Right, left or center it seems like there have been so many allegations leveled at highly regarded people in society. It’s difficult to assess these people. I nociced for me, it was easy to believe Dennis Hastert or Roy Moore were guilty of the crimes they were accused of committing however I found it difficult to entertain that Bill Clinton or Al Franken were guilty since I had a genuine respect for them. Over time, reading and researching I’ve come to believe all of the above were guilty of some severe sexual misconduct. Then there’s the problem that some who are accused may be innocent. So although I want to believe victims there are real reasons why some “victims” could lie in search of fame or money. I bring this up now because we are not in the middle of a huge sex scandal this week. Perhaps people can discuss the topic without it being one side laying accusations at the other side. How do you analyze scandals before there is proof? How many accusations need to be leveled before you put stock in the claim? When do you give a shit/not give a shit about accusations? Is it based on the age of the accusers, the position of the accused, the moral juxtaposition of what the accused espouses? What matters? Who surprised you the most?
Charlie Rose probably surprised me the most.....Al Franken didn't, I've read Jane Curtain's take on the out of control testosterone of SNL back then..I don't even think they've begun to look into Rock Stars from decades past...stand up comedians I would expect this from more than some subcultures..Garrison Keillor was another surprise to me.
Again. Almost 8 billion people on the planet, people living in horrific poverty having kids. Every porn niche that could be invented has probably already been invented yet some sicko is still thinking of new ones right now. People love feet and pain and voyeurism. I will likely never be surprised at the sick shit people are into. I don't recall Franken being accused of anything sinister but that doesn't mean he ain't doing something weird. Anyway, what side of the aisle someone is on has nothing to do with how creepy they are likely to be.
I have a hard time believing there was "nothing" to all of that, but I can't prove anything (nor do I even want too), I hope he's innocent. Anyways none of it really surprises me. I was probably the most disappointed in Cosby though.
I'm completely innocent! I was on Ambion and didn't know you shouldn't put wine bottles away like that. I mean, with names like bung, punt and cork screw you can't lay all the blame at my feet.
Most of these people we hardly know so nothing surprises me. Louie CK hurt though. Thought he was one of the best SNL hosts ever and enjoyed his comedy before his downfall.
I don't. In Bill Clinton's case, I was somewhat embarrassed by what turn up on him, as it came out. I voted for him and events made me regret it. But what was worse, all the Islamic terrorist stuff that was going down and not much was being done about it since the President was under the microscope the whole time. It became very apparent to me why the Constitution has it that we do not put President on trial while in office. We need the Chief executive to give full attention to business while he holds the post. Not waste time and energy on defending himself against the pettiness of the opposition.
Well, in the case of Franken, I really don't want to know more about him. Although, at the time, I had the feeling the dems were giving him the bum's rush.
Only a handful of people, all well-known to me personally, have my respect. And none of them have ever let me down. Celebrities/politicians are the most flawed, narcissistic people on the planet, and I doubt we've scratched the surface of their insidious secret lives.
