Al Franken's a chickenshit

[crazed_hoosier2]

I see it doesn't matter. You are comfortable accusing me of hypocrisy whether I demonstrate it or not.

Well, I'm simply saying that, when it comes to politics, most people have double standards....and that's because, in most cases (perhaps not all), the politics actually matter more to people than the alleged scandals. If that weren't true, then they'd be just as eager to go after "their own" as they are the other guys.

And I'm not pointing the finger at others without first pointing at myself. I'm as guilty of this as anybody. In fact, I might even say that I'm unapologetically guilty of it.

I can live with that. I just don't want to be lectured about it by anybody who approaches these things the same way while constantly denying that they do. If you genuinely swore off WJC for his misdeeds, then bully for you -- and for any other Democrat who did.

But relatively few did. And most of those who did only did so once it was politically safe to do so. Heck, there are even more people (Chelsea Handler comes to mind) who are only now saying that they believe Clinton's accusers, etc. That's pretty convenient timing...now that both Bill AND Hillary are in the rearview mirror.

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Well, I'm simply saying that, when it comes to politics, most people have double standards....and that's because, in most cases (perhaps not all), the politics actually matter more to people than the alleged scandals. If that weren't true, then they'd be just as eager to go after "their own" as they are the other guys.

And I'm not pointing the finger at others without first pointing at myself. I'm as guilty of this as anybody. In fact, I might even say that I'm unapologetically guilty of it.

I can live with that. I just don't want to be lectured about it by anybody who approaches these things the same way while constantly denying that they do. If you genuinely swore off WJC for his misdeeds, then bully for you -- and for any other Democrat who did.

But relatively few did. And most of those who did only did so once it was politically safe to do so. Heck, there are even more people (Chelsea Handler comes to mind) who are only now saying that they believe Clinton's accusers, etc. That's pretty convenient timing...now that both Bill AND Hillary are in the rearview mirror.

ha ha ha, you think Hillary is in the rearview mirror...

 

[iuwclurker1]

This isn't about how we talk on the Cooler. It's about how society deals with this reckoning now that women are starting to open up about poor treatment at the hands of men. Not all misbehavior is the same. It's important to remember that.

I agree. In your opinion, what's different about Franken's current misbehavior of lying and Moore's current misbehavior of lying (assuming they're both lying)?

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

Well, I'm simply saying that, when it comes to politics, most people have double standards....and that's because, in most cases (perhaps not all), the politics actually matter more to people than the alleged scandals. If that weren't true, then they'd be just as eager to go after "their own" as they are the other guys.

And I'm not pointing the finger at others without first pointing at myself. I'm as guilty of this as anybody. In fact, I might even say that I'm unapologetically guilty of it.

I can live with that. I just don't want to be lectured about it by anybody who approaches these things the same way while constantly denying that they do. If you genuinely swore off WJC for his misdeeds, then bully for you -- and for any other Democrat who did.

But relatively few did. And most of those who did only did so once it was politically safe to do so. Heck, there are even more people (Chelsea Handler comes to mind) who are only now saying that they believe Clinton's accusers, etc. That's pretty convenient timing...now that both Bill AND Hillary are in the rearview mirror.

Yes, you are quite unapologetically open about this. But I'm not attacking you for it. I'm correcting you for inaccurately reporting my own words.

 

[twenty02]

Is this appropriate behavior? No, obviously not.

That said, he apologized, the lady accepted his apology today, and said "people make mistakes". She isn't asking for him to step down or do anything else at this point.

Sorry if I'm not aghast.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I agree. In your opinion, what's different about Franken's current misbehavior of lying and Moore's current misbehavior of lying (assuming they're both lying)?

Well, Moore's misdeeds are a lot creepier due to the age and the apparent level of obsession. Franken apparently orchestrated and manipulated a situation so he could steal a kiss from the hot chick at a USO show. Kinda creepy and weird. But Moore seems to have had some kind of sick fetish for really young girls that spanned years, to the point he was known for it locally. That's way creepier.

