Fireworks light up the night sky, make thunderous noises and often burn people.
Just like accusations of sexual impropriety.
And right now, the sky is lit up like the Fourth of July.
Starting with the explosive allegations of rampant sexual misconduct in Hollywood and extending to Washington and beyond, one powerful man after another has been caught up in a tawdry web of harassment and abuse charges, for all appearances of his own making.
In such an environment, one must be careful not to jump to conclusions or overreact; accusations aren’t always true, especially in politics, and can smear good people if untrue.
But in the case of Alabama’s Judge Roy Moore, a candidate for the U.S. Senate to replace now-Attorney General Jeff Sessions in a special election next month, we may have seen enough to reach a reasonable conclusion that he is unfit for office.
The number of women alleging he was inappropriate or flat-out assaulting toward them at tender ages has grown in recent days. But the clincher may be a jarring story from Alabama news site al.com headlined “Gadsden locals say Moore’s predatory behavior at mall, restaurants not a secret.”
The story quotes a number of locals with memories of Moore allegedly trolling the mall for teens and ogling young waitresses while a powerful district attorney in his 30s. One former prosecutor who worked with Moore said it was “common knowledge about Roy’s propensity for teenage girls.”
“Him liking and dating young girls was never a secret in Gadsden when we were all in high school,” said one woman. “In our neighborhoods up by Noccalula Falls we heard it all the time. Even people at the courthouse know it was a well-known secret.”
One man said a mall security guard once warned him about several characters at the mall – and one of them was Roy Moore.
The words that come to mind for the sanctimonious Moore are “creepy” and “hypocrite.”
It must be asked, how could such an open secret go on so long without becoming well-known outside Gadsden?
Well, the case of Bill Clinton wasn’t even shrouded in secrecy before his two elections as president, and was certainly universally known when he was impeached. And yet, his liberal defenders not only savaged his female victims – while flattering themselves as world-class feminists – but have ever since have held him up as a Democrat Party standardbearer and friend to women.
That’s a world-class hypocrisy all its own.
Astoundingly, the recent sexual misconduct fireworks have actually prompted – more like “forced” – some liberals to reassess Clinton’s misconduct in the glare of today’s explosive revelations.
MSNBC’s Chris Hayes now meekly acknowledges that “Democrats and the center-left are overdue for a real reckoning with the allegations against him.” New York Times columnist Michelle Goldberg now concedes that “I believe Juanita” – that “we should look clearly at the credible evidence that Juanita Broaddrick told the truth when she accused Clinton of raping her.” And the liberal Atlantic now writes of “the sex crimes of which the younger, stronger Bill Clinton was very credibly accused in the 1990s.”
Talk about revisionist history! Excuse us, but liberals never conceded either point back then – that they were even “crimes” or that Clinton’s numerous accusers were “credible.”
It’s conservatives who have kept that particular Roman candle lit, lo these many years.
Welcome to the club. Where the heck have you been?