Roy Moore

A lot of people are calling him a pedophile. He’s an awful human being, but he’s not that. I got into a stupid Twitter war this morning on that issue.

A pedophile is someone who has a desire for sex with actual children (and by children, I mean people who have not attained puberty, not teenagers). We have seen no evidence of that. But for simply pointing that out, I was accused of being one myself for “defending” him (I’m not, and I didn’t defend him, other than to point out that his attempted statutory rape is not pedophilia). And because I have a mustache.

Contra what so many confidently and ignorantly informed me, pedophilia has nothing to do with the age of the perp. It doesn’t matter how old Moore was when he attempted sex with these young women (and yes, a female who has started menstruating is a young woman, not a “child,” though she may be emotionally). All that matters is the age of the victim.

34 thoughts on “Roy Moore”

  1. I don’t believe the accusations. They are scripted, which come across as Democrat’s preferred narrative device, carefully crafted lies. The one today made by Alred is especially fishy because it is so over the top and the use of emotional buzzwords. None of these accusations can be proven or disproved, which is why they were made.

    They even use the old, “I was a life long Trump supporter.”

    The people pushing these claims have a long history of similar dirty tricks used during elections. Everything about this should cause people’s BS detectors to go off.

    1. Paraphrasing a comment I saw on another site, if unprovable accusations can be used to force political candidates to drop out of races, then we’ve achieved mob rule. Why not just let the Washington Post pick senators, and dispense with elections?

    2. My immediate reaction is that the timing of the accusations reeks of dirty politics. And fits an MO we’ve seen before, the Clarence Thomas confirmation hearings being one example.

    3. I wouldn’t be willing to bet on whether Moore is guilty or innocent. I’ve seen both the self-righteous exposed, and the mendacity of last minute dirty tricksters.

      I wouldn’t base my vote on either assumption either. I would leave it to the justice system to determine guilt or innocence.

    4. I agree. Think accusations of child molestation during contentious divorces. That was a thing for awhile too.

  2. Rand, what do you make of the suggestions floated at the Washington Examiner and elsewhere that Mr. Trump should pressure Mr. Sessions to resign so that he can run as the most likely write-in Republican candidate to win back his old Senate seat, allowing Mr. Trump to appoint a new Attorney General to rein in Mueller and reopen Clinton investigations?

    1. What about the theory that the sate GOP can withdraw their endorsement of him thus causing the election to be null and void, requiring another special election?

      I read an article about that but don’t know if that is possible. If so, that seems like the best route to go if they don’t want Moore or don’t think he can win.

  3. You’re not a pedophile Rand, just pedantic.

    And you’re standing in front of the mob witch hunt.

    What I can’t figure is why Lindsey Graham would tell Moore that he shouldn’t even run for Senator, and then Graham goes to the Menendez trial to provide evidence as a character witness for the Defendant.

  4. Rand, I’m utterly appalled that you have admitted to having a mustache!

    You are also quite right regarding the definition of pedophilia, but don’t except twitter users to be familiar with arcane devices such as dictionaries.


  5. Well one thing Rand is did you come to the defense of Spacey when people were accusing him of pedophilia?
    You have the pedantic definition of Pedophillia but terms change. We don’t have a term that in common circulation for what Kevin Spacey and Moore is but Pedophile is close with some minor distinctions. Though another term that is close is lecher but distinction is more significant , since would consider lechery can be legal whereas pedophilia is not.

    Moore defense is kinda pathetic and should lose him the support. Him denying knowing the most recent accuser, but the Woman having a signed High School Year book by him. The accusation of coworkers knowing him as a Known den-generate who was dating high school Girls, stalking girls at malls, showing up at high school football games and general being a creepier version of David Wooderson.
    Doesn’t have enough evidence for the abuse but raises enough doubt and has enough of a ick factor republicans need to strive for a better politicians.
    Republicans shouldn’t bend to the mob rule but shouldn’t be so partisan that bury our heads in the sand to ignore the smoke. We always Harp on the hypocrisy of the democrats with Clinton, Weinstine and Weiner. Just because they follow Results trumps means dosen’t mean republicans should resort to same tactics.

    1. But, the Democrats are going to be hypocrites no matter what the Republicans do. So, isn’t falling on one’s sword here really little more than self-immolation?

      Remember, you can always vote Roy Moore out. You might not be able to undo what his replacement enables to be done.

    2. “Just because they follow Results trumps means dosen’t mean republicans should resort to same tactics.”

      Because losing valiantly is the Republican way.

      Besides which, given how fast the Republican cucks came out when the story broke, I’d say there’s a pretty good chance they’re behind it.

    3. Well one thing Rand is did you come to the defense of Spacey when people were accusing him of pedophilia?

      No, but I didn’t know that was the accusation. Again, I think that Moore is terrible (as is Spacey if true), but words mean things.

    4. It is amazing how going to the mall or to a football game is being framed as stalking baby children. Its totally well known fact according to random people two towns over but hasn’t surfaced for 40 years. Its too well known to be known.

      And he signed a year book, so he must be a rapist right? The lady totally hated him and thought he was skeevy, which is why she brought her year book to work and had a hated person sign it?