 

[DrHoops]

Am Franken called for an ethics investigation on himself today. Also, almost all the Democratic senators who were asked, condemned his behavior, taking into account the woman’s side of the story.

I guess we’ll see what the results of the investigation are.

 

[iuwclurker1]

Well, Moore's misdeeds are a lot creepier due to the age and the apparent level of obsession. Franken apparently orchestrated and manipulated a situation so he could steal a kiss from the hot chick at a USO show. Kinda creepy and weird. But Moore seems to have had some kind of sick fetish for really young girls that spanned years, to the point he was known for it locally. That's way creepier.

You keep focusing on the past incidents. I am asking about the present misbehavior of lying about the past incidents. That's what the OP was about. Last week Louis CK told the truth, today Franken equivocated.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

You keep focusing on the past incidents. I am asking about the present misbehavior of lying about the past incidents. That's what the OP was about. Last week Louis CK told the truth, today Franken equivocated.

I think Louis CK's statement was pretty solid (even though he never actually apologized). I have no opinion on Franken. He apologized, she accepted it. You're obsessed with his single statement that he remembers the kissing incident differently. To me, that's a big "meh."

 

[Marvin the Martian]

Is this appropriate behavior? No, obviously not.

That said, he apologized, the lady accepted his apology today, and said "people make mistakes". She isn't asking for him to step down or do anything else at this point.

Sorry if I'm not aghast.

I didn't see that she accepted. I had a buddy suggest he offer to resign if she felt it important to do so. That may have been the best answer.

 

[UncleMark]

Well, Moore's misdeeds are a lot creepier due to the age and the apparent level of obsession. Franken apparently orchestrated and manipulated a situation so he could steal a kiss from the hot chick at a USO show. Kinda creepy and weird. But Moore seems to have had some kind of sick fetish for really young girls that spanned years, to the point he was known for it locally. That's way creepier.

lurker doesn't care about any of the actual conduct. It's all about the lying.

 

[iuwclurker1]

If we're on comparing sexual acts, which is worse, jacking off in front of women or sticking your tongue in their mouth?

To me, if someone jacks off in front of me, I'm thinking, man, you've got a problem. If some man sticks his tongue in my mouth, I'm choosing between strangling him to death and poking his eyes out.

 

[zeke4ahs]

Been gone all day, so going to have to catch up on this story, but it makes me sad, as I really like Al Franken, in fact, listening to his book right now. But that may be past tense.

 

[iuwclurker1]

lurker doesn't care about any of the actual conduct. It's all about the lying.

lol Exactly, UncleM. Wow, did you read my mind! sheesh

You do see a difference between past and current behavior, right? Also, you do see a difference between someone with unacceptable past behavior and telling the truth about it now or not?

You liberals are kinda...pathetic.

 

[Joe_Hoopsier]

You guys are a joke. Either it is wrong to treat women this way or it is not. Whether someone is on team D or team R should not matter.

Your first sentence is slut shaming and blaming the victim. Rock and Thyrsis do a good job of jumping into whataboutism. Rock goes so far as to say the flak jacket protects Tweeden from actually being groped. Moore is a dirty old perv who chased after teenage skirts but I have not seen that he has been accused of forcing himself on a female (of any age) and groping them. Although apparently if he groped a lady while she was wearing a thick jacket that would be okay since he was not really groping her breasts, right Rock?

My thought has always been that many (most) of the positions taken by liberals come with an out clause as long as the perpetrator plays for the right team. Rape away Bill. Whip your dick out Harvey and force women to play with it. Slut shame and shout down accusers of Bubba, Gloria. It is all good because you play for the right team.

Hypocrites.

Can I get an AMEN!!! Bring it brotha!

 

[iuwclurker1]

To me, that's a big "meh."

I'm not at all surprised. YOu're a man.

It's hard enough for women to come out with these stories. When men feel free to deny it, that doesn't make it any easier for them. Louis CK admitting the bad deed is more empowering to victims than Franken's watered down apology for the picture.

