# Now, Al Franken **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [November 16, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770 "2017-11-16T15:42:53Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 22
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/421 "2017-11-17T15:03:27Z")
> [@Ramira](#): > > of course, for the americans it must have a triple signed form twenty-seven B stroke six or the consent for any kind of thing that has a touch on the dangers of anything that could have the sexual content. > > but a punch in the face, it is quite all right without the form not as damaging. > > funny american puritanism. I think **Ramira** is…not entirely wrong here. Which do you think would be the bigger scandal, a congressman body slamming someone without consent or a congressman tongue kissing someone without consent? I think it may well be the latter. And it is certainly the case that America, as in many traditional religious cultures, has historically regarded harm to chastity as being especially grave–among the most grievous of harms. That doesn’t come from an entirely feminist place, I don’t think. But to me the answer there is that we should regard other forms of harm more seriously, and not that we should regard sexual misconduct less seriously. Don’t you think, **Ramira** , that it is appropriate to punish someone who thrusts a tongue in someone else’s mouth without consent? ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/422 "2017-11-17T15:04:54Z")
> [@What\_Exit](#): > > Minor note but I’m pretty sure Rush Holt is retired now (from politics at least). Another minor note he was a total dick when I met him. I don’t care that he’s really good at math. > [@DrDeth](#): > > I have seen french kissing on screen. She consented to a kiss. She put no limits on the scene until after. Reasonable limits, certainly, but this was indeed\* “acting” on stage. \* > > The picture is a diferent story, it is in extremely poor taste,\* at best. > \* It was neither acting nor on stage. A dirty old man writes a sketch where he conveniently gets to kiss the beautiful young woman. Then he insists on a private rehearsal. He then insists the actual kiss needs to be rehearsed in private (it doesn’t). He then grabs her by the back of the head and sticks his tongue down her throat. Try to find a professional actor that believes that’s is just acting. Between themselves they map that out ahead of time. With an amateur for a silly one off skit you definitely have to go through the particulars ahead of time. It in no way is just acting on stage. It was Franken using his position in the tour to get a cheap thrill. I find that to be 100 times worse than the picture. ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/423 "2017-11-17T15:05:20Z")
> [@Ramira](#): > > the continuation of the puritianism of the americans is very strange. Rather like very naive and sheltered children, or persons who want to pretend they are. I’m gratified to see the floodgates finally opening and all the Hollywood stories coming out. I do suspect that the power of Bill Clinton being finally broken led to this cascade of airing of dirty laundry; a thousand long-bitten tongues can finally freely wag without harming the dear leader of the party. But it is somehow both funny and horrifying that people think this will mean that men will stop behaving foolishly, recklessly, and cruelly; and society will turn into some sort of idealized world of perfect consent and propriety. No. I hope, rather, that we learn to talk openly about things enough to deter some of the really stupid stuff that went on while it was only whispered about. That’s the best thing that can happen, I think. But at the very least, you’ll learn that people are not perfect, and even your heroes do stupid things, and sexuality is not exempt from that. If everyone were completely sexually proper, well, some of us wouldn’t even exist! 😉 ---
**Author:** ![Loach](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/loach/32/350_2.png) [@Loach](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Loach)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/424 "2017-11-17T15:09:27Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I think **Ramira** is…not entirely wrong here. Which do you think would be the bigger scandal, a congressman body slamming someone without consent or a congressman tongue kissing someone without consent? I think it may well be the latter. > > And it is certainly the case that America, as in many traditional religious cultures, has historically regarded harm to chastity as being especially grave–among the most grievous of harms. That doesn’t come from an entirely feminist place, I don’t think. > > But to me the answer there is that we should regard other forms of harm more seriously, and not that we should regard sexual misconduct less seriously. Don’t you think, **Ramira** , that it is appropriate to punish someone who thrusts a tongue in someone else’s mouth without consent? I find her to be totally wrong so there’s that. In our