The craziness of the undiscussed Moore!


Anderson Cooper remembers:
Ever since the stampede began, Roy Moore has been discussed within one context only.

Pundits have staged pleasing, but often incoherent, discussions of various sexy-time matters, including the fact that he married a woman who was only 24. The craziness of Moore's public career has gone almost wholly undiscussed.

Roy Moore's Big Crazy has been forgotten. Last night, like Pepperidge Farm, Anderson Cooper remembered.

Through some miracle, Cooper was granted a long interview with Janet Porter, a Moore campaign spokeswoman. For various reasons, the interview was unsatisfying—Porter evaded every question; Cooper interrupted too much—but the format let Cooper take us back through Moore's greatest Big Crazy hits.

Because our pundit corps simply luvvvs sex, none of these questions have been discussed in the past month. The Alabama candidate's Big Crazy has gone unexplored. For the record, here are some of the questions Cooper asked:
COOPER: He violated state and federal regulations, and he was removed from the Supreme Court for that, and then four years later he misled the judges by saying he didn't order probate judges not to marry same-sex couples. They said he was essentially lying.

COOPER: He said that those judges were radical homosexuals and transgendered activists. Do you really believe that the judges on the Alabama Court of the Judiciary are radical homosexuals and transgendered people?

COOPER: Does Judge Moore still believe that homosexual conduct should be illegal and that homosexuality is still the same thing as bestiality?

COOPER: Does he still believe that 9/11 may have happened because, "We distanced ourselves from God?" That's what he said in the past. Does he still believe this?

COOPER: Does he still believe an American citizen who's a Muslim should not be able to serve in Congress?

COOPER: Does he still believe that communities in the U.S. are being ruled by Sharia Law as he did in the past?...He said there were actually communities that are being run by Sharia Law. Does he still believe that?

COOPER: Does he still believe Barack Obama wasn't born in the United States?

COOPER: Does he still believe that the U.S. has become the focus of the evil in the world because the U.S. promotes things, in his words, like same-sex marriage?
How about it? Does Roy Moore still believe that the United States is the focus of evil in the world? Because of our exciting panic, the public has been kept from hearing that Roy Moore actually said that.

Porter kept evading those questions last night. We thought these questions should be reproduced just to create a record.

Ever since November 10, our reporters and pundits have conducted a moral stampede concerning alleged behavior by Moore from the late 1970s. Granted, these topics are very exciting because they involve highly exciting sexy-time sex topics, with plenty of teenage dating thrown in!

The corporate suits who foul your world simply luvvv these exciting discussions—discussions where the actual facts are extremely hard to determine. In the process, the public has been kept from hearing about the crazy public behavior of the Republican Senate candidate in Alabama.

Also this:

The GOP tax proposal has been moving through the Congress while we hysterics focus on Moore's forty-year-old dating behavior, which is often described in blatantly distorted ways. Somewhat similarly, George W. Bush got elected while the press corps spent two years inventing crazy statements by Candidate Gore.

People are dead all over the world because the press corps conducted that earlier scam/entertainment/payback. But so what? As part of our species' extremely low intellectual and moral capabilities, this is the way our corporate press corps prefers to play the game.

Lawrence praised Jack, while battering Roy for marrying such a young wife! Upstairs, the suits who covered for Lauer and Weinstein set up a very loud cheer.

Do you think this isn't the way it works? Who's naive now, Kay?

Despite what you hear from the Washington Post, where the only thing that counts is the dating, Moore has been charged, by two women, with two acts of sexual assault in 1979. Earth to "press corps:"

It's possible to discuss that fact while also discussing the blatant craziness of Moore's ridiculous public career.

Our cable pundits haven't done that. The suits don't want them to do that.

They prefer that we stick with the sex. While we're at it, let's all pretend that we're in a "watershed moment!"


  1. There is no controversy among liberals about the awfulness of Moore's political views and past actions. There is also no controversy about the assaults he is accused of committing against two teens. There IS controversy about whether Moore's propensity to "date" girls much younger than himself is a moral failing. Look at the arguments here for an example. It is unsurprising that much of the discussion should surround the gray areas, not the ones where there is agreement.

    It also matters that the Republicans are unwilling to call Moore out on anything, that every principle is sacrificed for a senate majority. But we saw that with Trump, so Moore is nothing new.

    There is a saying "Be the change you want to see in the world." I am hoping this is a watershed moment because I want to see a world in which women are taken seriously and not treated as sex objects, for the enjoyment of men without regard to their own wishes. I want to live in a world where the powerful are punished for their misdeeds along with the less powerful.

    Meanwhile, Somerby pretends this is about sex. Clue for the clueless -- it isn't. It is about power. Trump revealed that only power matters and everyone else has apparently agreed with him. We are witnessing power struggles and the flexing of muscles by people who didn't realize they had them. And it has nothing to do with sex.

    1. Misdeeds?

      Like Al Franken taking a gag photo on a USO trip that parodies USO hijinks?

