Roy Moore the Pedophile

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How many people here defending Moore would be cool with a man in his thirties 'dating' their underage daughters?

+1 What is wrong with these people? It's like they're from the year 1882, but vote.

Poll: 37 percent of Alabama evangelicals more likely to vote for Moore after allegations following allegations of sexual misconduct against him.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely telling how so many keep ignoring the true definition of pedophile and keep tossing it as if it applies in this case. Diminishes your opinions every time you do.

But that's typical partisans with their inflammatory rhetoric attempting to apply the glue while the other side runs around with their whitewash.

Both sides are doing their level best to hold our nation up for contempt. Any wonder why both parties have diminished numbers over the last 20 years?

I hang out with the 13-14 year old set, since I have an 8th grade DD. Most of them: have recently started getting their periods, still have braces, still think boys are icky, are obsessed with Hamilton (like sing it together 24/7), don’t wear makeup, just started texting last year, and are both excited and terrified to be starting high school next year. They do not look like adult women. They certainly do not act like adult women. And maybe if you are a 14 year old boy, you have a crush on one of them, and want to go to a movie and try to hold her hand. But it would take a super sick emotionally stunted perverted creep to be a grown ass adult and to think that it was appropriate to have an adult sexual relationship with a girl this age.

And plenty of 13-14 year olds sending pics over their phones, and more including having Clinton sex. If they aren't running a con on you, or if you aren't being very naive, the girls you describe sound stunted, boys are icky?, in the modern world.

What Moore did was wrong on many levels but does not qualify him as a pedophile.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely telling how so many keep ignoring the true definition of pedophile and keep tossing it as if it applies in this case. Diminishes your opinions every time you do.

But that's typical partisans with their inflammatory rhetoric attempting to apply the glue while the other side runs around with their whitewash.

Both sides are doing their level best to hold our nation up for contempt. Any wonder why both parties have diminished numbers over the last 20 years?

I hang out with the 13-14 year old set, since I have an 8th grade DD. Most of them: have recently started getting their periods, still have braces, still think boys are icky, are obsessed with Hamilton (like sing it together 24/7), don’t wear makeup, just started texting last year, and are both excited and terrified to be starting high school next year. They do not look like adult women. They certainly do not act like adult women. And maybe if you are a 14 year old boy, you have a crush on one of them, and want to go to a movie and try to hold her hand. But it would take a super sick emotionally stunted perverted creep to be a grown ass adult and to think that it was appropriate to have an adult sexual relationship with a girl this age.

BTW— pedophile is shorthand for “super sick emotionally stunted prevented creep who is a grown ass adult and thinks it is okay to have a sexual relationship with a 14 year old” I think the later is probably more accurate. But it is a lot to type. So pedophile it is.

And if you think Roy Moore is not a pedophile, that only goes to show that you were never a 14 year old girl, and have never parented a 14 year old girl. Also, that you, too, have more than one screw loose.

PP, your FOS and the real world DGAS as to your attempt to change laws and definitions. Either use the correct terms of STHU.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely telling how so many keep ignoring the true definition of pedophile and keep tossing it as if it applies in this case. Diminishes your opinions every time you do.

But that's typical partisans with their inflammatory rhetoric attempting to apply the glue while the other side runs around with their whitewash.

Both sides are doing their level best to hold our nation up for contempt. Any wonder why both parties have diminished numbers over the last 20 years?

I hang out with the 13-14 year old set, since I have an 8th grade DD. Most of them: have recently started getting their periods, still have braces, still think boys are icky, are obsessed with Hamilton (like sing it together 24/7), don’t wear makeup, just started texting last year, and are both excited and terrified to be starting high school next year. They do not look like adult women. They certainly do not act like adult women. And maybe if you are a 14 year old boy, you have a crush on one of them, and want to go to a movie and try to hold her hand. But it would take a super sick emotionally stunted perverted creep to be a grown ass adult and to think that it was appropriate to have an adult sexual relationship with a girl this age.

And plenty of 13-14 year olds sending pics over their phones, and more including having Clinton sex. If they aren't running a con on you, or if you aren't being very naive, the girls you describe sound stunted, boys are icky?, in the modern world.

What Moore did was wrong on many levels but does not qualify him as a pedophile.

That is your sick, twisted opinion. The law, even in Alabama, views that behavior as a crime. If a 32 year old man made my daughter fondle his erect penis against her will and fondled her breasts, the way Moore did to the 14 year old girl, I would want him behind bars for life.

[Anonymous]

Moore is planning to sue the Post. Should get interesting

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Moore is planning to sue the Post. Should get interesting

My bet is that he won't actually sue the Post, just talk about doing it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Moore is planning to sue the Post. Should get interesting

Meh. He doesn't have the money to get good lawyers and will just be blowing more hot air. He didn't go after the Post when they reported he was siphoning off millions of dollars from his "Foundation for Moral Law" to pay himself and his family. The Post wouldn't have run this story without vetting it heavily with its own lawyers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Moore is planning to sue the Post. Should get interesting

Red meat stunt to change narrative. Moore (unfortunately for us all) is a public figure and would have to demonstrate actual malice.

