JoCa
-
Posts
448 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Posts posted by JoCa
-
-
28 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:
She is a model and did/does not sell sexual favors. Even if she did, it is rape to force oneself on a prostitute.
Yes, I do agree it is rape to force oneself on a prostitute . . .the person who commits the crime has a responsibility and if they commit a crime be prosecuted for it. Period!
But to say that the "model" . . . have you ever seen pictures of the woman? Obviously not, but she was/is a low grade porn model.
Why in the world is it so hard for people to just say, yes in many cases the "victim" has a personal responsibility, i.e. if you don't want men to leer at you make crude jokes, then don't put yourself in a situation where that will happen.
It's this idiotic ideology that I should be able to do whatever I want, I should be able to be a porn model (which is really what she was, she got paid for strutting her stuff around in highly sexualized magazine, her tour was even sexualized) and then get to claim . . ."well I was just an innocent little victim".
When your whole career is based on exciting the base animal instincts in man and then the man actually acts out, claiming your a "victim" does a disservice to woman who are truly victims who have never encouraged a man's base instinct by their dress, their actions, etc.
Again, I know my wife was assaulted. To compare this woman and this incident to actual victims makes a travesty out of actual victims.
What the guy did was wrong. Period.
But to let the woman who's whole career (except for when she got older and didn't have quite as much sex appeal) was geared towards getting a rise out of men, skate through this like she is just some innocent poor little victim is hypocrisy.
-
4 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
we’ve seen that movie twice before during Moore’s time as Chief Justice
You disagree with the stands he took?
-
3 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
It would work if the party chose to unite. But given the state of things, the only one who could unite the party is Trump himself; and he seems inclined to stay out of it.
As he should. The states get to decide, not the President . . it would set a very bad precedent for him to get involved in overturning the primary voters of Alabama.
-
5 minutes ago, Godless said:
No, it's not. Unlike some Christians (and some atheists too, probably), I'm not naive enough to think that my worldview has a monopoly on morality. There are very good people in every religious worldview.
I totally agree . . .but there is a reason why the most free and prosperous countries in the history of the world were Christian.
And I do like your response . . . I guess the point being is most people have probably never been in a situation where their livelihood is on the line due to horrible accusations.
I have been; it's horrible, it sucks and sometimes there are just bad people in this world who want to take you down and when these evil people decide to throw a bomb your way . . .there is nothing you can do to stop it.
And when you sit on that side of the table being accused of things you would never do in a million years and no one believes you and you lose your job because of it . . .man that causes some real soul searching.
-
8 minutes ago, Just_A_Guy said:
And the trouble is, anyone who says they know those allegations to be true (or false) is simply lying.
True but boy there is a lot of smoke coming from Gloria Alred that indicates that story is 100% false.
-
1 minute ago, Just_A_Guy said:
But it seems to me that the Republicans have an awfully deep bench of solid politicos who *haven’t* been accused of sex with underaged teens; and I think it’s still politically expedient for us to decline to elevate those who are living under a question mark. I think the least-bad policy here (which Ben Shapiro recently pitched) would have been for Trump to lead a call to dump Moore and get behind a write-in—maybe bring Strange back, or invite Sessions or Shelby to resign their current posts and run for that seat.
I would generally agree JAG and it's a decent thought out response, except people don't understand the political process. That is why they did this b/c the 2nd bold is just an impossibility. A write-in?? Oh my goodness, they never succeed (Lisa Murkowski not withstanding).
You can't legally take his name off the ballot! And even if you could and did, you are going to do so over allegations? Either Moore wins or the seat goes to the Democrat, period end of story.
Here is what you actually do if you want to really solve the problem; you allow the vote to be held, you push everyone to vote for Moore and then the Senate could easily censure him for ethics violations if there is a preponderance of evidence.
This was all done right now specifically b/c there are no other options left. You can't postpone the election, you can't write-in, it is a political hit job. I completely agree if these allegations came out 2 years ago, yeah fine find someone else . . .they didn't.
-
12 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:
"Fight or flight" is a myth. 80% freeze when confronted with an instant crisis. It's also bizarre that you equate modeling with prostitution, and insinuating that she got what she had coming. Frankly, I'm not at all certain she would not have experienced the imposed kiss had she been a sincere Christian. Sometimes predators find the innocent even more enticing. Let's not forget Elizabeth Smart.
