Should Al Franken change his mind?

Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV), the most conservative Dem in the Senate thinks so as do some other Senators and others.

 https://www.politico.com/story/2017/12/18/manchin-franken-senate-resign-300843

absolutely

I'd like for him to stay but I can't justify why. Apparently, he's being purged in the name of party purity, and as ammo against GOP sleaze.

With so many damn true scumbuckets in Congress, Franken being forced to resign is practically criminal.

What does this mean? 

“She has said, ‘He was entitled to a process, but he was not entitled to my silence,’” said one person who has spoken to Gillibrand about the decision.

The statement is nonsensical. Maybe she's been taking lessons from Trump.

drummerboy said:

With so many damn true scumbuckets in Congress, Franken being forced to resign is practically criminal.

Agree.

cramer said:

What does this mean? 

“She has said, ‘He was entitled to a process, but he was not entitled to my silence,’” said one person who has spoken to Gillibrand about the decision.

Seems to mean that she felt the need to crucify him but would be fine with an ethics hearing as long as she could make frequent comments to the press.

GL2 said:

I'd like for him to stay but I can't justify why. Apparently, he's being purged in the name of party purity, and as ammo against GOP sleaze.

I must have misunderstood what it meant to be a liberal.

Morganna said:

GL2 said:

I'd like for him to stay but I can't justify why. Apparently, he's being purged in the name of party purity, and as ammo against GOP sleaze.

I must have misunderstood what it meant to be a liberal.

In what way?

Scully said:

Morganna said:

GL2 said:

I'd like for him to stay but I can't justify why. Apparently, he's being purged in the name of party purity, and as ammo against GOP sleaze.

I must have misunderstood what it meant to be a liberal.

In what way?

Well, I guess in the way that I am socially liberal as opposed to being socially conservative. To me, I thought very conservative people would get upset by that kiss. I would just blow it off as a guy being bold or misreading a cue. Again I'm limiting this to the accusation by a beautiful woman who complained he kissed her, I think during a skit.  She was playful as is shown in photos and pretty and he thought maybe I should make a move. I know my take on this seems out of step with how my party thinks I should feel right now but in my estimation I don't think its all that big a deal . She told him don't ever do that again and he didn't  As for the stupid photo, I think its funny, he's a comic and he did something that everyone seems to think is heinous. I just don't take this as seriously as others do.

As for the price my party will pay, well just now attorney Richard Painter expressed his frustration with the decision to oust the man that he referred to as the most articulate voice in the senate. Its how I see Franken. Some minds are fascinating to observe in action. His is one of them. As a pragmatist I would weigh what he did against what good he did or what good he might do.

I generally agree with you, but I think that if Franken had decided to stay Moore might have won.  The act of Democrats accepting poor behavior from their own would have been (improperly) used to vindicate the scumbag Moore.

FilmCarp said:

I generally agree with you, but I think that if Franken had decided to stay Moore might have won.  The act of Democrats accepting poor behavior from their own would have been (improperly) used to vindicate the scumbag Moore.

True, I think most everyone accepted that it would be inconsistent but I feel really dug in on this because I'm concerned about the fact that we are lumping all of these men into one category, wicked. I feel that we as a society have sent a message to men telling them that it is traditionally acceptable, even perhaps desirable for them to make the first move, lean in for the kiss, make the remark, ask for the date.  Everyone loved the leading man who was a bit aggressive and he may have had a drink thrown in his face on occasion but we knew he would get the girl. Now I feel like we have moved from Gone With The Wind to The Crucible. (and I prefer the wardrobe choices of the former)

I say, he should un-resign.  I respect that some voters would find his alleged conduct disqualifying.  I just don't. I can't believe he's being kicked out by peers as ethically challenged as many of his fellow senators are. 

On the other hand, he has looked miserable for a while now. He is not a phony.  I wonder if he even likes being a senator.

I think he looks miserable now exactly because he loves being a Senator.

breal said:

I say, he should un-resign.  I respect that some voters would find his alleged conduct disqualifying.  I just don't. I can't believe he's being kicked out by peers as ethically challenged as many of his fellow senators are. 

On the other hand, he has looked miserable for a while now. He is not a phony.  I wonder if he even likes being a senator.

His resigning is why I'm never voting again.

dave said:

His resigning is why I'm never voting again.

That'll teach 'em. 

Morganna said:

FilmCarp said:

I generally agree with you, but I think that if Franken had decided to stay Moore might have won.  The act of Democrats accepting poor behavior from their own would have been (improperly) used to vindicate the scumbag Moore.

True, I think most everyone accepted that it would be inconsistent but I feel really dug in on this because I'm concerned about the fact that we are lumping all of these men into one category, wicked. I feel that we as a society have sent a message to men telling them that it is traditionally acceptable, even perhaps desirable for them to make the first move, lean in for the kiss, make the remark, ask for the date.  Everyone loved the leading man who was a bit aggressive and he may have had a drink thrown in his face on occasion but we knew he would get the girl. Now I feel like we have moved from Gone With The Wind to The Crucible. (and I prefer the wardrobe choices of the former)

I'm not a fan of placing people in moral categories like "wicked" and "good." Actions can be good or bad, but people can't. All of us do both good and bad actions, and even an action that we can judge good in one context can be bad in another.

All of which is to say, I don't see this as a question of "lumping all of these men into one category, wicked."

But I do think you hit on something here which gets to the heart of it when you talk about  "I feel that we as a society have sent a message to men telling them that it is traditionally acceptable..."

