Jump to content

Roy Moore


new tobie

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, new tobie said:

This is the hidden content, please

Oh Im sorry , he's republican, we were'nt gonna bring this one up

So no comment? And no one from the non-Liberal side tries to stifle debate. You can bring it up, along with any other news story. We will just hammer your analysis (which is sure to be blatantly bias) if you offer one. But I really don't see you giving a detailed analysis. I would be surprised if you even read the article.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Englebert said:

So no comment? And no one from the non-Liberal side tries to stifle debate. You can bring it up, along with any other news story. We will just hammer your analysis (which is sure to be blatantly bias) if you offer one. But I really don't see you giving a detailed analysis. I would be surprised if you even read the article.

I give whatever i please, and you can't stop me. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

27 minutes ago, new tobie said:

This is the hidden content, please

Oh Im sorry , he's republican, we were'nt gonna bring this one up. just like Bill Oreilly, Roger Ailes and the rest of the fox news bunch that ran Meagan kelly and Gretchen off.

If proven true, he deserves his punishment.  But, it is funny they would wait to now to say something.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is the hidden content, please

Based on the article, these incidents happened between 1977-1982 (I don't remember seeing that in the H. Post).  So these women decide to just "come forward", after 40 years?  Understand, I'm not condoning this If he did it, I just find an accusation from 40 years ago, just coming to light right before a big election, something that stinks to high heaven.  This smells of typical political tactics, or goldigging.  Stinks to high heaven.

And if Moore was such a sexual predator, why didn't he continue?  Oh, just wait a few days, they'll be lining up to tell their stories, if the money is right.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, new tobie said:

You spend a considerable amount of time on this message board.......just sayin

Someone would have to spend an inordinate amount of time on this message board to notice...just saying. Why do you even attempt to trash talk? You are just so bad at it. Stick with "grab um", at least that one was funny the first 10,000 times you said it.  Maybe resuscitate the "go feed your cats" line. That also typifies and clearly displays the intelligence level of the poster. Attempting the high-brow subtle jabs is just not you...which is clear to pretty much everyone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 hours ago, REBgp said:

This is the hidden content, please

Based on the article, these incidents happened between 1977-1982 (I don't remember seeing that in the H. Post).  So these women decide to just "come forward", after 40 years?  Understand, I'm not condoning this If he did it, I just find an accusation from 40 years ago, just coming to light right before a big election, something that stinks to high heaven.  This smells of typical political tactics, or goldigging.  Stinks to high heaven.

And if Moore was such a sexual predator, why didn't he continue?  Oh, just wait a few days, they'll be lining up to tell their stories, if the money is right.

I am with everyone (I think) on this board in condemning such conduct.  And you make an excellent point - the accusations are basically pedophilia, which many think is incurable, and even the most optimistic believe it takes extensive therapy.  I think we all believe victims should come forward and perpetrators punished.  But after 4 decades, how can anyone defend themself other than to say i didn’t do it.  And I am guessing there is no video/audio out there of Judge Moore bragging about groping teenage girls. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On a related matter, some states, including our own, have removed the statute of limitations on these types of offenses.  So in this state, Judge Moore could be charged with this offense 40 years after it allegedly occurred.  I believe most prosecutors wouldn’t go near such a case with a 10 foot pole but one could if they so chose, thanks to the infinite wisdom (and I say this with every bit of sarcasm I can muster) of our representatives in Austin. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, TxHoops said:

On a related matter, some states, including our own, have removed the statute of limitations on these types of offenses.  So in this state, Judge Moore could be charged with this offense 40 years after it allegedly occurred.  I believe most prosecutors wouldn’t go near such a case with a 10 foot pole but one could if they so chose, thanks to the infinite wisdom (and I say this with every bit of sarcasm I can muster) of our representatives in Austin. 

Lmbo!  I'm no english prof so tell me, when the words, infinite wisdom, are applied to a group of politicians (anywhere), wouldn't that be an oxy moron?

On a serious note, I did a little searching on:  Is it a crime not to report a felony.  I was surprised in what little I was able to find (because I'm in remedial computer class), in most States/cases it's not.  My immediate inclination is to say it should be.  I'm pretty sure there's some good reasons why it's not a law, would you please enlighten me.

