[Jim Moonan]

We each advancing day forward in this morass of american politics I hear echoes of the recent past, during the election campaign, that now take on new meaning; or ring hollow; or worse.

Case in point: The republican campaign mantra, "Drain the swamp!" (which, btw, has been a mantra for virtually all candidates for decades).
As of today, the swamp A) is not being drained -- at all. It's being fed. Look at the appointments made; look at the nepotism flowering, and B) The swamp IS NOW THE PRESIDENCY. Filled with fakes and deceitful legislation, venomous deregulation, predatory capitalism, etc.

I'm disgusted anew each morning.

What inflames me more than anything is the virulent propaganda arm of the presidency. It's spewing out bile that the deplorables are licking up like honey. I'm disgusted. Can you tell? I'm disgusted.

If someone were really serious about draining the swamp they would simply walk over to the faucet, turn it off, and let it wither. It's systemic. For example, the most despicable of "swamp critters" is the congressional benefits package that looks like the blueprint for socialism (not that a dose of socialism is a bad thing). I cannot believe we continue to allow the select few that WE ELECTED receive the benefits they do while we beg for morsels of healthcare, slivers of social security. They even SPEND our social security money to pay for their tax plans that benefit the wealthy.

We have now entered the rock throwing stage. The glass house era of politics. Give me a break. What Al Franken did was immature. He was a funnyman once; a comedian. Not a serial criminal. That Alabama politician running for senate whose name I can't recall at the moment was obviously a bad dude back in the day. He found religion and put it behind him. He should say that and let the voters have their say. If criminal charges can be brought against him then get on with it. I'm ready to give up on democracy -- if what we have is even democracy.
We are in the throes of an existential moment in the US. Where do we turn? Where is the decent revolution when you need it? Who?

[Gail White]

Jim, if we were both young and single, I'd ask you to marry me.

[Jim Moonan]

I hear you, Gail. We would live forever and a day

[Erik Olson]

Originally Posted by Jim Moonan

We have now entered the rock throwing stage. The glass house era of politics. Give me a break. What Al Franken did was immature. He was a funnyman once; a comedian. Not a serial criminal.

The thing with Al Franken is really disappointing, to say the least; and I think it is more than just immature, I am afraid. Being a comedian is no excuse for what he did. I honestly think he will be an unwanted liability now for the Democratic party that would define itself in opposition to the party of Moore. I do agree, however, that Roy is worse. In my opinion, when one of our own is guilty, it is incumbent upon us to fully disclaim the wrong committed as we would do were he of the other party. And where there is smoke there is fire, what starts as a trickle of accusations all too often ends as a flood with such cases; as we have seen play out over and over. Thus, I would be all the more hesitant to downplay or defend, though the first allegation was bad enough.

[Roger Slater]

He's guilty of posing in an adolescent picture during a 36 hour plane ride after spending two exhausting weeks entertaining the troops in a bawdy show with Playboy models and Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders. The part where he kissed her with her consent but too sloppily for Tweeden's taste (as she informs us 10 years later) is bullshit, and even if it weren't it's really not all that huge a blemish on an otherwise spotless life of 60 years. (And now we have pictures showing that she also went around pinching and kissing people without permission, and the script she says Franken wrote just as a pretext to kiss her was actually a standard script used for years in USO shows).

[Erik Olson]

Well, if the plane was 36 hours, then in that case... Or if there were Dallas cheerleaders, that does not give one the license to take degrading pictures of someone, hands over breasts. And it is quite generous to characterize it as not to her taste that he forcibly shoved his tongue down her mouth as she tried to push away.

Now, with the latest one, is it ever acceptable for a senator, as he was in 2010, when asked to take a picture at a state's fair, to do as Lindsay Menz now has come out to say: he "pulled me in really close, like awkward close, and as my husband took the picture, he put his hand full-fledged on my rear. It was wrapped tightly around my butt cheek" "It wasn't around my waist. It wasn't around my hip or side. It was definitely on my butt..." .
Are you just fine with, that because I'm not. I can't imagine asking for a simple picture and being groped. These are violations and they are not right.
As the first woman said, she found out of the photo and has since " felt violated all over again. Embarrassed. Belittled. Humiliated."

P.S. The whole thing upsets me because I liked Franken quite a bit, and it is unpleasant to disclaim one whom I admired, but it may be morally right and even politically judicious not to stand by him and his baggage (which may yet worsen for all we know).

[Roger Slater]

The part about shoving his tongue into her mouth has not been confirmed by Franken, who tactfully says he remembers it differently (rather than screaming that the woman is a liar who pals around with Hannity), and there are many circumstances that lead me to believe that she is not accurately reporting what happened.

I don't feel like going over every last bit of evidence, but for now let me mention one thing that makes me doubt her. She claimed that Franken wrote the script in 2006 at the last minute for no other reason that to have an excuse to kiss her. But it turns out that:

A. This was a standard USO set-piece that she and Franken actually performed in their 2003 USO shows, and it probably predates even those shows, and

B. One of the lines she reads from the script is "You just wrote that to have an excuse to kiss me!", before proceeding to say she'd rather kiss one of the soldiers (and then doing so).

In other words, her memory of what happened is so shaky and unreliable that she didn't even remember that the script wasn't new, and she invented the part about his having cooked up the script just to be able to kiss her, not recalling that this was a joke in the script itself.

There are other circumstances as well, but I need to stop now.

[John Isbell]

I've had a high opinion of Franken for some time.

1. That is precisely how Moore's supporters feel about Moore.
2. However, the reported acts are quite different.
3. As is the number of witnesses (and acts).
4. And from what Roger states, the lead-off Franken accusation does seem to raise some questions about simple reliability.
5. Not least if the accuser is in fact friendly with an enemy (I think Hannity deserves the word) political operative, as I believe are none of Moore's accusers.

Michelle Goldberg called for Franken to resign. I see the argument, but I'm not there yet.

Cheers,
John

Update: I think my points 2 and 3 will stand at present (barring further testimony). 4 and 5 I'd like to know more about, before forming an opinion.

[Erik Olson]

There is a question as to whether Franken should resign. For my part, it is premature to call for any such thing. For this would depend on his continued response, which has so far stood out in a good way relative to other notables accused of misconduct (his second, if not quite his first, apology to the first accusation was the best he could have done in the circumstances). This question would be influenced greatly by the advent of additional accusations. Especially if that happens, he may have too much baggage to be an asset to the party moving forward, as much as it pains me to realize; but if he makes it through all the scrutiny, he may yet continue to be more of an asset than a liability in the final analysis. Time will tell, or so I suppose.

[John Isbell]

Leaving aside for the moment the first allegation against Franken, I've heard two commenters so far on MSNBC note that the second, from 2010, concerns his time as senator, which involves a whole different power dynamic. That may well become a focus of an ethics investigation.

It should be repeated I think that Moore is a quite separate issue. Trump has been vocal on the first case and silent on the second, FWIW. A profile in presidential courage.

Cheers,
John