Well, there’s a chance that ANYTHING that puts Republicans in the news could “backfire;” I just saw a letter on the National Review’s blog that said that the writer was “energized” to vote Republican this fall because of the “mean spiritedness” of the Democrats. Which sort of puts some truth in the “no such thing as bad publicity” canard.
So anyway, for a certain segment of the population, any event can have any effect. Whether it’s widespread or not is the question, of course.
Somebody reading the National Review was already a near-certain GOP voter anyway. The people who matter here are the ones who will actually vote *differently * than they otherwise would.
Did ya think Stone and Parker could make up something like that? 
A 1995 undercover FBI investigation of NAMBLA discovered 1,100 members on the rolls. However:
I think “X might backfire on the Democrats” is merely a right-wing codephrase for “X has the Republicans scares sh*tless.”
Yup, they often speak in riddles, or metaphor:
And this is bad because…?
The point of the exercise here, which quite a few Congressional Republicans appear to be missing, is that the right thing to do IS to toss the people who knew and didn’t do anything about it. This is the great big flashing neon POINT of this entire shitstorm. And they still don’t get it.
That list might be too long for one or two scapegoats to adequately cover.
And the problem with this would be…? 
Why are you willing to let the terrorists win?
My favorite gay “celebrity” thinks I may be right .
Ugh. I’m sorry…every time I start to read a Paglia column/article/interview I strain a muscle in my eye from the rolling.
I can’t really remember at any point in the first two weeks of the Foley scandal the Democratic Party establishment saying anything about Foley. I was under the impression that it was entirely media-driven. The only way that her point about the Democrats “colluding” with the media on this makes any sense is if she somehow thinks the MSM is in the Dems’ back pockets.
HAH! I say. Where’s she been the last six years?
Your favorite gay “celebrity” is, to put it charitably, not widely noted for accurate predictions about the direction of American culture.
You started this thread three weeks ago, and the election is in 10 days. So far there’s been ZERO backfiring. I’m thinking you were wrong, and so is Paglia.
All Paglia has to offer is another comment that Democrats and the media “colluded” to make this a story, that it hasn’t helped them because the Republicans were already unpopular and that it may energize the Republican base. I’ve seen no evidence that either proposition is true.
Besides, I think she’s actually bi.
ZERO? How do you know that??
Looks like many races are tightening up to me and how do you know that there aren’t a good number of voters out there who realize that if they are disgusted by Foley (as well as a VA senate candidate who got a little steamy himself ) that they are definately better off voting for a Pub than staying home.
And like it or not, some of those same voters don’t care much for the NJ decision either re gay marriage/unions… just another example of what they have to lose if they don’t get out and vote.
Take a straw poll.
Bi or gay, she’d make a great Doper.
How do you know she isn’t?
As I said, I’ve seen zero evidence that there is some kind of anti-anti-Foley backlash, as opposed to the evidence that people were angry over the way Foley’s predilections were dealt with.
How do I know those people even EXIST? Paglia may have a point about the way Democrats are portraying gay men, but there’s no evidence so far to support your backlash theory. Even if the races are tightening up, that only makes sense as Foley fades from the headlines. It doesn’t indicate that everybody who was disgusted by the Republicans two weeks ago, has now suddenly deciding it was actually the Democrats’ fault. That just defies any kind of reasoning.
I don’t, really. But if her posting style were anything like her writing style, she be … noticeable.