[Anonymous]

One doesn’t plan to sue. One demand a correction or retraction. You can be sure that the WaPo provided him with an opportunity to respond to the reporting before publication. He didn’t disputes anything. Instead he went to Breitbart:

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Absolutely telling how so many keep ignoring the true definition of pedophile and keep tossing it as if it applies in this case. Diminishes your opinions every time you do.

But that's typical partisans with their inflammatory rhetoric attempting to apply the glue while the other side runs around with their whitewash.

Both sides are doing their level best to hold our nation up for contempt. Any wonder why both parties have diminished numbers over the last 20 years?

I hang out with the 13-14 year old set, since I have an 8th grade DD. Most of them: have recently started getting their periods, still have braces, still think boys are icky, are obsessed with Hamilton (like sing it together 24/7), don’t wear makeup, just started texting last year, and are both excited and terrified to be starting high school next year. They do not look like adult women. They certainly do not act like adult women. And maybe if you are a 14 year old boy, you have a crush on one of them, and want to go to a movie and try to hold her hand. But it would take a super sick emotionally stunted perverted creep to be a grown ass adult and to think that it was appropriate to have an adult sexual relationship with a girl this age.

And plenty of 13-14 year olds sending pics over their phones, and more including having Clinton sex. If they aren't running a con on you, or if you aren't being very naive, the girls you describe sound stunted, boys are icky?, in the modern world.

What Moore did was wrong on many levels but does not qualify him as a pedophile.

It certainly does qualify him as a pedophile - in every respect. Not sure why you're trying to convince anyone otherwise. Alabama law recognizes this as a crime and a pedophile is someone who is sexually attracted to children. A girl - and that was this accuser was at the time - is not a sexually mature woman and sexual interaction with a 14 year old is sexual interaction with a child.

The tribalism of the GOP has become dangerous. You can be sure that any Democrat found guilty of the same thing Moore is accused of would be uniformly condemned by EVERY SINGLE Republican. And yet post after post here of people trying to convince themselves he did nothing wrong. It's sick. Common decency and laws now have no meaning thanks to the GOP.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s take step back. WaPo reporter hears about rumors that have been circulating for years relating to Moore and young women. Someone puts her in contact with Ms. Corfman who tells her about a single incident with Moore. Not multiple incidents, mind you. And what does she say? Does she assert that Moore had intercourse with her? No. Did she say she performed oral sex on Moore? No. Did she say that Moore digitally penetrated her? No. Did she say she gave Moore a handjob? No.

All of these would be terribly damaging to his campaign. Instead, she tells the reporter about the mundane details: being approached while sitting in the courthouse hallway, being asked for her number, speaking with Moore in the telephone from her bedroom, being picked up around the corner from her house and driven to a home out in the woods, being given alcohol and then disrobing as he kissed her, being touched and having him put her hand on his penis through his underwear, being uncomfortable and wanting it to just end. The best part of her scheme, however, was to travel back in time to 2009, just to tell her then-boyfriend about this encounter do that he could corroborate her story 18 years later when a reporter showed up at her door because Moore was the Republican candidate for the US Senate.

This. If the Post set out simply to slander Moore, wouldn't they have included even harsher details, for example about rape etc? Not that the story isn't bad enough but if you are making things up why not make up something even more salacious?

Not enough has been made of this. If she was going to make something up, why not go big? She knows it's her word against his. Why not say he raped her? Why not say he raped her and she got pregnant, and he made her get an abortion?

Because that would be less believable.

You...don't see the irony in what you're saying?

Anyway, go ahead - stick with him. It's you he's going to end up hurting. You, and some vulnerable fatherless children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Moore is planning to sue the Post. Should get interesting

My bet is that he won't actually sue the Post, just talk about doing it.

Zero percent chance of him suing

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people here defending Moore would be cool with a man in his thirties 'dating' their underage daughters?

+1 What is wrong with these people? It's like they're from the year 1882, but vote.

Poll: 37 percent of Alabama evangelicals more likely to vote for Moore after allegations following allegations of sexual misconduct against him.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

I saw this. So disgusting. WTF is wrong with these people?!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people here defending Moore would be cool with a man in his thirties 'dating' their underage daughters?

+1 What is wrong with these people? It's like they're from the year 1882, but vote.

Poll: 37 percent of Alabama evangelicals more likely to vote for Moore after allegations following allegations of sexual misconduct against him.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

I saw this. So disgusting. WTF is wrong with these people?!

If I were a corporation considering Alabama as a potential location due to low cost of living, I would have serious doubts after seeing how some of these people are behaving.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:How many people here defending Moore would be cool with a man in his thirties 'dating' their underage daughters?

+1 What is wrong with these people? It's like they're from the year 1882, but vote.

Poll: 37 percent of Alabama evangelicals more likely to vote for Moore after allegations following allegations of sexual misconduct against him.

http://thehill.com/homenews/senate/360010-poll-37-percent-of-alabama-evangelicals-more-likely-to-vote-for-moore-after

I saw this. So disgusting. WTF is wrong with these people?!

And for that, “Saturday Night Live” made Alabama the butt of a series of jokes in its cold open this weekend.
“Voters in Alabama will never elect someone who's had relations with a minor,” the Vice President Pence character says.
“You sure about that?” asks SNL's Roy Moore, dressed in a leather vest and cowboy hat.
“No,” Pence admits.