Unless there’s evidence that more politicians (of either party) knew that Foley was soliciting minors and didn’t say anything, I think the calls of “everyone’s guilty” are premature. I’m sure most/all Congresscritters knew he was gay, but that’s not a crime (at least, not yet).
Might as well be.
Was Foley dating a hot younger 30-year-old? If so, I can see the Congresscritters gossiping. “That old cradle-robbing horndog!”
Show me this of age Gay boyfriend?
No, what the congresscritters knew was he was chasing sixteen-year-old male tail and they let it go as a “Gay thing.” Better not say anything.
So is the idea that Democrats for years knew about a potentially explosive Republican sex scandal–that they knew about it, say, in the months leading up to the 2004 election–and they decided, out of respect for Republicans, not to say anything about it?
Does not compute.
Daniel
Worse (for the GOP), the “molested by a clergyman” angle is certain to remind people that the real scandal in the pedophile-priest cases was the way the higher-ups systematically covered it up… which puts the spotlight on Hastert specifically and the Republican leadership generally.
I have yet to see a single shred of evidence that a single Democrat knew what was going on. Don’t let the Republicans off the hook with this “everybody knew it” crap. The lone Democratic member of the page board has been very vocal about being kept in the dark.
As Left Hand of Dorkness points out, what possible motive would the Democrats have for keeping this secret?
I could conceivably imagine someone keeping it secret if they learned about it, say, two months ago, holding it back for an October Surprise. If I squint really hard, I could imagine them keep it secret for a year (although I strongly suspect that they would have let it rip when Tom DeLay was being indicted, in an effort to throw down all the Republican leaders at once). But there’s just no way that they knew about it prior to November 2004.
They may have had suspicions, but they didn’t have the names of three pages who either had been hit on or who knew about it. That’s what Hastert had; that’s what should have prompted further investigation.
Daniel
Democrats are stupid. You have to present them with a scandal on a steaming hot gold platter then whack them up-side the head and remind them you’ve just handed them a scandal on a steaming hot gold platter.
Why would Democrats keep this a secret? Because both Democrats & Republicans saw it as a “Gay thing?” Better not go there. It’s just a Gay congressman doing the Gay thing. It’d be tacky to try to make that a scandal.
So why the Democrats brouhaha about Ohio voting machines, Bush’s failures in Iraq, whether Condi Rice was briefed on Bin Laden, the Yemeni Ports Deal, Tom DeLay, and the roughly two bajillion other scandals of the past two years, some valid and some not? It’s just ignoring evidence to say that Democrats are slow to trumpet a scandal; frankly, for the past six years, they’ve been good for very little else.
Daniel
Thomas Reynolds’ Chief of Staff resigned today. Now he’s spilling his guts to the FBI:
Hastert is toast. The entire leadership of the House may be toast.
Alexander just flipped again, saying that Hastert knew about the emails that he and Boehner knew about.
It’s simply amazing to me that it’s Day 5 of this little hoedown and the House leadership is still fumbling their stories…
Yeah, all those scandals have really worked out for the Dems, haven’t they?
Anyway, my point is neither the Dems or the Pubs even saw this as a scandal. It’s just a Congressman doing his Congressman thing. Chasing sixteen-year-old tail. ABC news had to bring it to light so everyone finally noticed it was a potential scandal. But I maintain they all knew and looked at it as business-as-usual.
Where does this come from? Completely out of your imagination? Where is the evidence that anything remotely like this happened?
“Ah Hell, they’re all crooks” is a crappy meme. It encourages apathy and complacency. It allows scumbags to get away with betraying the public trust. And it’s intellectually lazy.
Which points out that they have a hairtrigger about scandals, if anything, not that they’re slow to pick up on them.
That’s just crazytalk–you’re really trying to tell me that the Dems didn’t realize there was scandal potential in the “No stalking kids on the Internet!” bill dude stalking kids on the Internet?
I’m sorry, but I really think you’re reaching to defend an argument that’s indefensible.
Daniel
How naive could a person possibly be (never mind hold a seat in congress) to not know - let me remind you all the pages knew and schooled each other on it- that Mark Foley has a thing for the young’ns?
You honestly can sit there and claim everyone didn’t know?
The linked story is actually about an Aide named Fordham, not Alexander. Different guy but easy mistake. Hastert is baloney on a cold roll, man.
For those who were wondering how Fox News was going to spin this, well here you go:
Pay special attention to the first few seconds.
Five days since the story broke and at least 3 days since we were told that the FBI had been asked to investigate. And just today it was anounced that the FBI had finally sent Hastert a letter requesting that Foley’s House office and its contents be secured.
For those who didn’t notice, Fox News describes Foley in the following fashion: Former Congressman Mark Foley (D-FL). As much as there was a consensus on the boards at Fark, most people seem to think that this error (intentional or no) will make no difference as anyone even casually attentive to any story will notice that he’s a Republican.