Always Believe A Woman...

[Spicerack]

unless her name is Tara Reade.

[naomi24]

This isn't about the other side is it?

[royfromaus]

A reminder of Jim's comment to naomi.



jim360
I'm not looking for an argument, I just thought it was amusing that the picture wasn't commented on on its own merits.

[naomi24]

^And that was inaccurate too.

[Zacs-Master]

If only there was a tape of Biden saying something disgustingly misogynistic, eh!

[royfromaus]

You haven't seen 'them' Zacs?

[Mozz71]

Pelosi defends Biden but attacks Trump for similar = hypocrisy.

Democrats demand Biden investigated while ignoring/covering up Trump's misogyny = hypocrisy.

So hypocrites on both sides seems about right.

[royfromaus]

You're confused, Mozz

[Zacs-Master]

No, Roy.

[Mozz71]

//You're confused, Mozz//

You're deluded, Roy.

[tomus42]

It's well known that Biden is a horrible creep, which makes two of them. Nice choice for the American voter.

[Peter Pedant]

// but I know we have a lot of ABers who believe any accusation should bar you from standing for public office.//

yeah but no but - also believe that money and lies can get you off ....

guilty on that one I am afraid

[Peter Pedant]

// Pelosi defends Biden but attacks Trump for similar = hypocrisy//

o mi gard that is awful - you mean Biden also hired a lady of the night to er do something in the bed Obama had slept in?
How disgusting

[jim360]

It clearly wasn't inaccurate, Naomi. You went from saying "what a nice picture!" to deploring the Sussexes in the same post, contrasting them to the Cambridges. Thus confirming the point I was making. If you wanted to praise said picture "on its own merits" then you wouldn't have mentioned the Sussexes at all.

[jim360]

I assume that Mozz meant to say "Republicans demand Biden investigated...".

[jim360]

As to "the other side", I suppose my question, directed to nobody in particular, is "are the accusations of sexual assault shocking on their own merits or is there something about who is being accused that is more important?" Taking cases of Trump, Kavanaugh, Biden, Salmond, even Assange, it seems uncontroversial to claim that the allegations are easier to dismiss if it's a political ally, and easier to believe if it's an opponent.

[Mozz71]

Jim, thanks. I didn't notice I screwed that up. That explains Roy's post. Apologies all.

[Peter Pedant]

mozz apologises shock ! - yozza ! mozza sez sozza

It clearly wasn't inaccurate, Naomi. You went from saying "what a nice picture!" to deploring the Sussexes in the same post,

situation normal Jimbo - this is AB - and we support Naomis right to free speech - so one sentence abutting on another which says the opposite is just in a days work

[Peter Pedant]

oh dam = that should be
Mozza sozza shozza ! - my own appozzas

[naomi24]

Jim, you’ve just shot yourself in the foot - again. What I actually said was //A Picture To Brighten The Gloom And Doom …. …carried by most of the British press today and guaranteed to bring a smile to all but the most determinedly miserable faces.//

Therefore the picture was commented on on its own merits and to claim otherwise is grossly inaccurate.

[jim360]

In the very same post you mentioned the Sussexes. They need not have featured at all. It isn't difficult. No foot-shooting here. Your *entire* post is the point.

Why is context so hard for you?