. The picture of him leering at the camera as he groped Tweeden as she slept made it all but impossible for him to attack her straight out as being a liar -- although he still does that in a somewhat polite way about the thing where no damning photographs exist.

Again, this makes me wonder why the MSM isn't seeking out everybody who was there looking for eyewitnesses.

[carpedm9587]

It isn't that Franken took the high road here. The picture of him leering at the camera as he groped Tweeden as she slept made it all but impossible for him to attack her as being a liar -- although he still does that in a somewhat polite way about the thing where no damning photographs exist.

Again, this makes me wonder why the MSM isn't seeking out everybody who was there looking for eyewitnesses.

I've responded to this, so I'll let my previous posts stand.

[Cow Poke]

I am not sure how many times I need to say this: the picture shows an unacceptable, condescending, disrespectful action.

Yes, nothing a gentleman would do. For you to assume he'd act "gentlemanly" with regards to women in other situations is just really stretching it.

[carpedm9587]

Yes, nothing a gentleman would do. For you to assume he'd act "gentlemanly" with regards to women in other situations is just really stretching it.

I look at myself and realize that I have changed significantly in 11 years. I extend the benefit of the doubt to others that they might as well.

For that I need look no further than TWeb. 11 years ago, I was a member and engaged in a lot of exchanges here. I was inappropriate in more than one instance. Today I return and find myself in a different place.

So who am I to judge someone else on the basis of actions 11, 30, or 40 years ago? I have no opinion concerning Moore 40 years ago - I wasn't there. I DO have an opinion about what he is doing and saying today. Same for Trump. Same for Clinton.

[Cow Poke]

I look at myself and realize that I have changed significantly in 11 years. I extend the benefit of the doubt to others that they might as well.

So, Moore --- that was 30-40 years ago...... no benefit of the doubt there, though. And how bout this...

“And, ‘I give the pills to Lesley Stahl. Then, when Lesley's passed out, I take her to the closet and rape her.’ Or, ‘That’s why you never see Lesley until February.’ Or, ‘When she passes out, I put her in various positions and take pictures of her.’”

Is this the "gentleman" you so nobly defend?

[carpedm9587]

So, Moore --- that was 30-40 years ago...... no benefit of the doubt there, though. And how bout this...

Wow - I am amazed I have to say this yet again - I have no opinion abut whether Moore is or is not guilty about the accusations against him. He says no - they say yes - I have no way to resolve it. If I accept one, I reject the other. So I suspend judgment - as I believe we all should do.

The only judgment I pass on Moore is his treatment of the women accusing him - attacking them is unacceptable, IMO.

“And, ‘I give the pills to Lesley Stahl. Then, when Lesley's passed out, I take her to the closet and rape her.’ Or, ‘That’s why you never see Lesley until February.’ Or, ‘When she passes out, I put her in various positions and take pictures of her.’”

Is this the "gentleman" you so nobly defend?

I am not actually "defending" anyone. Franken (I say again) has acted inappropriately in multiple instances (I'm not sure why no one is actually hearing this part?). I do not like the humor he used to use and found much of it disrespectful. I despised his book - and thought he had descended into the same morass he was accusing others of. I applaud exactly one thing - his refusal to attack the woman accusing him. A total scoundrel can behave gentlemanly now and again. I find that choice of his "gentlemanly." I do not endorse or defend anything else.

I also do not think he should summarily resign or be dismissed from his post. I am willing to allow for the possibility that people change - and to let the political process unwind. So if people seriously want him out, recall him. If the Senate feels strongly about it, initiate ouster proceedings. I am willing to let the political and judicial system play out without coming to summary judgment. I do not know what is in the man's heart today - I only know he was a cad 11 years ago.

For the record, if Hitler helped a little old lady across the road - I would describe the action as gentlemanly. It does not mean I forgive or dismiss all of his attrocities, nor does it mean I think he is a "gentleman," it means exactly what it says: that act is gentlemanly.