Marine Colonel Announces He’s Running Against Roy Moore: ‘Hold My Beer’

[Bigun]

What sucks, Major League or otherwise, is that we have a man who is accused of sexual misconduct
with underage girls for whom people might vote regardless because, you know, well, Democrats,
with a tenuous Republican Senate majority at stake. We have the very real prospect of seeing a state
send a possible sexual criminal to Crapola Hill simply because, well, you know, he stands in their eyes
for the "right" things.

Funny how we had no trouble tearing out Democratic throats without the benefit of trials by jury
of their peers because, well, you know, they stood for the "wrong" things and their party
was just so deviant for standing by their manpersons despite what we knew was wrong with
them . . .

It's almost enough to make you wonder whether Teddy Kennedy---who never faced a trial by jury of
his peers (yes, we know he and his made damn sure that wouldn't happen until hell froze over,
but let's not get technical)---would have gotten a rightward Republican pass on Chappaquiddick if he'd
been a Republican and thus on the right side, the way he got a Democratic pass for all those years
because he was a leftward Democrat and thus what they believed to be on the right side.

I'll say it again: if nothing else, should this sordid business provoke a lot stronger vetting of candidates
by all political parties---major, minor, tailgate, surprise, or Tupperware, I don't care which---it would be
a very good thing.

And who will vet the vetors?

[musiclady]

What sucks, Major League or otherwise, is that we have a man who is accused of sexual misconduct
with underage girls for whom people might vote regardless because, you know, well, Democrats,
with a tenuous Republican Senate majority at stake. We have the very real prospect of seeing a state
send a possible sexual criminal to Crapola Hill simply because, well, you know, he stands in their eyes
for the "right" things.

Funny how we had no trouble tearing out Democratic throats without the benefit of trials by jury
of their peers because, well, you know, they stood for the "wrong" things and their party
was just so deviant for standing by their manpersons despite what we knew was wrong with
them . . .

It's almost enough to make you wonder whether Teddy Kennedy---who never faced a trial by jury of
his peers (yes, we know he and his made damn sure that wouldn't happen unless hell froze over,
but let's not get technical)---would have gotten a Republican pass on Chappaquiddick if he'd been a
rightward Republican and thus on the right side, the way he got a Democratic pass for all those years
because he was a leftward Democrat and thus what they believed to be on the right side.

Almost.

I'll say it again: if nothing else, should this sordid business provoke a lot stronger vetting of candidates
by all political parties---major, minor, tailgate, surprise, or Tupperware, I don't care which---it would be
a very good thing.

BRAVO!!!

[Fantom]

The number of democrat enablers around here astounds me. I would almost swear peloser has multiple accounts here.

[musiclady]

The number of democrat enablers around here astounds me. I would almost swear peloser has multiple accounts here.

Since you're here, and the thread where you called me a liar closed before I could respond, let me respond here, and then I am done with it.....

#1 - Calling me a liar was an indication that you understood you had lost the debate and had nothing reasonable to respond with.

#2 -  I had made a simple statement of fact...."God's laws of sexual morality apply equally to both men and women."  You spent the better part of the day trying to shoot that statement down, saying that God made men and women different, therefore my statement was incorrect.

#3 - I asked you to provide a Scripture reference where men were excluded from the laws of morality, and you refused to give me any.  (And in addition you leveled the silliest of accusations saying that my argument based on Scripture was "PC.")

#4 - I replied with the logical conclusion of your argument (and your intransigence and smarminess) by saying that you didn't believe in the 7th commandment, or that it applied to men.  At that point, you called me a liar, when all I was doing was following your argument to it's logical end.

#5 - If you do not believe that God's commands regarding sexual morality apply equally to men because God made you different than women, then my conclusion was accurate.  If you do believe that morality is equally applied, then you were playing a dishonest game, or are possibly one of the worst communicators/debaters around.

#6 - In addition to the 7th Commandment, you have to ignore the words of Jesus regarding adultery and lust, all the many references to sexual morality (fornication, adultery, homosexuality.... IOW, any sex outside the bonds of male-female marriage) in the Epistles, in order to make the argument you were making against my simple statement of Biblical truth.

