Pubs deal with individual hypocritical perverts…see Foley.
Dems, hypocritical as a whole, embrace perverts … see Pelosi marching with NAMBLA and the rest in the gay pride festivities.
Do the Pubs have the balls to fight this fight? Would the evangelicals listen to this argument?
Are you saying that Pelosi marched with NAMBLA, or that she was in a gay pride event that NAMBLA was also in? Are you saying that the actions of Pelosi represent Democrats as a whole? Are you saying that gays are perverts? Do you have any cites for these claims, if in fact you are making them?
Kinda depends on how you feel about stuff. If the “pervert” in question wants to spread cocoa butter on my son’s body and get all cuddly, I wouldn’t much like that, but he’s a big boy and his abject devotion to all incarnations of the Goddess is pretty well established. Not liking it, not worrying about it.
If said “pervert” wants to plop a helmet on his head and shove a rifle in his hand and send him off to a futile and senseless war…well, thats a whole 'nother kettle of piranha, isn’t it?
Boy, I’ve never seen an OP’s username be more indicative of their posting style.
No doubt they’ll try, but I think it’ll fail. If I considered sexual purity to be my primary electoral issue (as, I think, many Christian conservatives do), and if both parties appeared to be sexual deviants, I would have a very hard time motivating myself to go to the polls.
Daniel
Cite? Looks to me more like “Pubs turn a blind eye to individual hypocritical perverts in their own ranks, in order to maintain their hold on power, until escalating media scandal finally forces them to confront the issue, at which point they desperately try to spin it into smearing the Democrats”.
Nice try, though.
Yeah, no. No way this hurts the Democrats more than the Republicans.
It was a Republican that was caught writing naughty IMs to an underaged boy. It is Republicans that are being accused of covering it up and allowing the guy to hold his position on the House Committee on Irony.
The GOP cannot help but be hurt, and anti-pedophile is agreeable enough that even the most spineless of Democrats can claim that position.
You can argue that by election day no one will care, and the effect will be minimal, but there’s no way to make it hurt the Dems instead.
**Related Wisdom from the Perfect Master:
**Why the weird religious ravings on Dr. Bronner’s soap?
Oh haven’t you heard…Foley is a Democrat now.
Let me see. Gay repub sexually harrassing pages.
A repub leadership thart knew and did nothing about it due to political expediency.
Hypocracy in the name of power. We care about our children when it is politically convenient. We can sacrifice a few kids to keep power.
Yep this is a winning strategy.
Please leave the personal jibes until the discussion has actually taken root (or take them elsewhere).
[ /Moderating ]
Haven’t you heard? No matter what happens, it’s good for Republicans!
Casualties up in Iraq? Proof that the enemy is getting desperate! Good for Republicans!
Threats of another terror attack? Proof that the world is a dangerous place! Good for Republicans!
Dick Cheney shoots a man in the face? Shows that he’s a tough guy! Good for Republicans!
Thousands left to suffer in squalor in New Orleans? Proof that you can’t depend on the government to help you! Good for Republicans!
Mark Foley gets a hankering for some teenage boy booty! Reminds the voters that the Democrats are the party of perverts! Good for Republicans!
What’s next? Dennis Hastert eats a dozen puppies on live TV? Donald Rumsfeld decides to conduct his next press conference naked? Photos are leaked to the media showing Geoerge Bush french-kissing Osama Bin-Laden?
It doesn’t matter! Because EVERYTHING that happens is GOOD FOR REPUBLICANS!
You know, I’ve seen spin, and I’ve seen spin. But I’ve never seen spin that could turn this into a problem for Democrats. I’m no fan of Pelosi, but I couldn’t give a rats ass whether she marches in the Pride parade or not. She’s from SF, for Christ’s sake and that parade is a huge cultural event. And are we even sure that NAMBLA is allowed to march in that parade anyway…?
I wonder if we could persuade NAMBLA to send contingents to pro-war rallies, gunshows, and anti-abortion protests? Because then we could smear any Republican at such an event as having appeared alongside NAMBLA. Or, if NAMBLA gets the shit kicked out of them–well, I’m just not seeing a downside.
Daniel
It just takes 'em a few years.
Talk radio hosts are trying to imply the Democrats are being hypocrites for the reason you give, but even they have to know it’s futile. The attack is too extreme for an actual politician to make (Katherine Harris doesn’t count), which means it can’t help too much. And no, the evangelicals wouldn’t listen. You’re talking about people who really believe that Republicans are the morally superior party, that God wanted Bush to be President, and they really need Republicans to be better and more moral than the opposition. The argument you’re proposing boils down to “we’re no worse than them,” and that won’t fly with this crowd. This is exactly why people are now wondering if evangelical voters will stay home on Election Day: because they’ll be disgusted that the Republicans weren’t any better on this matter, and may have been worse. Reminding them of similarities between Republicans - Republican leadership, no less - and the immoral Democrats will not excite these people.
Anyhow, the GOP can’t make the “we deal with perverts, they embrace them” argument at this stage because there is evidence they knew, at the highest levels, that something was wrong with Foley and they did nothing. Besides, there are other gay Republicans, so I’m not sure where that argument is going.
The whole point of this scandal is that the Republican leadership in Congress didn’t deal with Foley; they were clearly willing to ignore what he was doing in order to retain an extra seat in Congress. Politics over principles.
The Democrats were completely outside of this one; they weren’t involved in it and they weren’t aware of it. So hyprocrisy wasn’t even a possibility.
Obviously, the kool-aid drinkers will ignore this scandal. It’s impossible for them to ever admit their party is in error. The people who believe Bill Clinton never cheated on his wife or George Bush never told a lie will still believe these things.
And it’s not likely that “family values” conservatives will suddenly flock to the Democrat banner. The long-standing Democrat support for gay rights isn’t going to disappear.
But what might happen is that this will shake the faith many “family values” conservatives have had in Republican candidates. They will start to question whether these candidates really share their principles or are just publically claiming to share them for votes. If these voters start feeling they’re just being pandered to, they might decide not to trust any candidates and stay home on election day.
Does anyone have a cite for NAMBLA having a float in the Gay Pride Parade? I’m calling bullshit on that.
THis is going to do immense damage to the Republicans, and help the Democrats. And that’s the way it should be.
The primary way this is going to hurt the Republicans is that it’s going to de-energize the base. A lot of Christian conservatives are going to stay home in this next election. But more importantly, it’s going to be much harder for the Republicans to mobilize them to get out the vote and help the party machine.
And the smear against Pelosi by associating her with NAMBLA is idiotic. You can plausibly make the claim that she supports gay rights and has marched in gay pride parades. She wouldn’t argue that. But just because someone was waving a NAMBLA banner at such a parade does not make her a supporter of NAMBLA. If you want to play that game, then does that make a Republican a supporter of the John Birch society if he shows up at a 2nd Amendment rally and the Birchers carry a banner? Ridiculous.
Sorry, forgot what forum I was in. ::properly chastised::
and that’s meant to be a ‘p’ not a smiley… I’m slinking away to MPSIMS now.