BS. Total BS. Yes people freeze for a second and then instincts kick in. Two the 2nd . . .have you never seen pictures of her, prostituting her body? I'd link but unfortunately it wouldn't be SFW.
Her "modeling" is at best soft-core porn. Oh I forgot that's what they call it these days "modeling" yeah right.
Yeah, I am saying if you swim with the bottom-feeding muck-rackers don't be shocked when you get crap flung on you.
Oh . . .I get it, in today's society a woman should . . .it's her dang right don't you know.. . .walk around totally naked and never no not once get a cat-call or be leered at or any rude comments. And if she does, well that man should go to Hell b/c he's an evil brute a beast that isn't worthy to live. Because don't ya know, she's always right!
What you are asking for is an impossible standard.
-
3 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:
This is horrible. "Stealing a kiss" in my line of work would get me up to 15-years in prison and a life-time label as a sex-offender. No means no. Your contention that if a woman does not fight back no wrong was done is equally horrible. "Fight or flight" is a myth. 80% freeze when confronted with an instant crisis. It's also bizarre that you equate modeling with prostitution, and insinuating that she got what she had coming. Frankly, I'm not at all certain she would not have experienced the imposed kiss had she been a sincere Christian. Sometimes predators find the innocent even more enticing. Let's not forget Elizabeth Smart.
??? What, okay I'd like to see what line of work you are in. First off she didn't say NO . . .oh my goodness, did you read what she wrote. He asked to practice, she said she didn't want to and then he persisted and she said yes ... that's sexual harassment? Did she tell him, "now when we practice, don't actually kiss me" No she didn't.
I guess a man should never ask a women out on a date multiple times b/c NO MEANS NO!!!
-
Just now, prisonchaplain said:
She was asleep, and so did not consent to the picture. So, he did not grope, but he violated her--AFTER already being told sternly that she wanted no kissing or sexual contact with him whatsoever. This picture could even be perceived as harassment, given she had already told him his sexual advances had crossed a line. They were not friends, nor even friendly colleagues. Fine-tooth comb this, if you want. You win the debate point on it not being a verified grope (who knows for sure if he did or didn't). However, there's not much sunlight difference, imho, between groping and taking suggestive photos with someone who is asleep and has previously told you to BACK OFF.
Thank you! Details are important here (but of course in the modern day lynch mob mentality, details don't mean squat-this is exactly how blacks were hung in the 60s, exactly how the Red Scare happened, exactly how the Salem Witch Trials happened, etc. etc. etc.).
But again after she allegedly told him to back off. She even admits that she had reservations about rehearsing the kissing . . . but did it anyways and then is shocked, shocked I tell you when he actually kissed her. Please any self respecting woman would have never put herself into that situation.
10 years after the fact; I'm sorry I just get really, really sick of old allegations popping up for political gain or b/c someone wants their 15 min. or b/c they feel "empowered" now. Oh please give me a break, you feel "empowered" just now. I don't buy it in the least bit. Really grow up . . .modern feminist/women in today's society want to act all empowered but never, not once actually stood up for themselves when the incident happened.
They didn't slap the jerk, hit him, etc. no, they were cowards in a corner and then at the opportune moment brought it out.
I agree what is confirmed (i.e. the picture) is totally inappropriate, I don't agree with it, I don't approve of it . . .but if that is the standard of conduct we are setting as to whether one should be publicly flogged in society then boy oh boy pain is coming for this culture.
-
13 minutes ago, Godless said:
George Zimmerman, OJ Simpson, and Casey Anthoney would beg to differ. They're hated individuals to this day, but they are hated individuals who were aqcuitted of wrongdoing in a court of law. They are living examples that the court of law trumps the court of public opinion. They can't control how people feel about them any more than Moore can, but at the end of the day they aren't in prison.
I am truly sorry to hear that. I wasn't trying to make assumptions about you or your loved ones, and I apologize if it seemed that I was.
As someone who interacts with drunk people professionally, it has always been my opinion/observation that a person's ideology doesn't change with the consumption of alcohol, but their filter does. I have said embarassing things while drunk. I have never said racist, misogynistic, or homophobic things while drunk because I am not a racist, misogynist, or a homophobe. Do you really think that Mel Gibson only hates Jewish people when he's drunk? Because I don't believe that for a second.