I think this moment is about changing what we, as a society, say is acceptable, and what roles are. I think change is often painful, and I can sympathize with the hurt and confusion that such change can create, but I think this change is absolutely essential. This old attitude rested on an implicit assumption that women were not, and could never truly be, professional equals to men. Recall that in addition to Franken's forced kissing and mock boob grabbing of Tweeden, he's been accused by multiple women of groping them. 

On the one hand, sure, this isn't Roy Moore territory. On the other, recall that at least some of these gropings happened after he was senator, when constituents went up to see and talk with a man they admired. What if they had political ambitions of their own? What message was Franken sending when they came up to him in his context as senator and he responded by treating them as objects? What message does that send to other women who heard these stories and who looked up to Franken and who are considering political careers themselves?

Witch Hunts never end well, either for the 'Witch' or the 'Hunter'

He should stay

A great solution would be to step down as planned and then run for either this or another state office again.  His own voters can make the choice.

he should not resign because of this -- that is why we have elections.  

And I don't think the outcome for the Moore election would have changed if Franken had not resigned.  

He might prove to be effective as a journalist going forward.  

Yeah, I kinda like the idea of an Al Franken Show somewhere.

I don't buy the argument about resign vs. elections. Elections are not a substitute for resigning if something is found out mid-term. They should resign immediately if warranted. I just don't happen to think Franken's resignation was warranted.

I do agree about Moore - I don't think Franken had any effect one way or another.

mikescott said:

he should not resign because of this -- that is why we have elections.  

And I don't think the outcome for the Moore election would have changed if Franken had not resigned.  

He might prove to be effective as a journalist going forward.  

How many Alabama voters have even heard of Al Franken? I doubt if his resignation influenced even one vote.

I'm pretty sure that the Fox News viewers (i.e. Moore voters) knew about Franken.

LOST said:

How many Alabama voters have even heard of Al Franken? I doubt if his resignation influenced even one vote.

And even if they heard about Franken, I don't think it changed the vote.  

Moore came close to winning anyway and they voted for Trump knowing about his history.  Jones won because the Democrats saw that they had a chance to win this election and came out to vote.  

drummerboy said:

I'm pretty sure that the Fox News viewers (i.e. Moore voters) knew about Franken.

LOST said:

How many Alabama voters have even heard of Al Franken? I doubt if his resignation influenced even one vote

PVW said:

But I do think you hit on something here which gets to the heart of it when you talk about  "I feel that we as a society have sent a message to men telling them that it is traditionally acceptable..."

I think this moment is about changing what we, as a society, say is acceptable, and what roles are. I think change is often painful, and I can sympathize with the hurt and confusion that such change can create, but I think this change is absolutely essential. This old attitude rested on an implicit assumption that women were not, and could never truly be, professional equals to men. 

@PVW I think you're right on the money here except it's not an 'old' attitude it's currently in use and going strong. Hopefully soon after we work through this discovery and punishment phase (which is of course important) we can get to what I think you're referring to.  

We've watched scores of men get rejected and fired and suspended from their livelihoods etc., but other than apologies to victims, co workers and corporate sponsors- what has changed?  If you're right and so much of this is in fact about equality (and the power that comes with that equality)- apologies are not ever going to be enough.  How many of these men, along with their oaths to be 'better', or to 'seek help' have also announced that they are dedicating money and resources to establishing economic parity in the workplace between men and women- immediately . How many corporations have announced that they will be restructuring the standards used to hire, promote and pay women to match the criteria used for men- immediately.  If a network can fire an anchor immediately then why can't they replace that anchor with a woman- immediately?  If a studio head can be jettisoned immediately, then why can't he be replaced with a woman immediately?

Taking into account the importance of allowing the women who suffer through this daily to have a voice and to be protected, it's equally important to hold men's (society's) feet to the fire and to demand that immediate measures be taken with each and every firing.  Let's be honest, for a large corporation the path of least resistance is to simply fire the culprit (whatever the expense) and call up the next person from the dugout- who will inevitably be another man. And in most cases another white man, brought up in the same environment as the last one. In the end some cash is spent, a little tarnish on a corporate reputation- but nothing changes.  

In my opinion, if any marginalized group is going to change what society considers to be acceptable than it has to not only shine a light on the wrongdoing but also be the architects of the solution. Right now men who benefit from a society that denigrates women are also dictating the terms of restitution. I don't see how that will ever result in change.

Franken doesn't even know who some of his accusers are. How can that be right?

Some of the allegations against him are not serious, even if true. Squeezing a person's clothed waist during a photo opp?? How does the ethics committee even process that allegation?  Or even ones where the allegation is hand on clothed butt or clothed breast during photo opp.

If he  did this, What the hell, Al? But Did he?  I guess you  you take testimony, make credibility assessments?  Interview witnesses? A witness would recall seeing a U.S. senator grope a person in public while being photographed--even if the alleged incident was many years ago. 

Trying unsuccessfully to kiss the aid after a radio interview?  Not good. But he did not kiss her. The charge is: A juvenile, hammy attempted kiss.

Shannon Tweeden is where I'm all over the place. She was a show person. There to entertain the troops. (Thank you, Shsnnon!) He was a show person. There to entertain the troops.(Thsnk you, Al!) But that demeaning, bad-joke photo happened off stage, on the plane ride home. Bad fact for Al. 

It was a long time ago, he has apologized, and Tweeden has accepted his apology.(Good facts for Al.)   Does Senator Gyllebrand really need to involve herself in this matter? Tweeden was the injured party. Not Senator Gyllebrand.