#7 - There is one more possibility, that you were too emotionally involved in the conversation to present a lucid and rational argument, but as it stands, you lost the argument big time, and you know, of course, that nothing I said was a lie.


Thanks for listening.


(I will no longer converse with you on this subject as you are lacking objectivity, and cannot debate the subject intelligently. On other subjects, you may feel free to comment and respond to my posts.  On this one, it would be best, for your sake, if you ignored what I said, and stopped pursuing me).

   @Fantom

[INVAR]

Think, real hard, about what you just said.

Whether Moore wins or loses this race the Witch Hunters will have the last cackle.

Everywhere he goes (let's say he loses) people will shun him.

"Oh, that's that Roy Moore fellow. He almost became a Senator till it came out that he was a child molester."

Yes. I'll use the word Convict.

He will be shunned and avoided, Convicted in the Court of Mob Opinion, and forever personally and professionally mined over it.

Because he ran for elected Office.

Utterly ruined.

This is far more than a vote.

And I will be damned if I will countenance the use of such Precedent Setting smear tactics just to win a Senate Race.

You're upset about how many replies there have been picking at this nit?

Try counting all the replies Frank Cannon and RoosGirl have swelled threads with here. Witty sexually laden riposts, parries and Bon Mots, to each other. Personally, I'm getting tired of being notified there's a 'New Reply' to my post every time they do it.

BUT, they are both willing participants who are not destroying someone else.

A whole Universe of difference.

This crap isn't just a vote.

It's tearing a man's throat out without the benefit of a trial by a jury of his peers.

And it sucks, Major League.

And.... it sets the permanent precedent of using the tool of choice for the Oligarchy in DC to choose our rulers for us, no matter whom we ourselves prefer.

[Silver Pines]

The number of democrat enablers around here astounds me. I would almost swear peloser has multiple accounts here.

@Fantom

Simple-minded TOS level crap.

When did conservatives decide to let their minds atrophy?

[corbe]

@Fantom

Simple-minded TOS level crap.

When did conservatives decide to let their minds atrophy?

  It occurred, for a significant amount of them, back in May 2016.

[Fantom]

Since you're here, and the thread where you called me a liar closed before I could respond, let me respond here, and then I am done with it.....

#1 - Calling me a liar was an indication that you understood you had lost the debate and had nothing reasonable to respond with.

#2 -  I had made a simple statement of fact...."God's laws of sexual morality apply equally to both men and women."  You spent the better part of the day trying to shoot that statement down, saying that God made men and women different, therefore my statement was incorrect.

#3 - I asked you to provide a Scripture reference where men were excluded from the laws of morality, and you refused to give me any.  (And in addition you leveled the silliest of accusations saying that my argument based on Scripture was "PC.")

#4 - I replied with the logical conclusion of your argument (and your intransigence and smarminess) by saying that you didn't believe in the 7th commandment, or that it applied to men.  At that point, you called me a liar, when all I was doing was following your argument to it's logical end.

#5 - If you do not believe that God's commands regarding sexual morality apply equally to men because God made you different than women, then my conclusion was accurate.  If you do believe that morality is equally applied, then you were playing a dishonest game, or are possibly one of the worst communicators/debaters around.

#6 - In addition to the 7th Commandment, you have to ignore the words of Jesus regarding adultery and lust, all the many references to sexual morality (fornication, adultery, homosexuality.... IOW, any sex outside the bonds of male-female marriage) in the Epistles, in order to make the argument you were making against my simple statement of Biblical truth.

#7 - There is one more possibility, that you were too emotionally involved in the conversation to present a lucid and rational argument, but as it stands, you lost the argument big time, and you know, of course, that nothing I said was a lie.


Thanks for listening.


(I will no longer converse with you on this subject as you are lacking objectivity, and cannot debate the subject intelligently. On other subjects, you may feel free to comment and respond to my posts.  On this one, it would be best, for your sake, if you ignored what I said, and stopped pursuing me).

   @Fantom

Meh,    Your own words called you out.   As far as pursuit...looks like you have the projection down pat. 

Speak, don't speak...Meh. I will do the same.

BTW, have a good night there @musiclady.

[roamer_1]

There is no presumption of innocence attached to a candidate's run for political office. 