If you think a lifetime of good deeds is enough to wash away some vile indiscretions, then there are some Catholic priests who would probably love to be your friend. Your brand of forgiveness sets a dangerous precedent. It tells young men that it's okay to have a few missteps with the opposite gender so long as everything else you do in your life is good and godly.
I want to share with you the story of someone close to me. Her story is very public (of her own choosing) and I have her permission to share it, but still I will refrain from going into too much detail as to her identity. This individual is a returned missionary. Her mission was the greatest experience of her adult life, and she continues to draw spiritual strength from that experience. Last year she got engaged to a young man, also a RM, who she felt was her spiritual equal. A couple of months before the wedding, it was revealed that he had placed hidden cameras inside her dorm room and bathroom to spy on her and her roommates. After the cameras were discovered, he immediately confessed and turned himself in to the police. Her story got quite a bit of attention around campus because in a society that is quick to vilify and demonize individuals like him, she and her roommates were quick to forgiveness. She still saw all the good in him despite what he had done. HOWEVER, she still pressed charges because she recognized that he had a debt to pay to society for what he had done. It was a very painful ordeal that she is still recovering from. She couldn't bring herself to hate him, but she still saw the necessity of punishing him for the crime he committed. Because otherwise, even as good as he supposedly is, he would very likely commit the same crime again. THAT'S what Christian forgiveness looks like. She's a better person than I am. Heck, she's probably a better person than most Christians. But I wouldn't be so quick to label a desire for mortal justice as unChristian.
I understand GZ, OJ Simpson, etc. it gives people something to talk about that's fine. Whatever. I don't really care about them; they don't affect my life, never have, never will. Who gets elected to Congress, that will affect my life and my children's.
To the bold, let's get this straight; you want to be the judge, the jury and the executioner for Roy Moore. The story you relate has nothing to do with this case. In one situation-the actual true situation of sexual abuse the abused presses charges!!! As they should, there is enough evidence to at least indict. I'm okay with that . . .if there is enough evidence to indict not big deal.
But in this case . . .even if the incident happened 5 years ago, there is not enough evidence to indict.
Just face it Godless, you are already predisposed to believe that Roy Moore is guilty b/c 1) you have friends who have sexual abuse stories 2) you have no belief in God and therefore the idea that someone could actually have a firm believe in God and be a moral individual their entire life is an anthema to you. 3) You would really, really, really love to see Roy Moore go down b/c as an atheist the worst thing is that there actually is a God. It serves as confirmation bias that their is no God "look at all these self-righteous individuals who are no more moral than me".
Finally, even if he did everything he was accused of it does not make him a pedophile (man it really irks me when people use words incorrectly):
Pedophilia or paedophilia is a psychiatric disorder in which an adult or older adolescent experiences a primary or exclusive sexual attraction to prepubescent children.
Having sex with a minor is not never has been and never will be pedophilia. It is having sex with a minor, which society has currently decided is morally wrong . . .but who knows check back in 30 years and we'll probably find true pedophilia embraced.
To the last bold; I never said that and don't agree with that. A Christian duty is to understand that people are innocent until proven guilty, if it is the reverse society goes down a very, very bad path.
-
10 minutes ago, Godless said:
As it happens, I personally know a few "good Christian girls" who have been victims of sexual assault (and there's a good chance you do as well, whether you realize it or not). And I'm talking about things far worse than light groping or "stealing a kiss".
And FWIW, I don't think anyone has implied that what Franken did is a jailable offense. It's disgusting and repulsive and it's something that voters should know about. But I don't see a prosecutable offense here. That doesn't mean that it shouldn't be brought to light.
Yeah, I do, my wife so you can take a long walk off a short pier . . ..
Mob mentality . . .that's all this is, mob mentality. Hey you remember that time you got drunk and said some things. As much as we like to claim we are a better society, we are worse b/c there is 0 room for people to make mistakes in today's world and that is a travesty. You get drunk, say something stupid and boom your life is over-nothing criminal but just something stupid. And some things, in fact most things unless they are criminal should just be forgotten and moved on from.
As much as you like to think Christians should cheer for this crap, you forget one of the key tenants of Christianity, forgiveness.
So all these people who are "Christian" who castigate Moore for possibly dating underage girls-they are the worst Christians . . .Look at the entirety of the man's life, look at his record, look at what he has done all the good. Not at some idiotic thing that was not criminal that may or may not have happened 40 years ago. With what judgement ye met, that which you will be judged.