 

[hoosboot]

I called him a chickenshit for a reason. I never drew any equivalence between the types of sexual harassment. You falsely attributed that to me. I clearly attacked Franken for not admitting his wrongdoing and sloughing it off, unlike Louis CK, who set a notable precedent for supporting and empowering women further by admitting his wrongdoing in full.

Franken should come clean for women. We're a forgiving nation. We can forgive him too. But he needs to admit what he did and that it's wrong. Only then does he warrant any forgiveness.

I find it odd that you find what Louis CK did honorable. It would have been notable for him to do so when the rumors about him first started floating around - although I still wouldn't be holding it up as some great positive.

 

[DrHoops]

They went on to perform the same skit more than 100 times after this alleged incident took place. Also, upon review of the pic, he’s not actually touching her.

Does that mean he’s innocent of taking a stupid (and creepy) pic? No. But he didn’t “grope” her...and, since according to Twitter, Roger Stone knew about this in advance...I have to wonder what the reality is.

I think Louis CK's statement was pretty solid (even though he never actually apologized). I have no opinion on Franken. He apologized, she accepted it. You're obsessed with his single statement that he remembers the kissing incident differently. To me, that's a big "meh."

 

[hoosboot]

For you, I think you just got into a little whataboutism with trying to assign degrees of severity. Franken tongue kissing Tweeden without consent under the guise of "rehearsing" is similar behavior to Spacey and Weinstein.

Um...what? What Franken did was wrong, but for you to claim it is similar behavior to Spacey and Weinstein is just bizarre.

 

[TheOriginalHappyGoat]

I'm not at all surprised. YOu're a man.

It's hard enough for women to come out with these stories. When men feel free to deny it, that doesn't make it any easier for them. Louis CK admitting the bad deed is more empowering to victims than Franken's watered down apology for the picture.

Whether or not the accused cops to it is far less important than how others react. Tweeden probably didn't stay quiet out of fear Franken would deny it, but rather out of fear that if he did, people would believe him.

 

[iuwclurker1]

I find it odd that you find what Louis CK did honorable. It would have been notable for him to do so when the rumors about him first started floating around - although I still wouldn't be holding it up as some great positive.

Honorable? I find it odd that you decided to impute that on my post.

I said a notable precedent in the context of my post discussing admitting to bad deeds or not admitting to them and especially in the context of our current trend of women coming out with these stories. This is a significant cultural evolution for women right now and it's important we give our full-throated support to them so they feel ever more empowered to do so. CK corroborated his accuser's story. That's notable. Franken eseentially disputed it by saying his memory of it was different. That's notable for the wrong reason. Franken did not second CK's motion, instead he opted for the classic dodge that has frustrated women at every turn.

 

[twenty02]

I didn't see that she accepted. I had a buddy suggest he offer to resign if she felt it important to do so. That may have been the best answer.

I was listening to her press conference live on msnbc radio today. She basically said she didn't want anything to happen, that it was the Senate's prerogative re: ethics investigation. She just wanted to tell her story, and that she accepted his apology.

 

[hoosboot]

If we're on comparing sexual acts, which is worse, jacking off in front of women or sticking your tongue in their mouth?

To me, if someone jacks off in front of me, I'm thinking, man, you've got a problem. If some man sticks his tongue in my mouth, I'm choosing between strangling him to death and poking his eyes out.

I just asked my wife. She said your answer sounds like how a man might answer. I told her I was offended. :>)

I'd be interested in your thoughts on how rehearsal for kissing that is part of work is approached in other industries and any techniques you've developed for making it more comfortable in your own work.

 

[iuwclurker1]

Whether or not the accused cops to it is far less important than how others react. Tweeden probably didn't stay quiet out of fear Franken would deny it, but rather out of fear that if he did, people would believe him.

Both the perp's cop and the public reaction are important. Women still live in a culture where it's extremely dangerous for their career to make true accusations. Everything that changes that culture for the better for women is important. If Franken really cares about women as much as he professes to, he'd not hesitate to be honest. Louis CK is obviously a lot more honest of a person and a lot more courageous too. Frankly, I've never liked Louis CK much as a comedian. He took one piece of one George Carlin skit and turned it into his entire career. But he has more credibility in my eyes in terms of caring about women than Al Franken, as of today.

