(11-13-2017 03:11 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-13-2017 03:09 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  

(11-13-2017 03:05 PM)Kronke Wrote:  

(11-13-2017 03:03 PM)Tom in Lazybrook Wrote:  Classic 'whataboutism'. Even if someone assumed that the allegations were true, how does that excuse Roy Moore's allegations?

You b*tch about 'whataboutism' and tell people to start new threads, and then when they do, you come to them and continue to b*tch about 'whataboutism'.

Sad.

Uh, you don't understand how whataboutism works.

The entire implication of the OP was 'whataboutism'. Bascially, the OP attempted to excuse or deflect from the allegations against Moore by using the 'but what about Bill Clinton" meme.

So, keeping with the OP and staying on topic, I simply called it out as whataboutism and asked the poster to explain

How does any true or untrue allegations against Bill Clinton have any relevance whatsoever to the accusations against Roy Moore?

Now if the OP is not trying to argue that the fact that there were allegations against Bill Clinton excuses Roy Moore's behavior or can be used as a defense against said claims, then he's free to do that at all.

Do you disavow alt-left terror on those in the LGBT community that don't have what you consider to be the "right" politics?

OT. But since you asked, I did note that you posted something on it, then I read it. I then attempted to google it to find the story outside of some right wing blogs, couldn't find a word on it, and decided to not comment on it.

But again, I fail to see how this has anything to do with Bill Clinton, Roy Moore, Chelsea Handler, Miss Broderick.

This isn't whataboutism. Its just deflection.