And thus you get evil men in office b/c their are very few good Christians who want to deal with their entire lives being destroyed over something stupid they might have done decades ago. Evil men don't care.
-
1 minute ago, Godless said:
In the court of public opinion, sure. And I think I've adequately explained my reasoning for that.
In a court of law, a person is still innocent until proven guilty. If the allegations against Moore are objectively disproven in a court of law, I will gladly reverse my opinion of him (In terms of him being a pedophile, anyway. There's still plenty of other things to dislike about him from where I sit).
Again, public opinion vs. court of law. Religious belief has nothing to do with it. There are plenty of good Christians and LDS denouncing people like Moore, because our society has made a collective decision that sexual harassment and sexual assault will no longer be swept under the rug and ignored. The culture is changing, and for once it's changing in a way that people of faith should be happy about. So why are some of the loudest voices defending accused perverts coming from religious conservatives?
That is an evil ideology. You obviously have not read history. It has happened before and will happen again. As soon as you go down this route, bad things happen. It is not that far of a step from public opinion to law. You state so yourself.
The bolded is false; he can't prove it objectively false in a court of law and you know it. It will never be brought to a court of law; b/c it can't. You have set up a standard that can not be met unless you change the laws.
And that is what will happen.
Oh my gosh (2nd bold). You have no clue . . .
-
2 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
Are you saying models give up equal protection under the law?
Would it help if I mentioned the admitted grope happened in 2006, and she didn't pose nude until five years later?
1st off. Franken did not grope her!! Man, people are sheeple, everyone is losing their minds. Look at the picture! You can clearly see daylight between his left hand and her body. He took a mocking picture, dumb, stupid, inappropriate, harassment, etc. But it was not groping. So let's get those facts straight. The picture does not show him groping. It shows him acting like he is groping.
Now, where I come from, there is a big difference between pointing a gun at someone and shooting them. Both are wrong, but they are different.
2nd off. What Franken did was absolutely wrong . . .however "stealing a kiss" has gone on since the dawn of time. If she'd been woman enough about it, she would have slapped the ever-living crap out of him. Did she do that, no, she was too "shocked". Oh please. No, what you have is an absolute coward who sells her body for sex and now b/c she can get fame and fortune comes out against him. As to the whether she posed nude later, it doesn't matter, we know what she was, she was a whore and she has gone a whoring. If she were a good Christian girl-this would have never happened. The wicked are turning on the wicked.
For what purpose, for what end? What he did was a private problem that all she had to do was smack him across the face. He didn't do anything criminal; yet he will be flown up on the flagpole of lynch mob hysteria.
You really want to go down this road that if a man "steals a kiss" he should be prosecuted, jailed?
This whole lynch mob mentality does not bode well for society. Why, b/c what it is and will do is drive men away from women. In the professional world, there is no way in hades I want to be dating, just 1, just 1 false accusation and it doesn't matter, nothing else matters, you are done.
Man, people need to read history. Just like the Red Scare, but we are so much better than they were . . .idiots.
-
11 minutes ago, MormonGator said:
If he didn't want to be lied about, he shouldn't have gone into politics. Live a nice, quiet life in the private sector. No one will bother you. I have zero sympathy for him.
Wow dude .. .then only the wicked will be in politics. So so sad. Oh and least we forget, he didn't really go into politics. He is a judge . . .I don't know where you come from but where I come from while judges are "elected" they are non-partisan races.
-
Just now, JoCa said:
Guilty until proven innocent . . .got it. And you are right; you are godless and a godless society by virtue of it being godless must devolve into guilty until proven innocent.
Because you see believers understand that ultimately I, nor you nor anyone else is the ultimate judge and one day, if you have committed a heinous crime. You will stand before God and you will be accountable. Based on that world-view, it is perfectly acceptable that some guilty individuals never get caught.
But in a godless, atheist society all that matters is the here and now. If someone who is guilty, gets away with it, they will never answer for their "crimes" so it is better to assume one is guilty first and have the innocent prove they are innocent . . .b/c if we don't catch the guilty, no one will.
-
1 minute ago, Godless said:
"She was asking for it"
"She should have worn something less provocative"
"She was leading him on."