PS:  I did see (in one state) that it was against the law if police ask you about a felony and you said you didn't see it, and you had.  In most cases, it'd be hard to prove though.  Point is, I don't see much difference.  Again, I'll wait for your opinion on this matter.

 

 

Obviously, this allegation brought this up.  Just me personally, if you don't have reasonable proof, it should be a crime to accuse someone of a crime, that was committed over 5 (10/20?) years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, six burg said:

Doesn't really matter which party affiliation.

You're correct six burg.  My problem, and not just with Moore, but all these guys, including Weinstein, is accusers going back 30-40 years.  I know many probably don't agree with me, but if someone does you wrong, you should accuse them within a few years time frame, unless you have some daming evidence to back up your accusations.  

I laugh watching TV when the police say, "What were you doing the night of Sept 8"?   I'm thinking, I couldn't tell you what I was doing a week ago lol.  Course I'm old and senile.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, REBgp said:

You're correct six burg.  My problem, and not just with Moore, but all these guys, including Weinstein, is accusers going back 30-40 years.  I know many probably don't agree with me, but if someone does you wrong, you should accuse them within a few years time frame, unless you have some daming evidence to back up your accusations.  

I laugh watching TV when the police say, "What were you doing the night of Sept 8"?   I'm thinking, I couldn't tell you what I was doing a week ago lol. Course I'm old and senile.

We may not always agree but I couldn’t agree more here :D 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, REBgp said:

Lmbo!  I'm no english prof so tell me, when the words, infinite wisdom, are applied to a group of politicians (anywhere), wouldn't that be an oxy moron?

On a serious note, I did a little searching on:  Is it a crime not to report a felony.  I was surprised in what little I was able to find (because I'm in remedial computer class), in most States/cases it's not.  My immediate inclination is to say it should be.  I'm pretty sure there's some good reasons why it's not a law, would you please enlighten me.

PS:  I did see (in one state) that it was against the law if police ask you about a felony and you said you didn't see it, and you had.  In most cases, it'd be hard to prove though.  Point is, I don't see much difference.  Again, I'll wait for your opinion on this matter.

 

 

Obviously, this allegation brought this up.  Just me personally, if you don't have reasonable proof, it should be a crime to accuse someone of a crime, that was committed over 5 (10/20?) years ago.

In Texas it’s against the law to not report certain felonies and it’s against the law to not report abuse.  Neither would apply to a victim though.  It is also against the law to make a false report. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Member Statistics

    46,207
    Total Members
    1,837
    Most Online
    JBarry68
    Newest Member
    JBarry68
    Joined



  • Posts

    • That should tell everyone something pretty clearly. Does anyone really think BH is recruiting elementary kids, to get them to transfer in Jr. high? Seriously? Here is the "dirty little secret" about BH: Most people move to the district for a quality living environment to raise their young family, and benefit from the outstanding acedemics at BH. Even If all athlectics suddenly disappeared from BH, people would still want their kids in the district. If thats not enough to convince anyone, and BH really was determined to recruit, first step would be to have open enrollemnt. It is closed.        Yes, I get it, no one ever wants to give BH the benefit of the doubt on anything. Some of the accusations are beyond ridiculous though. This paranoia the BH critics are afflicted with is not just sad, its flat out laughable.     
    • Opting is always an option. Are they considering any BC assistants? Highly qualified after that season they put up. 
    • Be that as it may, only time will tell. Hide and watch. Don’t be surprised if the next HC hire uses his own recipe. That happens more than not historically. I am not arguing the point that Hooks & CT had a winning combination that could’ve been carried over. I’m saying that finding someone to do that is not going to be as easy as one might think. Tell me again why Saban’s replacement, who even has Saban’s assistance if he wants it, just lost another game to an unranked team and has taken the Tide out of playoff contention? Why wouldn’t he just follow the success of possibly the greatest college football coach ever lived? 
    • We've acknowledged having 2 HOF coaches hasn't been like most other schools. So why everyone jumps to the conclusion it wouldn't work here is beyond my comprehension. I see it carry over with these other hires. Gilmer, Aledo, North Shore, Austin Westlake. Next man up that continues the system in place has instant success. Matter fact there was 2 rookie HC that won the state championship the same year we handed over the keys. Same book. Same recipe. Better ingredients.
  • Topics

×
×
  • Create New...