They have been assimilated by the Borg with the Queen of the Collective.
“Thats my standard does this sound like something that could have happened?”
This guy must be a sucker for historical novels. “Plausible” does not equal “true”. It might just be good fiction.
Attacking Bill Clinton is a cost-free exercise for the Progressive LEFTists. They can bloviate all that they want, the only thing to lose is the charming William Jefferson Clinton ability to give wonderful speeches as the Democrat’s ‘Elder Statesman’. It is now somewhat akin to having Bill Cosby, what was once comfortable is now the opposite! Besides, Barrack H Obama is far more suited for the leftward-ho movement into socialism and redistribution and he doesn’t need heavy makeup either!
I think you will find the Clintons doing far more overseas than here in the USofA over the next few years. An exchange of favors between friends and keeping the gates open for Chelsea to write her bio about “Daddy Dearest” as she runs for the legacy as a victim!
Which brings us to Hillary's stunning defeat a year ago - which still tastes so sweet today.
The delicious irony is that the "Hollywood Access" tape would have surely sunk Donald Trump had Bill Clinton been held accountable for all his sexual misconduct from years ago. However, back in the day, Hillary led the charge (with the "bimbo eruptions" team) to mock, ridicule and discredit the victims of Bill Clinton's sexual crimes.
Had Bill Clinton been held accountable back then, Hillary Clinton would probably be president today! Think about that one. Strange karma indeed.
But there was no need for an order or a memo. Those calls arent required because the political left is of one mind, a hive mind, when it comes to advancing whatever agenda item or narrative is at the forefront at the moment.
The memo doesnt have to be sent because the journalists are all part of the AP. The wire assures that everyone gets the word. Whoever comes up with a condign phrase to express what they all are thinking just triggers a cascade.
Ive never been a fan of Moore; I tend to dislike people who ignore the law based on their personal opinions or wishes (same reason I oppose people who embrace sanctuary cities), so his collapse not only didnt bother me, it didnt surprise me.
That to me is too easy. First, Moore was right about the Ten Commandments; if they are on the wall in SCOTUS they can be on the wall in any American court.Secondly, Moore has no more women proclaiming his moral turpitude than Donald Trump less than a year ago and - surprise, surprise! - these charges crop up at the most convenient time for the Democrats.
Finally, given the proclivity of the journalists (and other Democrats), I have no reason to assume that, if the Democrat happens to be 10x worse than Moore might be, I would know it. I wouldnt, you know - because Republicans dont run against that sort of thing in a personal way, and if they did journalism would dump on them for doing it. And because if the Democrat has a moral turpitude issue, journalists wouldnt mention it to me before the election - and maybe not later either.
So I just consider it to be noise. Would the Democrat help or hurt the ability of Trump to install good judges in federal courthouses? He would make it harder - and after 2018 elections that could, in the worst case, be crucial. So an abundance of caution about Moore could be quite expensive, and not a conservative approach to politics. I dont live in Alabama, but I did contribute to the Moore campaign. If Moore wins and is exonerated of the worst charges (at least) the whole thing blows over.
Because some of the charges are IMHO overblown. Allowing that the age of consent was lower in AL at the time, and that Moore was respectful of the girls parents. At that point its on the parents - and mores have changed about May-December marriages (there wouldnt be a non-pejorative name for them, if approbation against them had been as strong in the past as, say, that against homosexuality). My own maternal grandmother was a teen bride of a widower whose son had survived the disease that carried off his sister and mother. And according to what I read about Ireland, the term fighting Irish derives from the fact that Irishmen didnt marry until they inherited their fathers farms and thus could support a family - thus, the adolescent irresponsibility we are familiar with was seen is much older guys. And equally, the Irish maiden would see older men as attractive, since younger men were not acceptable mates.
And as to the concern that teen brides would be immature, well - women in general were treated as immature, in living memory. As recently as 1950, Im pretty sure that women couldnt open an account at a stock broker. And had few professions (teacher and nurse) open to them. So for a girl it was just a matter of learning homemakers skills at her mothers knee - and becoming an attractive maiden. In 1955 nearly all girls married within a year of high school graduation. And they werent marrying younger guys . . .
Never understood why Northeastern Liberals/Progressives so embraced a good ol' southern boy and his sidekick that they would allow them such power in the first place!
Disraeli's words might help to identify the why part of that statement if anyone wished to pursue it:
The world is governed by very different personages from what is imagined by those who are not behind the scenes. ― Benjamin Disraeli
It’s not opportunistic guilt, it’s worse than that.
Multiculturalism we know, this is “multijusticism”.