"She made a career out of selling her body"
A woman's profession doesn't excuse unsolicited lewd behavior towards her. Whatever immoral actions Tweeden engaged in during her professional career, she did on her terms. It doesn't give anyone a free pass to use her as a sex object outside the parameters of what she consents to professionally. This is a fact that has been ignored for years in the sex/porn industry. I imagine that will begin to change soon.
I won't deny that there may be some false allegations floating around right now. And if there aren't currently, there may be in the future. However, my first instinct is and always will be to trust the victim first, because I've known too many victims who stayed silent out of fear of character assassination, victim-blaming, career ramifications, and/or retribution from their attackers. And those fears (that, based on multiple examples we've seen over the years) are exactly why it's very unlikely that many women would lie about something like this. Who in their right mind would put themselves through the mental anguish and public inquisition that we've seen sexual assault accusers go through? Is 15 minutes of fame worth putting yourself through all of that? I'm inclined to think not. Again, there will probably be a few exceptions here and there, but I think the amount of public scrutiny and investigation that goes into the background of alleged victims is enough to deter most would-be frauds.
So I can be a drug dealer and if I get shot I bare no responsibility for my actions? This whole sexual harassment crap has just got to stop. By not recognizing that yes you bare responsibility for your profession you are abrogating personal responsibility. Man this world has gone nuts . . .I was always taught "you can choose your actions but you can't choose your consequences". If you go into a profession of selling sex, don't act all outraged when you get assaulted. When you go into a profession of drug dealing, don't act all upset when you get shot. Personal responsibility!
Guilty until proven innocent . . .got it. And you are right; you are godless and a godless society by virtue of it being godless must devolve into guilty until proven innocent.
-
5 minutes ago, MormonGator said:
The blunt truth: guilt and innocence are legal terms, not terms in the political arena. Politics is a tough game, and it's not a fair game. Wisely, many GOP leaders have thrown him under the bus. You tell Roy here that "It's not personal, just politics. We need to keep the seat and we have better odds with Mr. Smith than we do with Mr. Moore." Why people have grown to love this guy is beyond me.
It's Alabama. Probably the most red state in the union. I say that as a registered republican by the way, not a pejorative. I want the GOP to win. The GOP can easily, easily easily find someone just as conservative who doesn't have the baggage.Wrong. You don't understand the game. They can find a conservative they can control. They can't control Roy Moore. You really don't understand how the system works. The reason why they all threw him under the bus is b/c the guy is legit! He is a legitimate Christian conservative who believes very firmly in God and his actions back him up on it. Rs and Ds are cut from the same cloth; it's why things don't change too much during the changing of the Guard it is the uni-party.
But Moore-just like Trump is an actual legitimate threat to their power. Trump was not supposed to win at all and they want to send a message to any actual true-blue conservatives thinking of running in 2018 in the Trump mold (i.e. to break the power structure), "you don't play our ball-game, we will take you out".
Oh they can easily find someone they want . . .Luther Strange, he was their guy. But the actual people of Alabama rose up and said NO! This is the swamp fighting back, they will do everything to take down good, moral men.
If you don't see that what is actually going on is a very real war between good and evil . . . . well then man, it's just all made up-no God, no Satan, no Heaven, no Hell.
-
6 minutes ago, person0 said:
Honestly, I was thinking more of the wicked or worldly ones who repented: Lamoni, his father, Nebuchadnezzar, Cyrus. Anyway, I would say that to an extend David and Solomon fit one or more of those descriptions at times throughout their reign.
And you either had wicked ones who repented or good ones who fell. I don't believe you can have a wicked leader that leads people in righteousness nor a righteous leader who leads people into wickedness.
-
2 minutes ago, prisonchaplain said:
sincere effort to shine a light on sexually predatory behavior.
I don't believe it is actually a good desire. I believe it is a very vindictive effort and a lot of good people are going to be caught up in it. How quickly we forget the Red Scare of the 50s.
-
13 minutes ago, MormonGator said:
The fact that this even needs to be said is so depressing. So, so depressing.
40 years ago man, 40 years ago. I'm sure 40 years from now people will say. How could it be that Joe Blow ever held an opinion that homosexuals shouldn't marry . . .what an evil, degraded person. Judging people on actions they took 40 years ago, that were not criminal then. and fitting it into today's culture is morally wrong.