 

[zeke4ahs]

If we're on comparing sexual acts, which is worse, jacking off in front of women or sticking your tongue in their mouth?

To me, if someone jacks off in front of me, I'm thinking, man, you've got a problem. If some man sticks his tongue in my mouth, I'm choosing between strangling him to death and poking his eyes out.

Can't speak for all women, but I'd much prefer the kissing.

 

[iuwclurker1]

I'd be interested in your thoughts on how rehearsal for kissing that is part of work is approached in other industries and any techniques you've developed for making it more comfortable in your own work.

For starters, I was under the impression that actors often fake kissing in the movies. Not so?

Second, I wouldn't do it. I'm not required to and I wouldn't take on such work. In any case, kissing is just another form of physical communication and communication is always a two-way street for me. I don't practice or advocate forcing communication on others.

Third, your question implies consent. Consent is...consensual. I can imagine a lot of people don't mind kissing every duck, donkey, and dork who comes along so have at it.

 

[hoosboot]

Honorable? I find it odd that you decided to impute that on my post.

I said a notable precedent in the context of my post discussing admitting to bad deeds or not admitting to them and especially in the context of our current trend of women coming out with these stories. This is a significant cultural evolution for women right now and it's important we give our full-throated support to them so they feel ever more empowered to do so. CK corroborated his accuser's story. That's notable. Franken eseentially disputed it by saying his memory of it was different. That's notable for the wrong reason. Franken did not second CK's motion, instead he opted for the classic dodge that has frustrated women at every turn.

My bad. I thought that something that was a notable precedent would be considered honorable, but I see that's not how you meant it. I still find it odd that you find Louis CK's statement an notable precedent as you seem to look upon it as a positive development. He made a nice statement, but I don't find much positive about a guy who was pretty much cornered coming out and admitting the truth. I didn't find much positive about his statement other than he did what he must do given the situation he was in. It would have been much more notable to me if he had come out and said that he was guilty of these things when the rumors about his behavior first started flying around.

Meanwhile, you make a lot of assumptions about the situation with Franken...most notably the assumption that Franken remembers it the same way that Tweeden does. I don't see the situations as being very comparable at all and I think it does a disservice to the progress that has been made to insist that all situations result in the same response. Louis CK's deserves a different reaction than Harvey Weinstein's than does Roy Moore's than does Richard Dreyfus's or Dustin Hoffman's. Franken's response today was pretty decent and, while you are hung up on his not completely agreeing with Tweeden's perspective on it, I'm not there.

 

[zeke4ahs]

It appears that we are in a different world than we were concerning sexual harrassment just a year ago. I think Franken should be investigated. But to compare what he did to Moore is silly. However, if Franken is going before the ethics board, how in the world are we still just ignoring the 15 women that have cited Trump? He admitted to the forced kissing, but he has much more serious accusations than that. Are we going to confront all accusations or just some of them?

 

[iuwclurker1]

Can't speak for all women, but I'd much prefer the kissing.

Just to make sure I understand your answer, you'd prefer it if Donald Trump ambled right up to you and stuck his tongue deep into your mouth against your protestation rather than him sitting down on the couch across from you and playing with himself?

 

[DrHoops]

Enough already. Asked and answered.

Just to make sure I understand your answer, you'd prefer it if Donald Trump ambled right up to you and stuck his tongue deep into your mouth against your protestation rather than him sitting down on the couch across from you and playing with himself?

 

[CO. Hoosier]

In particular, while Franken had no business using the sleeping Tweeden as a prop for an off color photo, he's not groping her breasts. Just as the flak jacket protected Tweeden's chest from bullets, so did it protect her from Franken's fingers. I think that's not a photo of Franken groping Tweeden, but a photo of Franken pretending to grope Tweeden. Not appropriate, but not nearly equivalent to Weinstein, Ailes, Moore, Spacey, etc.