There is ALWAYS a presumption of innocence between honorable people.To so blithely defame a man is nothing short of scurrilous.

The voters are being asked to exercise their common sense, not render a legal verdict. 

There is no common sense in bowing to gossip, and ripping away a lifetime of honorable service on the basis of hearsay..

Do you believe Roy Moore or his accusers?   

I believe Moore, hands down. There is no evidence against him. And his accusers are of questionable reliability, and likely politically driven,

Trust your gut, trust your instincts.   

What nonsense. Trust the evidence. This is no different than a bleeding heart 'it's for the chidrennn'.
Poppycock.

There will be no "proof" of the sort you demand prior to the election. 

There will be no proof at all. But if there is, THEN is the time to try him. Then is the time to make him step down, and there will be no shortage of people ready to crucify him.

Nevertheless,  it is up to the people of Alabama to enable or deny the political ambitions of a lawless hypocrite.

Yes, and thankfully, I will lay a good bet the people of Alabama still believe in the concept of proof.

[roamer_1]

And I do believe that Judge Moore was a Judge in the STATE of Alabama and was acting as an advocate for his STATE against federal overreaches in every instance!  In other words, he was actually UPHOLDING his oath of office!

That is the FACT of the matter.

[roamer_1]

I'll say it again: if nothing else, should this sordid business provoke a lot stronger vetting of candidates
by all political parties---major, minor, tailgate, surprise, or Tupperware, I don't care which---it would be
a very good thing.

HE'S BEEN VETTED FOR FORTY YEARS, through two very national and very fractious events. You can't get better vetting.

[Silver Pines]

  It occurred, for a significant amount of them, back in May 2016.

@corbe

Yeah, I can’t argue.

[DCPatriot]

The number of democrat enablers around here astounds me. I would almost swear peloser has multiple accounts here.

@Fantom

Wanted to publicly acknowledge your caterpillar to butterfly 'transmorgafication' since "The Great Tsunami".

Proud to know you!

 

[Jazzhead]

Think, real hard, about what you just said.

Whether Moore wins or loses this race the Witch Hunters will have the last cackle.

Everywhere he goes (let's say he loses) people will shun him.

"Oh, that's that Roy Moore fellow. He almost became a Senator till it came out that he was a child molester."

Yes. I'll use the word Convict.

He will be shunned and avoided, Convicted in the Court of Mob Opinion, and forever personally and professionally mined over it.

Because he ran for elected Office.

Utterly ruined.

This is far more than a vote.

And I will be damned if I will countenance the use of such Precedent Setting smear tactics just to win a Senate Race.

You're upset about how many replies there have been picking at this nit?

Try counting all the replies Frank Cannon and RoosGirl have swelled threads with here. Witty sexually laden riposts, parries and Bon Mots, to each other. Personally, I'm getting tired of being notified there's a 'New Reply' to my post every time they do it.

BUT, they are both willing participants who are not destroying someone else.

A whole Universe of difference.

This crap isn't just a vote.

It's tearing a man's throat out without the benefit of a trial by a jury of his peers.

And it sucks, Major League.

Oh, the drama.   

And for who?  A politician?   

No one forces a man to run for political office, and everyone knows that politics ain't beanbag.

The sexual harassment scandals in the press and media industries are claiming careers.  Matt Lauer, as big an icon as there is in television news, was fired this morning.   Politicians?   No one's paid any price yet.   Franken says he's sorry, but he won't step down.   Conyers' iconic status has so far saved him, unlike Mr. Lauer.   And evangelicals are tripping over everything they claim to believe to run to the polls to vote in Roy Moore.

Political partisans defend their man, and unashamedly embrace the double standard.   Moore's a creep, but he'll oppose abortion, so who cares.  Franken's a groper,  but he'll vote to ban assault rifles, so who cares.   Trump's a sexual braggart, but he wants to make America great again, so who cares.

Don't waste your tears on Roy Moore.     

 

[musiclady]

Meh,    Your own words called you out.   As far as pursuit...looks like you have the projection down pat. 

Speak, don't speak...Meh. I will do the same.

BTW, have a good night there @musiclady.

As for the "pursuit," I only said that because you were the one instigating the disagreement (childishly, I might add) to the simple Biblical truth I was posting about.