actual puritanical semi-recent past we treated sexual assaults the way they are still treated in much of the world, like they didn’t happen. Now it is recognized how damaging long term sexual assaults are to the victim. Much more than a punch to the face. When you deal with victims daily you see this. Dismissing it as Puritanism is ridiculous. ---
**Author:** ![filmore](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/7993a0/32.png) [@filmore](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/filmore)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/425 "2017-11-17T15:12:01Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > So a little bit of sexual assault is tolerable? A little bit of violation of consent? > > It’s not the end of the world, and it’s not rape. But that doesn’t mean we have to tolerate it among our highest office-holders. Senator isn’t office manager – it’s one of the highest positions in the country. Our standards should be really, really high… and it seems to me that putting the amount of sexual assault and violation of consent that we allow as “zero”, and not “a tiny bit 11 years ago”, isn’t setting the bar particularly high. While in principle I agree with you, the reality is that people are flawed and everyone has things in their past which demonstrate moral failings. No one is perfect. If someone needs a spotless past to be elected, our pool of candidates is going to be very small. It’s hard enough to find people who will work for the greater good as it is today. If we eliminate everyone who has so much as jaywalked in their past, who are we left with? ---
**Author:** ![foolsguinea](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/foolsguinea/32/14751_2.png) [@foolsguinea](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/foolsguinea)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/426 "2017-11-17T15:13:26Z")
> [@Starving\_Artist](#): > > It’s very simple, really. We live in a country where there are about a thousand different revolutions going on, all of which are an outgrowth of the counter-culture revolution that took place in this country in the late sixties. And as any good Marxist/Leninist knows, the key to revolution and getting people to join your side is to make them angry about the status quo. And to make them angry about the status quo it’s necessary to create victims and villains. As it pertains to issues concerning women’s rights and feminism, women are always victims and men, villains. This was the case with the wholly inaccurate way men were portrayed in the 50s and 60s as out enjoying their cushy jobs, drinking martinis and palling around all day while oppressing their wives and treating them like slaves, when the reality is that men were saddled with the responsibility of supporting a family financially and were therefore burdened with jobs they mostly didn’t like and would have loved to be free of, and stood to lose it all, house, car, kids, etc., in the event of divorce, as well as having to support their ex-wives in perpetuity with alimony, even in the event she was having affairs and was herself responsible for the breakup of the marriage. The truth in this matter and in most, is that each side has things that are unfair and to complain about, and other things that are in their favor and they benefit from. > > But I digress. We have an endless number of groups right now villainizing everyone who isn’t fully on board with whatever social justice issue they’re on about, and as a result we’ve become a country full of disparate groups of victims and villains, overlapping and partially integrating with each other, with everyone hating and resenting each other even if they’re in agreement on many other things. > > It’s ridiculous, but that’s what you get from 50 years of unfettered and unthinking do-gooderism, with one group after another seeking out a perch from which to look down upon and villainize everyone else. I’m pretty seriously feminist, and I don’t agree with Starving Artist about all the culture war stuff he posts about. But I agree with this post. This description is pretty much dead-on. ---
**Author:** ![CandidGamera](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/candidgamera/32/2878_2.png) [@CandidGamera](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/CandidGamera)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/427 "2017-11-17T15:14:18Z")
Franken is undeniably guilty of sexual harassment, and if this one set of accusations is the extent of it, then his apology, her acceptance, and an ethics investigation seem like a proportionate response. If there are other accusers to come forward, then it goes from a comedian doing something dumb on impulse (due to our pervasive culture that devalues women’s consent) to a serial predator, and resignation is called for. I say harassment because the photo qualifies as that, since there does not appear to be physical contact. I believe Tweeden, despite the rumblings in some quarters that the photographer or Franken’s military escort might, maybe, possibly come forward with a different account of events. If and when they DO come forward, maybe that will change things. I think that, should the Senate investigation turn up nothing more, and if he is allowed to remain in the Senate, he should retire in 2020 and let someone else run for his seat. If he truly believes in progressive causes, he can find other ways to help them. Lastly, I think Franken, the Democrats, and public figures in general should use this to start making people aware of the consent problem our culture has and start changing that. ---
