Sorry, I didn't see that posted earlier.

Media Equalizer Co-Founder Melanie Morgan has come forward

sean hannity's friend and the cofounder of an insane right wing "news" website are muddying the waters of the national conversation we were leading to about how voting republican is sexual assault on all of us

That's not really the issue.

I could go either way on this and thought about saying something similar. He was a jerk calling someone at home and following them after the show. Does that have anything to do with her being a woman? Maybe not, but maybe.

My personal experience compared with reports of life from my wife and other women is that women are subject to more aggression (non-sexual) than men. The kind of thing Franken did here is in that ballpark I think. Sometimes I think man to man there's a feeling, perhaps just a dormant innate evolutionary thing, that if an argument goes too far it's going to mean a physical fight. That tends to keep a lid on man to man agression, unless it does actually mean violence. Men to women and perhaps to a lesser degree women to men or even women to women don't have this restraint, but I think in the men to women version the man is taking advantage of being a credible threat while taking little physical risk.

No, they should be treated like anyone else, with respect.

Franken's alleged misbehavior deserves a rebuke from his colleagues but is not so severe that he should be called upon by Democrats to resign.

Thanks for your reply, i was looking for constructive dialogue but loki giving me an infraction took away my motivation to even continue. I was giving my honest view on it. Al is wrong for the pictures, we know that. But that also brings up the discussion of everything being over sexualized now and its effects on men will only get worse. But yea whatever.

Actual statistics disagree with the bolded. Men are overwhelmingly the victims in cases of non-sexual violence.

Big shock this life donk is in here arguing against franken

He would snap vote for Moore a second later.

See the part in the quote "unless it does actually mean violence".

Maybe this is too long of a debate to get into and too much of a derail, but I think you are probably familiar with the concept of having mechanisms to avoid violent conflict by restraining aggression and can see that lower levels of non-violent aggression is not necessarily incompatible with higher levels of violent aggression.

I love The Onion:

Al Franken Pledges To Make Up For Sexist Behavior Over Course Of Next Four Senate Terms

Would you vote for a Republican running against Franken?

Fair enough.

Dvault posts with the moral fanaticism of someone overcompensating for their secret sex dungeon

I'm interested to hear if people who were furious at Jill Stein/Nader/Etc voters would support voting for a third party candidate in this scenario. If so, is the only difference the degree to which Franken's behavior sucks compared to someone like Hillary? Like, you should hold your nose and vote strategically up to a certain point, but once the line is crossed you're free to vote for who you ACTUALLY think is the best candidate?

What's immoral about having a sex dungeon, secret or otherwise?

lol

If there's no viable third-party candidate, a third-party vote is still essentially half a vote for the Republican. If you would rather have the Republican, or you're indifferent, then fine, but if you have a preference for Franken over the other viable candidate then you should just vote for him imo.

If there is a viable third-party candidate, then it's different obviously.

Isn't the bolded what he did?

You seem to be interpreting this as, "I don't remember."

I interpret this as a polite version of, "I didn't do what she says I did."

If he meant he doesn't remember, but it sounds like something he could have done, then it's obviously in his range, which means he's done it to others, and he's a scumbag and should immediately resign. That's just not what his statement says, though.

The fact that the Media Equalizer bull**** has been posted TWICE in this thread, both referring to it as a "2nd accuser/accusation", is disturbing and makes me thing that the dumbassophere is really accepting it.

Search "Franken second accuser" or "Franken 2nd accuser" on Twitter, if you want to go down that rabbit hole.

Cliffs: They accept it, and they're already moving on to stage 2 of ripping CNN for not covering her accusation.

I've been searching online, but can't find the info: does anyone know how quickly the Senate Ethics Committee could get into this and be done with it? Are we talking weeks, months or years here?

If we're talking more than a couple months tops, I no longer like that approach.

I mean, he yelled at her..
about the budget?

Practically rape.

I feel like in one of his previous books Franken talks about doing similar things to conservatives, finding ways of needling them about their moronic lies in ways that bother them. Possibly including calling them at home. Maybe in Lies and lying liars?

6 mos minimum. Packwood report was like 10 volumes, but there were a bunch of accusers and documentary evidence.