But it's interesting that in all the things I posted, the word "pursuit" is the only thing you could disagree with.  The rest, since it is all true, you clearly agree with.


I consider that a total victory........ so thanks.   You understand that men have to obey God's mroal laws just like women do. 


(I knew you knew I was right all along and that you were just playing a silly game, but it's good to have it verified.  I was worried about you for a while, with all that "God's law says men can sin sexually" stuff you were posting).


At any rate, "meh" back atcha!  I had a GREAT evening, and the morning is starting out swimmingly.  Hope the same is true for you.   

[Cripplecreek]

As for the "pursuit," I only said that because you were the one instigating the disagreement (childishly, I might add) to the simple Biblical truth I was posting about.

But it's interesting that in all the things I posted, the word "pursuit" is the only thing you could disagree with.  The rest, since it is all true, you clearly agree with.


I consider that a total victory........ so thanks.   You understand that men have to obey God's mroal laws just like women do. 


(I knew you knew I was right all along and that you were just playing a silly game, but it's good to have it verified.  I was worried about you for a while, with all that "God's law says men can sin sexually" stuff you were posting).


At any rate, "meh" back atcha!  I had a GREAT evening, and the morning is starting out swimmingly.  Hope the same is true for you.   

I've come to realize that there are very few actual real Christians in this country. I'm talking about people who actually think about their souls and final judgement. So called Conservative Christians who vote for immorality are no different than the so called Liberal Christians who vote for immorality.

On the other hand if they want to try to use God to justify supporting immorality it is quite literally no skin off my soul. God doesn't do collectivism.

[musiclady]

I've come to realize that there are very few actual real Christians in this country. I'm talking about people who actually think about their souls and final judgement. So called Conservative Christians who vote for immorality are no different than the so called Liberal Christians who vote for immorality.

On the other hand if they want to try to use God to justify supporting immorality it is quite literally no skin off my soul. God doesn't do collectivism.

I heartily agree.   The last two years have been an eye-opener to me.  I always knew there were significant cracks in the armor of the American contemporary church, but it's been revealing to see the dam crack wide open and the flood of "no big deal" detachment from moral absolutes come gushing through.

Lots of folks click "Christian" on the box, but neither believe nor live what it demands.

(Keeping in mind that we ALL fall far short of the Glory of God, but at least know what that means and try to live as Christ taught).

[Cripplecreek]

I heartily agree.   The last two years have been an eye-opener to me.  I always knew there were significant cracks in the armor of the American contemporary church, but it's been revealing to see the dam crack wide open and the flood of "no big deal" detachment from moral absolutes come gushing through.

Lots of folks click "Christian" on the box, but neither believe nor live what it demands.

(Keeping in mind that we ALL fall far short of the Glory of God, but at least know what that means and try to live as Christ taught).

The liberal Christians in my family use God to justify supporting outright marxism  just as my atheist sister uses her self righteousness to justify supporting abortion. These so called conservative Christians who justify voting for immorality are doing the exact same thing.

They can claim "God's will" if they win but few will claim the same if they lose but the ultimate reality is that God gives us free will to choose between good and evil and the ultimate consequence is our own. That ideal of Godly free will is the very seed of revolution planted by men like George Whitefield in the 1700s.

[To-Whose-Benefit?]

"Don't waste your tears on Roy Moore."

@Jazzhead

And up to now, the time to reply to anything you've posted.

Amazes me that self identified Conservatives are all willing to jump on the Lynch Mob bandwagon.

What are they in favor of Conserving?

The 4th Amendment?

The 5th Amendment?

The 6th Amendment?

The 7th Amendment?

How about the 8th Amendment? Cruel and Unusual Punishment, sans Trial, inflicted by the Moral Superiority of a Lynch Mob.


Apparently they're not in favor of Conserving anything beyond their own self importance gauged by the depths of their own FEEEELLLIINGS of Superior Outrage because someone who MIGHT have done something, MIGHT be elected.

Every Citizen in this country MIGHT have done all manner of things, some of them prohibited by criminal law.

Which is why we have laws, and Courts.

Not Lynch Mobs.