**Author:** ![ThisIsTheEnd](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/thisistheend/32/4713_2.png) [@ThisIsTheEnd](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ThisIsTheEnd)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/428 "2017-11-17T15:16:11Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > [Democrats Missed A Chance To Draw A Line In The Sand On Sexual Misconduct | FiveThirtyEight](https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/democrats-missed-a-chance-to-draw-a-line-in-the-sand-on-sexual-misconduct/) > > I think the Democrats are in danger of missing a giant opportunity. I think there’s zero chance Franken can be an effective progressive legislator or advocate going forward, even if his apology was good and accepted. From now on he’s the groping Senator. How does that help the Democrats or their agenda? What, we’re afraid that other gropers or harassers might be afraid to run for office? Or others might be afraid to apologize if they get caught? > > Fuck em. The concern shouldn’t be about gropers, assaulters, or harassers. The concern should be about other victims and society in general. That not only do we believe credible accusations, but that we will follow up that belief with immediate action. Better the very rare false accusation slips through (in which the accused can come back and be redeemed) than we give the Republicans both another distraction and months of cooperation on an investigation that will be eminently useful to them. > > There should be a party with zero tolerance for groping and assault and harassment. It’s obviously not the Republicans, and their continued embrace of the groper in chief. That the Democrats are just not as bad isn’t good enough. We must be better, far better. Why waste time waiting for accusers? Let’s give 'em lie detector tests right now. And if that doesn’t work, waterboard 'em. Or if you want to be a wimp about it, make 'em sign affidavits. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/429 "2017-11-17T15:18:28Z")
> [@filmore](#): > > While in principle I agree with you, the reality is that people are flawed and everyone has things in their past which demonstrate moral failings. No one is perfect. If someone needs a spotless past to be elected, our pool of candidates is going to be very small. It’s hard enough to find people who will work for the greater good as it is today. If we eliminate everyone who has so much as jaywalked in their past, who are we left with? We’ll lose lots of old dudes. We won’t lose very many women at all. IMO, that might be painful, but it’s still necessary. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/430 "2017-11-17T15:23:44Z")
> [@Loach](#): > > In our actual puritanical semi-recent past we treated sexual assaults the way they are still treated in much of the world, like they didn’t happen. I guess what I’m saying is that ISTM a non-puritanical view of sexual misconduct is one that disentangles perceived harm caused by damage to chastity from other harms. A big reason that victims of sexual misconduct still feel shame and part of why it is so hard for victims to come forward are puritanical ideas about chastity and promiscuity. I think part of society’s reaction to sexual misconduct continues to be those puritanical ideas, and that’s bad. If you want evidence for that thesis, read any sufficiently long twitter thread about Franken. There you will find people minimizing his conduct by pointing to the fact that the victim posed in Playboy. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/431 "2017-11-17T15:26:01Z")
> [@Richard\_Parker](#): > > I guess what I’m saying is that ISTM a non-puritanical view of sexual misconduct is one that disentangles perceived harm caused by damage to chastity from other harms. A big reason that victims of sexual misconduct still feel shame and part of why it is so hard for victims to come forward are puritanical ideas about chastity and promiscuity. > > I think part of society’s reaction to sexual misconduct continues to be those puritanical ideas, and that’s bad. If you want evidence for that thesis, read any sufficiently long twitter thread about Franken. There you will find people minimizing his conduct by pointing to the fact that the victim posed in Playboy. I think that shows how intimately that puritanism is linked with the pro-abuser, anti-accuser/victim culture. That only sluts and whores are raped or assaulted – that victims were really asking for it. That women are ultimately the source of any sexual misconduct, and men are blameless victims of the wiles of women. ---