      The most credible part of the story are the two college age young women whose mom’s said he would be a great husband. Without them, the other accusations wouldn’t be very believable. This is an intentional slight of hand. All good lies have a kernel of truth and we know Democrats have a fetish for carefully crafting lies and a By Any Means Necessary approach to seizing and abusing power.

      1. “And he signed a year book, so he must be a rapist right?”

        Look at the picture of the yearbook. The supposed ‘signature’ is in two different inks, looks like two different handwritings, and makes little sense. Why would he write ‘Christmas 1977’ and then date it again?

        Yes, his pen could have run out of ink so he had to change to a different one, but there’s no sign of that in the writing.

        I’m amazed that even CNN was willing to post this.

          1. They don’t call it the Clinton News Network for nothing.

            But this looks like such an obvious fake that it’s only going to discredit the entire campaign against him.

            If Democrats don’t want him elected, they’re going about it the wrong way.

        1. Wow, that is clearly a forgery. Different ink, handwriting, switching from cursive to print, adding DA for some reason, ect.

          Did anyone in the media get a copy of the year book to see if there is a Ray or Roy that went to school there?

          1. People are claiming there was at least one Ray in her year, but I’ve no idea whether that’s true.

            BTW, the left are claiming the picture is Photoshopped, but this appears to be the original source image:


            Boost the saturation, and it’s extremely clear that everything after ‘Roy’ was written with different ink.

  6. The bigger point is not Moore’s character. He probably does lack some. He’s a message from the people to the elite… they’re mad as hell and aren’t going to take it.

    There are a lot of heads in WA that need to blow up. Electing Moore will do that, putting a thorn in the side of all the right people. Is it worth risking the seat. Hell yes, because electing anti-Trumps is worse than democrats. The party in power is supposed to be held accountable.

    1. In a different WA, they elected a serial rapist to Mayor in Seattle. Didn’t make the national news and the Seattleites seemed rather ok with it.

  7. Rand’s “pedantic” definition of pedophilia is the one found in the dictionary. That’s hardly pedantic.

    A common term (and accurate) for Moore and Spacy (assuming the allegations are true) is eubophile, so use that, not pedophile. An even more common terminology (and my preference) is sexual assault on a minor.

    Allowing the ignorant to redefine words is never a good thing, especially on horrific subjects. In so doing, the real meaning is lost. “Nazi” is watered down by creeping redefinition, as is “racism”, and thus they lose the horror and warning that they can and should possess.

      1. I’m getting very tired of the evil white men meme. I guess racism is ok if ya choose the right group?

        For diversity we could put gang members on the bench? Oh, that’s what we’ve been doing. It’s worked out so well.

      2. Engineer,
        My spelling is abysmal, always has been. I make no excuses there.

        From your own linked definition of pedant,
        “A pedant is a person who is excessively concerned with formalism, accuracy, and precision, or one who makes an ostentatious and arrogant show of learning.”

        How in earth is citing the actual meaning of a misused word a fit for that definition? In engineering terms, if I state that the acceleration rate of gravity on earth’s surface is 30 feet per second, and you correct me by pointing out that it is actually 32.2, is that pedantic? No, it’s citing the actual fact.

        A better example of pedantic is pointing out a spelling error.

  8. I live in Alabama and never have liked Roy Moore. I just don’t. I’m faced with a challenge. There isn’t a Democrat alive that I’d vote for but I don’t like Roy Moore. I either don’t vote at all or hold my nose and vote for Moore. At this point, I’m undecided as to which option I’ll choose.

    Roy Moore has been a public figure for decades, so these claims (coming conveniently after the deadline to replace him on the ballot) reek of political dirty tricks. If the MSM hadn’t spent decades destroying their credibility, I might believe the claims. However, they did and I don’t.

    1. Well, which is worse? Having a guy who may have done some unsettling things several decades ago represent you in Congress? Or, handing a victory to people who purposefully introduced this at the last minute in an effort to suppress your vote?

      I lost every last ounce of respect I had for the Dems when they rammed through Obamacare with underhanded tactics and against the popular will. They are dictators waiting for their chance to put us all in chains, and I loath and despise them.

      I would not worry about critics – they’ve got WJC hanging around their necks like an albatross. And, if anyone says anything bad about Alabama, remind them that Massachusetts reelected Gerry Studds by a wide margin after he was found to have had an inappropriate relationship with a minor Congressional page.

    2. Larry,

      I’m glad I don’t have to make your decision. But if I was, I would ignore the last few weeks of news and focus on my plans prior. Nothing alleged to date couldn’t be tried in a court of law after the election and handled afterwards. And if the seriousness of the accusations are such; they should be heard in a court of law.

      That said, Roy Moore wouldn’t have been my desire for a candidate right now. Then again, Donald Trump wasn’t my preference either, nor was John McCain. If I had it do over, I would vote again for Trump, but not for John McCain. So, I’m not sure what I would do in your shoes. But I do think the simple answer is to ignore current claims of harassment, because as you note, the MSM has destroyed its credibility, so has Gloria Allred.

Comments are closed.