The real question for Franken is whether there's more out there. Was this a one-off, or is he a bad guy? I suspect we'll find out.

I like this. I am anxsiously awaiting this one to be argued before a court.

Along those lines, If a victim had a boob job, can a perpetrator defend on the ground that the boobs aren't real?

 

[iuwclurker1]

My bad. I thought that something that was a notable precedent would be considered honorable, but I see that's not how you meant it. I still find it odd that you find Louis CK's statement an notable precedent as you seem to look upon it as a positive development. He made a nice statement, but I don't find much positive about a guy who was pretty much cornered coming out and admitting the truth. I didn't find much positive about his statement other than he did what he must do given the situation he was in. It would have been much more notable to me if he had come out and said that he was guilty of these things when the rumors about his behavior first started flying around.

Meanwhile, you make a lot of assumptions about the situation with Franken...most notably the assumption that Franken remembers it the same way that Tweeden does. I don't see the situations as being very comparable at all and I think it does a disservice to the progress that has been made to insist that all situations result in the same response. Louis CK's deserves a different reaction than Harvey Weinstein's than does Roy Moore's than does Richard Dreyfus's or Dustin Hoffman's. Franken's response today was pretty decent and, while you are hung up on his not completely agreeing with Tweeden's perspective on it, I'm not there.

I disagree that CK had no choice. Everyone has the choice of lying or telling the truth and the precedent he set was to tell the truth. It's a precedent in the current context insofar as all the others are denying some or all of the victim's account. That's all I'm saying about CK's precedent. Nothing else. Jacking off in front of a woman without her consent strikes me as really sick behavior.

I don't need to make any assumptions about Franken. Sticking to his statement, he says we should believe the women's stories and in the same sentence suggests that he doesn't. Period. Can't have it both ways, Al.

 

[hoosboot]

For starters, I was under the impression that actors often fake kissing in the movies. Not so?

Second, I wouldn't do it. I'm not required to and I wouldn't take on such work. In any case, kissing is just another form of physical communication and communication is always a two-way street for me. I don't practice or advocate forcing communication on others.

Third, your question implies consent. Consent is...consensual. I can imagine a lot of people don't mind kissing every duck, donkey, and dork who comes along so have at it.

What is fake kissing? Are lips pressed together? My experience is that when actors kiss in movies, they generally kiss (their lips press together) and the details of how it looks are handled by the actors in consultation with the director.

If you haven't already, you should note that Tweeden said that she gave her consent to rehearse the kiss. Franken's big mistake here is not working to understand the parameters of the consent she was providing. I've actually done kissing scenes and they range from chaste pecks to blush-inducing tongue tangling. Sometimes actors are intentionally surprised by which they are and/or how they evolve. Sometimes that's part of the emotion of the scene. So, there are gradations and sometimes actors misconstrue what is being played out. That may or may not be what happened here, but I'm merely suggesting that there's more at play here than with Louis CK.

 

[hoosboot]

I disagree that CK had no choice. Everyone has the choice of lying or telling the truth and the precedent he set was to tell the truth. It's a precedent in the current context insofar as all the others are denying some or all of the victim's account. That's all I'm saying about CK's precedent. Nothing else. Jacking off in front of a woman without her consent strikes me as really sick behavior.

I don't need to make any assumptions about Franken. Sticking to his statement, he says we should believe the women's stories and in the same sentence suggests that he doesn't. Period. Can't have it both ways, Al.

Suffice it to say that I disagree with you on both points. And that I think it's really odd that you suggest that a stage kiss becoming one with tongue (where a kiss was scripted) is worse than someone whipping out their penis and masturbating in front of you (when that wasn't in anybody's script).

 

[T.M.P.]

My thought has always been that many (most) of the positions taken by liberals

Our position?

Quit making normal people out to be some kind of boogieman. We (liberals) just want left alone, to live, without your fear of the day. Liberty.... get it.

We like having our freedoms and not being told what to do by a bunch of fear ridden old white men with sticks up their arses creating ever shifting moralities for everyone but them to follow

We don't want your greed, fear, xenophobia, homophobia, misogyny, or endless religious/economic wars. Your side needs to grow up and quit living in the damn 11th century.