      Are we down to that level of ridiculousness and stupidity?

      Apparently so. And do women have no agency in these matters aside from bringing it up years later?

    2. Do women have no agency?

      No. That’s the point. They get fired or branded “difficult” and their careers are damaged, and no one believes them. Or they accuse them of having no sense of humor if they don’t want to watch CK mas*urbate or kiss Franken for no good reason, or be groped by some skeezy old man. Men who fismiss this illustrate the problem by showing an absence of empathy.

    3. Samantha Bee showed a taped segment of Bette Midler describing what Geraldo Rivera and his producer did to her -- back in the 1990s. And no one said or did anything as a result of that interview. And Geraldo is still on TV tweeting garbage defending the abusers in today's scandals.

      Bette Midler was a big star during that time period and no one listened and no one said or did anything at all about her claims. I hope to God things have changed!

  2. What is there to say about the blatant craziness of Moore's career except that it is blatantly crazy?

  3. "The GOP tax proposal has been moving through the Congress while we hysterics focus on Moore's forty-year-old dating behavior, which is often described in blatantly distorted ways"

    C'mon Bob. Do you really prefer the mind-numbing "tax cut for the rich" zombie-outrage to hilarious zombie-puritan sanctimony? Snap out of it, man.

    1. They're certainly "political zombies", if they are really euphemisms like "tax cut for the rich", rather than the "Trump ball-licking and rimjob of the Establishment Elites"

    2. Say whatever else you want about Trump, but boy does he ever love the Establishment.

    3. Mao, your pretty much all Goebelsian.

  4. Too little, too late, Bob.

    "The Alabama candidate's Big Crazy has gone unexplored. "...
    "none of these questions have been discussed in the past month."

    A whole month? What an eternity!
    And, Oh, Somerby with his categorical "nevers" and "nones".
    This is just one quick counterexample:
    Chris Hayes, discussing Moore with Joyce Vance on 11/29:

    HAYES: I want to play a little bit of Roy Moore was heckled tonight at an
    event he did. This is someone who was twice kicked off the Supreme Court
    in Alabama, twice by fellow Republicans. Today, some news that he co-
    authored a textbook which in 2011 says women shouldn`t run for office.
    What would it mean for the state of Alabama to have this man, who is
    already a polarizing and controversial figure, in that state be
    representing the state in the United States Senate?"

    Elsewhere in the interview:
    VANCE: You know, Republicans down here are simultaneously embarrassed by
    Moore`s conduct, but very concerned about holding the majority in the
    United States Senate. And it`s safe to say that in Alabama there are one-
    issue voters on both sides of the abortion issue. Republicans tend to feel
    very strongly about the abortion issue, but by the same token, many
    Republicans, particularly younger ones, have backed away from supporting
    him. So we have young Republican groups in Birmingham and other parts of
    the state that have withdrawn their support, whether that means they`ll
    stay home or vote for Doug Jones remains to be seen.
    [end transcript]

    And doesn't it seem odd that Somerby denounces the media for not discussing Moore's beliefs during this sex scandal during the last month, while providing an example (Cooper) of someone doing just that?

    Somerby again:

    "How about it? Does Roy Moore still believe that the United States is the focus of evil in the world? Because of our exciting panic, the public has been kept from hearing that Roy Moore actually said that."

    If the public has been "kept from hearing about it", why do you suppose I or Somerby or just about everyone else has heard about it? That was the focus of the discussion about Moore during the primary with Strange. The latest revelations about criminal sexual misconduct are just an additional topic.
    And believe me, Moore's followers know EXACTLY where he stands, and love him BECAUSE he takes those stands.

    I found dozens of examples of discussions about Moore's beliefs from the past several months. Where was Somerby during that time? Did he praise the coverage? Did he mention it?

    If Somerby finds Moore's beliefs objectionable, why does he constantly denounce liberals for stating their objections publicly? If a liberal finds Moore's views on religion, women, gays, and minorities objectionable, Somerby has mostly lectured us on how that might upset the Others. That we must "respect" or "endure" or some other Quisling-like phrases.

    But I actually can't tell if Somerby finds Moore objectionable or not. Somerby has a way of suggesting but never clearly stating his actual views.

    1. This is Somerby’s way of evading responsibility. Like CMike, he quotes others to make his point.

    2. An "Anonymous" is upset others won't take responsibility for the point they're making- ha, ha, ha.

      That said, I would post a screen shot for this comment if I could. The Washington Post article that broke the allegations against Moore was published on November 9.

      According to Real Clear Politics' compilation of six or seven different polls, Moore's lead in the senate race was at 6 percentage points on November 8 but Jones closed to within 2 percentage points on November 11. From November 16 to November 26 Jones was shown to be leading in the polls. As of December 4 the RCP compilation of polls is showing Moore ahead by 2.3 percentage points [LINK].

      What does Somerby think were the prospects for Jones to narrow Moore's lead in the polls through a national discussion of the policy issues at stake without the revelations?

    3. Troll harder, CMike.