Go to An Unfortunate Outburst of Intense Patriotism
- Add a comment
- Go to Is criticism of Mark Foley gay-bashing?
Welcome, Saul!
Haven't heard much from you for a while! In response to your musings:
- What did Hastert know about? So far, that Foley had sent personal e-mails to pages. Nothing about content, and nothing about the later and much more explicit text messages (which the news media cannot or will not distinguish from e-mails). If he should resign over that, then Nancy Pelosi should resign because she knew about such scandals as Cold Cash Jefferson and did nothing about them.
- Is Studds obfuscatory or not? It has much to bear on this. The Democrats are calling for all Republican leaders to resign because of one Republican's actions. Yet this same party of moral relativity, anything goes and total tolerance applauded Studds when he should have been run out of the Capitol and arrested for doing something far worse than Foley ever did - druggng and sodomizing a minor. Talk about hypocrisy!
- And Studds was not a pedophile who should not have been prosecuted?
- Your last sentence is aboslutely right. The investigation needs to go wherever it needs to go, including to CREW and the Democrats.
posted by
WriterofLight
on October 6, 2006 at 7:28 PM
| link to this | reply
Addressing Blogfloggers addresses:
- The intent of Democrats to out all gay Republicans in Congress and portray them as Foleyesque pedophiles most certainly is gay-bashing. That is precisely what they have in mind to do in order to discourage the holy-holy Republicans from voting for them. And if the age of the page is the issue, what of the fact that he was of age? (Which, by the way, brings us back to Studds drugging and sodomizing a minor.)
- Agreed re Hastert, but Foley already did resign.
- And those who had this information and withheld it until now so as to do the most poltiical damage are absolutely complicit in this. You want a coverup, there it is. CREW had the evidence as early as April and sat on it.
- You miss my point, which is that the Democrats who are now demanding investigations opposed the FBI search of Cold Cash Jefferson's congressional office.
- It also touches on relationships with subordinates. That's the common thread between Foley and Bubba. And again, how can the Democrats have any integrity on this when they applauded Studds for doing far worse with a minor?
- Thanks for the clarification re Florida law, I forgot to mention that. But that does not answer the question I raise. If, as you say (ahem - write) that the Democrats are still campaigning against Foley, who is no longer in the election, then you have made my point for me. Which is: This whole thing is about a Democrat power grab, regardless of proper election procedure. Maybe this is a blind spot in Florida election law, but if a candidate is forced to drop out of an election and a replacement can be named, then should not the candidate's party have every right to inform the voters of the change, and shoudl not the opposing party be concentrating on the new candidate rather than the one no longer running?
posted by
WriterofLight
on October 6, 2006 at 7:19 PM
| link to this | reply
saul relative - Innocent until proved guilty. While it APPEARS....
... that Hasterd, Boehner, Reynolds, et al may have been guilty of neglect or worse, until an investigation takes place (and I mean a REALY one, not just a white wash) we don’t have the facts, we have opinions, conjecture, and rumor. Shame on you Saul. I have learned to expect more from you.
posted by
blogflogger
on October 5, 2006 at 9:21 PM
| link to this | reply
I'm with blogflogger on this, WriterOfLight, except on the point of Hastert
resigning. He should resign because he knew about it and didn't follow up on it. Reynolds is just as guilty of neglect, if not moreso, because he knew of the allegations against Foley last year. Boehner also admitted knowing of the situation, but left it to Hastert. This passing of the buck by these 'family values' bastards is as hypocritical. And bringing a 23-year-old case into the discussion is pure obfuscatory bullshit. Bringing Clinton in is as well. The point remains: Foley is a pedophile that needs to be prosecuted. Period. I don't give a damn what party he belongs to. And those grandstanding, Congressional-seat hoarding enablers should be prosecuted right along with him. Let's not confuse this issue, let's investigate and prosecute accordingly, political parties be damned.
posted by
saul_relative
on October 5, 2006 at 2:01 PM
| link to this | reply
Addressubg the points of your post...
- Looking into Foley’s behavior is not gay bashing. His sexual preference is not the issue, the age of the pages is the issue.
- No, Hastert should not resign now. No one should. A thorough investigation should be launched and possible prosecutions and requests for resignation would follow.
- Any adult behavior which causes children to feel uncomfortable should be investigated. This is what we teach children: report inappropriate behavior to a responsible adult. The FBI’s own web site indicates the need to take action if adults appear to be attempting to lure children into sexual acts. The page’s sponsoring Representative felt Foley’s behavior necessitated action. They all failed the pages.
- Crimes against children provide for the gathering of evidence. When it comes to our children who rely on adults for a level of protection, a full investigation is warranted.
- This is not a investigation of a politicians sex life: this is an investigation into the relationship between and adult and a child. (Since Clinton must ALWAYS come up in ANY discussion, Lewinsky was 22 years old, which means she was a consenting adult.)
- The law requires Foley’s name be left on the Florida ballot. Republicans are bringing the message to voters to vote for Foley which will allow a Republican to continue to hold the office. Democrats had been campaigning against Foley and continue to do so. This is the election process. I’m a news junky but have not seen any references to Democrats taking a stand against this, further, they don’t have it within their power to “screw the electoral process”. Your point is unclear.
posted by
blogflogger
on October 5, 2006 at 8:33 AM
| link to this | reply
Great post!!
Your words should be required reading for all!
posted by
sarooster
on October 5, 2006 at 5:24 AM
| link to this | reply