[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
I think the Republicans might end up grateful for this story. It lets some of them beat their chests and show how “moral” they are by standing against it, while worse things are ignored or swept under the rug.
[/quote]
…except that the Republican House leadership knew of Foley’s “indiscretions” for years and apparently did everything they did to cover it up.
And the growing chorus of right-wing nutjobs who insist this is all a conspiracy by the Democrats and/or gay pages is laughably embarrasing.
[QUOTE=Lightray]
From there (emphasis mine):
*“He was consistently kind,” said Bryce Chitwood, president of the 2002 page class. “He was just a very friendly man and was always willing to befriend a page. It was something we appreciated. You find yourself very low on the totem pole of the congressional power scale. For a congressman to act like he was interested in a person and cared about us was something pretty special and pretty important.” *
Um, what? They’re 16-year olds, they shouldn’t be anywhere on the congressional power scale! They shouldn’t even rise to the level of “flunky”! What were they expecting? fabbo perks of the job?? lobbyists courting their votes on important topics???
This, with Foley trying to get into their pants by taking them out for ice cream makes me think that these pages are just stupid enough to fit in well with a career in politics.
… they still shouldn’t be sexually harassed, though.
[/QUOTE]
Yep, I think you’re right.
I am out of adjective to describe the GOP-I don’t know words bad enough, I guess.
[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
I think the Republicans might end up grateful for this story. It lets some of them beat their chests and show how “moral” they are by standing against it, while worse things are ignored or swept under the rug.
Sure, they’d like it more if Foley were a Democrat, but don’t underestimate the resonance of being able to say, “See? I’m not partisan. I’m against the nasty horrible pedophile even if he claims to be a Republican. See? There’s no political gain here.”
[/QUOTE]
Except for the inconvient fact that the House Republican leadership KNEW about Foley’s predilictions and did absolutely NOTHING about them, even going so far as to let him remain as chairman of the Committee on Missing and Exploited Children.
[QUOTE=Frostillicus]
Except for the inconvient fact that the House Republican leadership KNEW about Foley’s predilictions and did absolutely NOTHING about them, even going so far as to let him remain as chairman of the Committee on Missing and Exploited Children.
[/QUOTE]
Who better? Don’t pols have that catch phrase-know your constituency?
[QUOTE=Frostillicus]
Except for the inconvient fact that the House Republican leadership KNEW about Foley’s predilictions and did absolutely NOTHING about them, even going so far as to let him remain as chairman of the Committee on Missing and Exploited Children.
[/QUOTE]
So they throw Hastert under the bus, like they did to Lott. And then they can drag Clinton back up and say, “See? The Dems circled the wagons but we are moral, not partisan!”
[QUOTE=rjung]
…except that the Republican House leadership knew of Foley’s “indiscretions” for years and apparently did everything they did to cover it up.
[/QUOTE]
I didn’t say they wanted the story. I think they might end up benefiting from it, in the long run. People love black and white issues and have short memories. Make a big show of how you’re cleaning house, and suddenly all the Brickers are so proud of the party that they’ll forgive other, more important abuses. It’s just if the party can make it look like they are willing to throw anyone connected out.
Think of someone who ends up untarnished, think of how he or she can say, “And even when something arose in my own party” hand over heart “I knew that morality was more important than petty politics.” batting eyes
No, the Pubbies don’t want this scandal. Sex scandals have a way of going and going and going and going and going. The reason the much more egregious offenses against human values committed by the Pubbies … the support of torture, starting wars on false pretexts, gutting habeas corpus … is that the Great Unwashed don’t really CARE about them, especially if it concerns dirty foreigners in rags. But a nice, juicy sex scandal? Oh, this one will not be easy to shut down. You can’t just turn those on and off using the Republican Spin Machine like you can other kinds of scandals. All the media outlets except the bought-and-paid-for Pubbie megaphones like Faux News will ALWAYS be happy for some new drib or drab from the Foley scandal.
And that family values crowd? They don’t like it, not one bit. They’re gonna stay home in droves in 2006. Maybe 2008 too.
[QUOTE=jsgoddess]
I hope like hell you’re right. I just don’t know that this can’t be spun, especially considering the ability of fanatics to hide from facts.
Are there any poll-type things out that show if people are paying attention?
[/QUOTE]
For what little it’s worth, I caught an NPR show today examining the Foley scandal. A caller from the Midwest said basically that he (a Christian fundamentalist) would not be discouraged from going to the polls and would vote Republican because they’ve prevented any more terror attacks for five years and stay the course and yada yada yada.
So, much as I’d like to, I’m not getting my hopes up.
[QUOTE=EddyTeddyFreddy]
A caller from the Midwest said basically that he (a Christian fundamentalist) would not be discouraged from going to the polls and would vote Republican because they’ve prevented any more terror attacks for five years and stay the course and yada yada yada.
[/QUOTE]
And that family values crowd? They don’t like it, not one bit. They’re gonna stay home in droves in 2006. Maybe 2008 too.
[/QUOTE]
This drives me crazy–they’ll stay home and not vote rather than helping candidates with integrity get into office.
I hereby dub the GOP the weasel party. Forget the stupid elephant. :rolleyes:
That quote isn’t the worst of Rush’s Oct.2 broadcast. He went on to say that it was the Democrat’s fault because they “coddled” the likes of Mark Foley, and encouraged that sort of behavior. I heard it re-broadcast this morning on the Stephanie Miller Show, and it’s a truly jaw-dropping bit of blather. In a roiling sea of snapping spinsharks the past few days, this was the most putrid bit of chum I’ve seen tossed.
Alas; I’ve tried to find a link to the specific quote, but all that comes up is the aforementioned one of the OP. Anyone with better Google skills help me out here?
[QUOTE=eleanorigby]
I hereby dub the GOP the weasel party. Forget the stupid elephant. :rolleyes:
[/QUOTE]
Now, there’s no need to malign weasels in such a fashion. Mustelids are actually quite useful creatures, which among other things help to control rodent populations. Whereas the modern Republican party would immediately embrace the financial support of rodent lobbyists, while accusing Democrats of gnawing their way into silos to steal seed corn.
Therefore, a better descriptor would probably be an invasive, uncontrolled species with obviously negative long-term effects. Perhaps the “Chestnut Blight party” or the “Giant Marine Toad party.” The “Kudzu Vine party” might work; partly because, much like the current Republican leadership, at one time cultivating the plant seemed like a really good idea to certain people. Also because it has pretty much taken over Florida.