But according to you, it's OK to DO IT to Roy Moore. Just cinch the noose around his neck and hoist him up into the tree, because of his desired 'Condition of Employment'.

He's applying for a job to the people of the State of Alabama as one of their U.S. Senators.

So that kicks his Unalienable God Given Rights off the Table. It Strips Roy Moore of His 'Equal Under Law' birthright because YOU have identified him as just a politician.

Real Nice to know what being a Citizen means to You, Jazzhead.

Thanks for the Clarification.

Welcome to Jazzhead's America, where Some people are More Equal Than Others, due to their Condition of Employment.

[musiclady]

The liberal Christians in my family use God to justify supporting outright marxism  just as my atheist sister uses her self righteousness to justify supporting abortion. These so called conservative Christians who justify voting for immorality are doing the exact same thing.

They can claim "God's will" if they win but few will claim the same if they lose but the ultimate reality is that God gives us free will to choose between good and evil and the ultimate consequence is our own. That ideal of Godly free will is the very seed of revolution planted by men like George Whitefield in the 1700s.

All I can say to that, is AMEN!!

[INVAR]

Real Nice to know what being a Citizen means to You, Jazzhead.

Thanks for the Clarification.

Welcome to Jazzhead's America, where Some people are More Equal Than Others, due to their Condition of Employment.

And don't forget that if you own a business, you must bake the effing homosexual celebration cake or be punished and destroyed in like-manner, have your business destroyed and rot in prison for bigotry in Jazzhead's sick, perverted world.

[skeeter]

All I can say to that, is AMEN!!

Moore on abortion:

"Because a human life with a full genetic endowment comes into existence at the moment of conception, the self-evident truth that “all men are created equal and are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable rights” encompasses the moment of conception. Legal recognition of the unborn as members of the human family derives ultimately from the laws of nature and of nature’s God, Who created human life in His image and protected it with the commandment: “Thou shalt not kill.” Therefore, the interpretation of the word “child” in Alabama’s chemical-endangerment statute, § 26-15- 3.2, Ala. Code 1975, to include all human beings from the moment of conception is fully consistent with these first principles regarding life and law."

Factor this in as long as we're talking about who's more likely doing God's will.

[DiogenesLamp]

What sucks, Major League or otherwise, is that we have a man who is accused of sexual misconduct
with underage girls for whom people might vote regardless because, you know, well, Democrats,
with a tenuous Republican Senate majority at stake. We have the very real prospect of seeing a state
send a possible sexual criminal to Crapola Hill simply because, well, you know, he stands in their eyes
for the "right" things.

Funny how we had no trouble tearing out Democratic throats without the benefit of trials by jury
of their peers because, well, you know, they stood for the "wrong" things and their party
was just so deviant for standing by their manpersons despite what we knew was wrong with
them . . .

It's almost enough to make you wonder whether Teddy Kennedy---who never faced a trial by jury of
his peers (yes, we know he and his made damn sure that wouldn't happen unless hell froze over,
but let's not get technical)---would have gotten a Republican pass on Chappaquiddick if he'd been a
rightward Republican and thus on the right side, the way he got a Democratic pass for all those years
because he was a leftward Democrat and thus what they believed to be on the right side.

Almost.

I'll say it again: if nothing else, should this sordid business provoke a lot stronger vetting of candidates
by all political parties---major, minor, tailgate, surprise, or Tupperware, I don't care which---it would be
a very good thing.

Dead babies.   



Justify your position in light of that.   

[DiogenesLamp]

The number of democrat enablers around here astounds me. I would almost swear peloser has multiple accounts here.

I have already made up my mind that were we in a combat situation,   there are a bunch of people here I would frag before they had a chance to get me killed and the mission compromised. 


They are literally working against the primary goal here.   




“If I had but one bullet and were faced by both an enemy and a traitor, I would let the traitor have it.” — Corneliu Codreanu —

[Sanguine]

I have already made up my mind that were we in a combat situation,   there are a bunch of people here I would frag before they had a chance to get me killed and the mission compromised. 


They are literally working against the primary goal here.   




“If I had but one bullet and were faced by both an enemy and a traitor, I would let the traitor have it.” — Corneliu Codreanu —

You are aware that sounds a bit hysterical and shrill, are you not?