What actions today are you doing that in 40 years will be looked upon society as evil, wrong, bad? That's why we have statute of limitations.
I have relatives who married 8 years apart the the woman was 18 when the married; they are happily married 40 years later which is a heck of a lot longer than probably 60% of marriages. Get off your high-horse.
-
11 minutes ago, MormonGator said:
I have zero love for Al Franken but he at least admitted he was sorry and didn't try to excuse it. That's what a good person does instead of makes excuses or tries to justify their behavior.
Tell me MormonGater, what exactly is a good, moral, honest person supposed to do in this situation. Just for a mind-exercise, believe Roy Moore is totally 100% innocent. What exactly should he say or do in this case?
You see, it's a catch 22. Because evil people know that it's easy to ask forgiveness than permission. So if caught, just play the "Oh, I'm so sorry, I'm so contrite, I'm not a bad person card" and you get out of jail.
But if the person is actually truly innocent, there is nothing they can do or say. Nothing . . .except exactly what Moore is doing. Fight it tooth and nail . . .but of course if you do that, (b/c people have already pre-judged) it means you're an evil person for not just admitting the wrongs you've done.
And it's why this attack is sooo incredibly powerful against actual honest men/women. And it's also very powerful b/c of where we are at in current culture.
We are so incredibly degraded as a society (porn use, vulgarity, infidelity, etc.) that people cannot fathom them being innocent! A good honest man cannot survive in politics b/c the assumption is that they are all dirty (just as dirty as most of society), so actual honest people are seen as holier-than-thou, better than the rest . . .b/c so many people can't actually fathom there being good moral people.
-
1 hour ago, person0 said:
If the allegations are later proved true, I would join in the call for his resignation, and possible incarceration. On a side note, in general I would probably rather have a wicked man who governs in wisdom or righteously, than a righteous man who governs wickedly or foolishly. Though the best would be a righteous man who governs in wisdom and righteousness.
I agree except for the bold. There is a reason why the law has a statute of limitations; to precisely avoid stuff like this. Common law recognizes and acknowledges that if a crime is perpetrated against you, the victim bares some responsibility. Part of that responsibility is to report the crime immediately, exactly to avoid this stuff-how do you prove or disprove something from 40 years ago? Even if the yearbook is accurate, it still doesn't prove anything . . .that's why we have the law and why we have reporting requirements.
But again, people have lost their everloving minds, they emotionally see this things happen and then want to burn them at the stake . . . we are going back centuries in time with regard to law.
I definitely disagree with the second portion; show me one time in scriptures that a wicked man governed in wisdom and righteously and a righteous man who governed wickedly and foolishly.
-
31 minutes ago, Godless said:
Update: looks like we have another dirtbag on the chopping block.
Couple of things with this one. Okay pleeze, Leeann Tweeden . . .she made her career out of selling her body. How many Playboy spreads, Maxim, FHM, etc. did she do? The military tour she was one she says specifically was made crude/lewd jokes. The whole point of your career is to sell sex. What the heck do you think is going to happen when your entire career is based on selling immorality? So please spare me your fake hypocritical outrage.
Point two she claims he groped her . .. umm did you look at the picture? The picture does not show him groping her. The picture shows him acting like he is groping her. So we don't know whether he actually did or didn't (my guess is he didn't and was simply being a very crude jerk-still totally inappropriate but worthy of jail time and/or expulsion no I don't think so).
It's everyone's 15 min. of fame right now in sexual harassment. If you are a male-be very, very scared. I would not work with or associate with any females unless I had to. All it takes is one baseless accusation and you are toast and of course the female always tells the truth, b/c a woman would never lie about something like this to get back at a man.
Sick, sick world we live in. He's a witch so burn him, burn him.
Guilty until proven innocent-it's a natural outcome of a godless society.
-
28 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:
Seriously. Don't date, or try to date, or propose dating, teen girls when you are in your thirties.
When you have lived your life in such a way that someone can write such an on-point zinger about you, you have a problem.
How about just not doing anything that makes enemies b/c they will lie, cheat, steal, do anything to make you look bad. It's amazing people really don't see where we are as a moral society. All you need to do is make accusations (several already have been proven false), you can have a squeaky clean record for 40 years but nope that doesn't matter. Come politics time, people will believe anything . ..
Let's talk Moore
in Current Events
Posted
I agree it's complete virtue signaling.