**Author:** ![HurricaneDitka](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/96bed5/32.png) [@HurricaneDitka](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/HurricaneDitka)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/432 "2017-11-17T15:29:57Z")
> [@Spice\_Weasel](#): > > Do you think we should be? On what grounds? > > I can’t help but take this personally given my participation here. It really sounds like you’re suggesting my opinion is politically motivated. Do you believe that? It certainly wasn’t intended to be personal, but there’s been enough flip-flopping and neck-breaking position reversals on this board in the last 72 hours to keep me laughing about it for months. And I have no doubt that most of it was driven by political considerations. As for what I think you (general you, not **Spice** in particular. Honestly I don’t know if there’s been much hypocrisy in your position(s) on the matter and I don’t have time to investigate. Given the good faith with which you generally post, I’m inclined to believe a simple assertion by you that there has not been.) should do, it doesn’t really matter, but I think some consistency would be a nice change. Either sexual assault is really bad, and we need to shun the people that do it, like **iiandyiiii** would have you do (in which case I have no problem with righteous indignation about Moore or Trump), or it’s not really that big of a deal, and Franken should stay on (in which case the bombast on Moore / Trump rings a good bit more hollow). If I were king for a day and could have my way, my position would probably fall closer to a respect for due process than most of the #BelieveWomen crowd would prefer. > [@iiandyiiii](#): > > By the way, I find your obvious gleeful posts in all this pretty disgusting considering that you supported and continue to support someone who bragged about groping, in addition to having multiple credible accusations against him. Today I’m feeling pretty comfortably in the political mainstream. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/433 "2017-11-17T15:32:50Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > I think that shows how intimately that puritanism is linked with the pro-abuser, anti-accuser/victim culture. That only sluts and whores are raped or assaulted – that victims were really asking for it. That women are ultimately the source of any sexual misconduct, and men are blameless victims of the wiles of women. Yes, I agree. I just think that lingering Puritanism also has the effect of inflating or at least _mischaracterizing_ the nature of harm from certain kinds of sexual misconduct. The point of the Playboy anecdote is that those people think she wasn’t really harmed because she didn’t have any chastity or modesty to be taken away. I’m not sure Ramira is wrong in perceiving that some of the outrage comes from that bad place, even if I think the overall level of outrage is correct (or even too low). ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/434 "2017-11-17T15:35:31Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > Today I’m feeling pretty comfortably in the political mainstream. Yes, and it’s sad that so many are willing to tolerate sexual assault and other violations of consent. Very sad. Even sadder that so many recognize that they’re tolerating this and are okay with it. ---
**Author:** ![Fotheringay-Phipps](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/d9b06d/32.png) [@Fotheringay-Phipps](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fotheringay-Phipps)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/435 "2017-11-17T15:40:09Z")
I’m OK with “tolerating” it for certain definitions of “tolerate”. It sounds like you’re trying to conflate “tolerate” with “think it’s OK”, but that’s not valid. The world is an imperfect place and you need to make trade-offs, and that includes “tolerating” a lot of unpleasantness. ---
**Author:** ![Corry\_El](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/ecae2f/32.png) [@Corry\_El](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Corry_El)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/436 "2017-11-17T15:42:15Z")
Not to discard morality, it’s important. But political practicality tends to outweigh it. The Democrats rallied behind Bill Clinton and dismissed what were many people’s opinion credible allegations of non-consensual sexual misbehavior, up to forcible rape, mainly because he was president and the stakes were a failed Democratic presidency: high stakes. It’s a little harder to fit that model to why he’s remained a ‘revered elder statesman’ in the party since then, but I guess partly inertia and partly in fact, no conspiracy theories needed, the Clintons had a remarkable death grip on the Democratic Party and its elites, though now breaking down. So now more prominent voices on the left are asking ‘why _do_ we defend Bill Clinton?’ No two of these cases are exactly the same so no exact plus/minus comparison of the underlying cases is implied, but the Republicans rallied behind Trump (GOP voters did, GOP ‘elites’ less so actually) after Access H and follow up accusations because they viewed the stakes of losing a presidency as too high. With Moore (where again the GOP head of the body Moore would join says ‘quit’, though not Trump and not necessarily AL voters) the stakes are losing one seat of a 2 seat Senate majority. But many in the elected GOP see greater risk of losing the seat _with_ Moore than without, and if he wins Moore becoming the ‘running mate’ of every GOP candidate in 2018 (though now what happens with Franken will affect that risk I think). But if Al Franken quits, what do the Democrats really lose, practically? I mean beside sentimental stuff like ‘he’s been such a fighter for progressive causes’ (but who built his prominence originally as an ‘edgy’ knucklehead, so it’s not the biggest surprise that would come back to bite him eventually). The MN governor would name a Democratic interim replacement. MN is still basically a Democratic state but not necessarily as safely so as it used to be, so there’s probably some risk of losing the seat with Franken, and still plenty of time to avoid it. And if Franken is let off the hook, the hypocrisy card plays, even if one satisfies oneself it’s not really hypocrisy because Franken wasn’t as bad as some case on the right, he (sort of) admitted it, apologized, it was accepted, etc. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/437 "2017-11-17T15:43:07Z")
> [@iiandyiiii](#): > > So a little bit of sexual assault is tolerable? A little bit of violation of consent? A minor offense is forgivable, provided the offender is sincere in his contrition. I’d like to see Franken do something positive, and if the Senate wants to censure him or something, fine. I don’t think he should have to resign. ---
**Author:** ![iiandyiiii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/iiandyiiii/32/7924_2.png) [@iiandyiiii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/iiandyiiii)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:45pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/438 "2017-11-17T15:45:12Z")
> [@Fotheringay-Phipps](#): > > I’m OK with “tolerating” it for certain definitions of “tolerate”. It sounds like you’re trying to conflate “tolerate” with “think it’s OK”, but that’s not valid. The world is an imperfect place and you need to make trade-offs, and that includes “tolerating” a lot of unpleasantness. Sure, but why do we need to tolerate it, even a little bit, at our highest levels? Why is a little bit of violation of consent, or a little bit of harassment, or a little bit of sexual assault, not enough to be removed from a very high position? Shouldn’t our standards be very high for such high office? As widespread as racism and bigotry still are, we don’t really tolerate a little bit of overtly racist insults at such high levels – if a Senator calls a cab driver nigger on tape, or is videotaped hanging a noose on a colleague’s office door, or marches wearing a swastika armband, then I’m pretty sure they’d be forced to resign. Is that standard too high? If not, why isn’t a standard of no-sexual-assault, not even a little bit, and no-violations-of-consent, too high? ---
**Author:** ![Hector\_St\_Clare](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/b5ac83/32.png) [@Hector\_St\_Clare](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hector_St_Clare)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/439 "2017-11-17T15:46:34Z")
> [@Ramira](#): > > of course, for the americans it must have a triple signed form twenty-seven B stroke six or the consent for any kind of thing that has a touch on the dangers of anything that could have the sexual content. > > but a punch in the face, it is quite all right without the form not as damaging. > > funny american puritanism. I think you’re quite right that, on sesual issues (as well as on other personal morality issues) America does have a weird mix of libertarianism and puritanism. That said, I don’t think this is a great example. I’m very far from being a feminist or even a social liberal, but “don’t deep kiss someone without their explicit permission” seems to be very clear cut to me, and “don’t kiss, proposition, etc. people in the workplace” seems pretty clear cut as well. ---
**Author:** ![JRDelirious](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jrdelirious/32/9531_2.png) [@JRDelirious](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JRDelirious)\ **Post date:** [November 17, 2017, 3:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770/440 "2017-11-17T15:47:43Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > What the hell, man? I’m starting to worry that when this is all over, the Capitol will be empty except for one guy with a floor polisher That’s gonna be my big break! 😛 [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770.md?page=21) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/now-al-franken/801770.md?page=23)