That being said .. lol ...

This stupid crap isn't about normal well balanced people vs the socially constipated. It's about men abusing their fame and power for sexual gratification. They exist on both sides and it's good it's coming out in the open. You started your post by saying that and then attack the socially competent for their view on the matter.

And, if you can't understand the fundamental difference between Franken and Moore's actions, (the intent) you are truly lost and should probably rethink your whole existence.

 

[SuperHoosierFan]

It appears that we are in a different world than we were concerning sexual harrassment just a year ago. I think Franken should be investigated. But to compare what he did to Moore is silly. However, if Franken is going before the ethics board, how in the world are we still just ignoring the 15 women that have cited Trump? He admitted to the forced kissing, but he has much more serious accusations than that. Are we going to confront all accusations or just some of them?

It won’t surprise me if senate republicans move to expel Franken and end up going silent on Moore.

 

[iuwclurker1]

What is fake kissing? Are lips pressed together? My experience is that when actors kiss in movies, they generally kiss (their lips press together) and the details of how it looks are handled by the actors in consultation with the director.

If you haven't already, you should note that Tweeden said that she gave her consent to rehearse the kiss. Franken's big mistake here is not working to understand the parameters of the consent she was providing. I've actually done kissing scenes and they range from chaste pecks to blush-inducing tongue tangling. Sometimes actors are intentionally surprised by which they are and/or how they evolve. Sometimes that's part of the emotion of the scene. So, there are gradations and sometimes actors misconstrue what is being played out. That may or may not be what happened here, but I'm merely suggesting that there's more at play here than with Louis CK.

Well, I often look at kissing scenes trying to figure out if the lips touched at all, just out of curiosity. I don't know what's considered fake kissing and all the subtleties involved.

As for the Franken Kiss (hereinafter, the F**K ), the full context she gave was that she made it clear she didn't really want to, he persisted, she relented, and then he took serious liberties. Would you disagree with that characterization? But in his statement, his apology focuses on the picture and minimizes the F**K.

 

[iuwclurker1]

Suffice it to say that I disagree with you on both points. And that I think it's really odd that you suggest that a stage kiss becoming one with tongue (where a kiss was scripted) is worse than someone whipping out their penis and masturbating in front of you (when that wasn't in anybody's script).

If someone's across the room and wanking off, I can turn, get up and leave, all sorts of options. When someone grabs my head, mashes his face against mine, and rams his tongue into my mouth, my options are pretty limited. Yeah, there's a huge difference in my books. She probably didn't want to bite his tongue off, mercifully. That would have been a salty, bloody mess and might have led to her vomiting, possibly infecting his tongue stump and so on.

 

[hoosboot]

Well, I often look at kissing scenes trying to figure out if the lips touched at all, just out of curiosity. I don't know what's considered fake kissing and all the subtleties involved.

As for the Franken Kiss (hereinafter, the F**K ), the full context she gave was that she made it clear she didn't really want to, he persisted, she relented, and then he took serious liberties. Would you disagree with that characterization? But in his statement, his apology focuses on the picture and minimizes the F**K.

Yeah, I'd disagree with that characterization. I don't think you have a good grasp of staged kisses or how rehearsals for staged kisses go. That doesn't mean that Franken handled it well, but screams of hypocrisy in comparison to Roy Moore, Harvey Weinstein, and Louis CK strike me as weak.

 

[hoosboot]

If someone's across the room and wanking off, I can turn, get up and leave, all sorts of options. When someone grabs my head, mashes his face against mine, and rams his tongue into my mouth, my options are pretty limited. Yeah, there's a huge difference in my books. She probably didn't want to bite his tongue off, mercifully. That would have been a salty, bloody mess and might have led to her vomiting, possibly infecting his tongue stump and so on.

Yeah, suffice it to say I disagree and don't think you have a full grasp of what Louis CK is accused of. Maybe you should reread the Louis CK statement that you claim to appreciate.