Let's get one thing straight about Roy Moore

[JakeStarkey]

The accusers are believable, much more so than Moore.

 

[Dim Bulb]

You said in your post that Bill Clinton and Weiner weren’t subjected to as much press as people like Judge Moore.

Please post where I said that. Again, try to make your point without LYING.

If you don’t bother to read your own posts you cannot be taken seriously.

 

[Auld Phart]

Mod Note:

Just merged 7 threads about Moore, just in Politics.

 

[JakeStarkey]

Why would a guy who had a DUI years before prevent anyone for voting for him? That's just stupid conservative talk.

It is also stupid conservative talk to lie and say the accusers' accusations against Moore do not far outweigh his denials.

 

[JakeStarkey]

So creepy.

 

[easyt65]

You said in your post that Bill Clinton and Weiner weren’t subjected to as much press as people like Judge Moore.

Please post where I said that. Again, try to make your point without LYING.

If you don’t bother to read your own posts you cannot be taken seriously.

I write my own posts. I read my own posts. That's how I know you just lied your ass off ... based on that lie.

 

[Reasonable]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

 

[Dim Bulb]

You said in your post that Bill Clinton and Weiner weren’t subjected to as much press as people like Judge Moore.

Please post where I said that. Again, try to make your point without LYING.

If you don’t bother to read your own posts you cannot be taken seriously.

I write my own posts. I read my own posts. That's how I know you just lied your ass off ... based on that lie.

You said the left is not as outraged about Clinton and Weiner. If your zest to call people names means that my paraphrase of this statement in your post makes me a liar then I accept your simplistic and inflammatory judgment. I wonder if you apply the same standard to President Trump.

 

[Auld Phart]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile,

in your opinion , all it takes is an accusation, and that makes them one?

 

[jc456]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

I'd say if you can't prove it, it's hearsay.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

Everyone knew...

yet no one did anything

Just like Harvey Trumpstein, everybody knew but were afraid to go against a man that powerful.

Powerful? Who? Not Roy Moore. He was just a puppy lawyer. A nobody.

 

[Faun]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

I'd say if you can't prove it, it's hearsay.

Not like that’s ever stopped the right from accepting whole, such weak claims levied against Democrats.

 

[Dim Bulb]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

I'd say if you can't prove it, it's hearsay.

Not like that’s ever stopped the right from accepting whole, such weak claims levied against Democrats.

When you’re a hammer everything looks like a nail.

 

[EvilCat Breath]

These "Christian" men crack me up. If this guy was such a heap big Christian, didn't he know that he was supposed to be a virgin until his wedding night? The Christian thing was always "no sex until you're married and then only with your spouse." Somehow, I don't think Moore "saved" himself for his wife. I think he left his "purity" ring on somebody's nightstand.

Good thing Moore is not accused of having sex with any of these women isn't it?

 

[Ava]

The accusers are believable, much more so than Moore.

Prove it or it ain't so. Innocent until proven guilty. Thing is, Jakey, non-conservatives want to believe the allegations and we constitutional conservatives don't want to believe it without evidence.

 

[jc456]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

I'd say if you can't prove it, it's hearsay.

Not like that’s ever stopped the right from accepting whole, such weak claims levied against Democrats.

When you’re a hammer everything looks like a nail.

when you have no evidence then you must look for a pattern. there is none. story is hearsay. the people will decide. why are you against that?

 

[bendog]

These "Christian" men crack me up. If this guy was such a heap big Christian, didn't he know that he was supposed to be a virgin until his wedding night? The Christian thing was always "no sex until you're married and then only with your spouse." Somehow, I don't think Moore "saved" himself for his wife. I think he left his "purity" ring on somebody's nightstand.

Good thing Moore is not accused of having sex with any of these women isn't it?

There is a god that he is not an actual rapist. Like Clinton. (-:

 

[jc456]

The accusers are believable, much more so than Moore.

then there should be a pattern. It is what usually happens if it were true. there isn't a pattern.

Why are you against the people he'd represent voting whether they believe him or not?

 

[Dim Bulb]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

I'd say if you can't prove it, it's hearsay.

Not like that’s ever stopped the right from accepting whole, such weak claims levied against Democrats.

When you’re a hammer everything looks like a nail.

when you have no evidence then you must look for a pattern. there is none. story is hearsay. the people will decide. why are you against that?

We might have a different understanding of “hearsay”. Four women on the record is direct evidence. Whether it is believable is up to the trier of fact, in this case the people of Alabama. I’m okay with them deciding.

 

[jc456]

When you have to debate whether someone is a pedaphile, you’ve already lost the debate.

I'd say if you can't prove it, it's hearsay.

Not like that’s ever stopped the right from accepting whole, such weak claims levied against Democrats.

When you’re a hammer everything looks like a nail.

when you have no evidence then you must look for a pattern. there is none. story is hearsay. the people will decide. why are you against that?

We might have a different understanding of “hearsay”. Four women on the record is direct evidence. Whether it is believable is up to the trier of fact, in this case the people of Alabama. I’m okay with them deciding.

four women? no you don't you have one. again, there'd be a pattern. why are you against the people voting on it?