Republican Leadership: “We’re sinking! Quick! Throw something big overboard!!”
[QUOTE=twhitt]
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.
[/QUOTE]
This also happened on O’Reily’s show several times in different segments. That show is prerecorded but the error was still allowed to go on the air.
[QUOTE=you with the face]
I fail to see how Foley’s latest confession about being molested–whether it’s true or not–is supposed to make us feel better about this whole situation.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t reckon it is. But if it’s true, and if this man’s whole life is imploding around him – which is certainly true – then it’s understandable if he comes out with it now.
[QUOTE=you with the face]
As if his actions haven’t been stupid enough already, he had to go and add more flammable material to the bonfire. I’m starting to think the guy really is a Democrat, because I can’t believe a Republican would engage in this much self-sabotage.
[/QUOTE]
What’s he got to lose? If it’s true that he’s alcoholic and was molested as a kid, then why not seek treatment for the one, and admit the other, now?
I seriously doubt that partisan politics is on his mind at the moment.
[QUOTE=you with the face]
Up until now, the Republican spin factory was doing an okay job at protraying this as a “horny politician only making inappropriate remarks to sexually mature young adults; Clinton did it too!” kind of scandal, but Foley’s confession seriously undermines that message.
[/QUOTE]
Which means it’s unlikely that he’s involved in any kind of orchestrated spin, and more likely that he’s doing and saying these things independently.
[QUOTE=you with the face]
Seemingly apropos of nothing, he tells the world that he was molested as a kid, which leads inquiring minds to wonder: what relevance is this supposed to have? Has he molested kids, too?
[/QUOTE]
Apropos of nothing?! Don’t be thick!
This man is experiencing severe public humliation, and the loss of his entire career. He may be saying he was molested because it’s true. He may be saying he was molested in order to gain sympathy. Or both.
But to try to claim that his statements are “apropos of nothing” is ridiculous. And to jump from there to “Has he molested kids, too?” is nonsensical.
[QUOTE=you with the face]
We haven’t found any evidence of that, but he certainly isn’t helping to relieve us of that idea.
[/QUOTE]
So that’s why you bring it up? 
What do you imagine is going through this man’s mind right now?
[QUOTE=you with the face]
If there was nothing inherently sinister about his attraction to teens, then why is he talking about how he was abused as a kid by a pedophilic priest?
[/QUOTE]
I don’t believe he’s saying that his contact with teens was innocent anymore. Maybe I’m wrong about that. Correct me if I am. (Seriously, b/c I may have missed some news.)
[QUOTE=you with the face]
He is attempting to explain his behavior by citing alcoholism and a history of sexual abuse, two things that portray the man as a sicko and not as a harmless, boys-will-be-boys type of horndog that I would think the Republicans would prefer him to be, if they want to keep comparing him to Clinton.
[/QUOTE]
Now you’re conflating Foley and the party leadership.
[QUOTE=you with the face]
I wouldn’t be surprised if evidence does turns up that he did have sex with teens, and I wouldn’t be surprised if some of these teens were really really young teens. You don’t make these type of confessions if there’s smoke but no fire. I think he is sick (hence all the stupidity) and when you’re sick you’re liable to do anything.
[/QUOTE]
Do you think it’s “sick” to be attracted to 16 yos? I don’t. I think acting on it in 21st century America is stupid, especially if you’re in Foley’s position. But “sick”? Get real.
I’d agree that it’s not sick to find 16-year-olds attractive (although somehow that reaction seems significantly more, well, oogy in a 52-year-old than it would in a 22-year-old).
But we’re not talking just about finding them attractive. We’re talking about constantly and indiscriminately pursuing 16-year-olds (in a work situation, no less) with unsolicited personal, romantic and sexual attentions to the point that they routinely get warned about you by other employees. That kind of behavior, if not actually sick, is at least inappropriate, undesirable, and strongly suggestive of needing some help.
Over on Talking Points they’re saying there’s a list of gay Pubbie staffers thats been compiled. The idea is that the Pubbies will blame a cabal of gay staffers who secretly colluded to protect Foley (because he was gay, you see) and conceal Foley’s nastiness from their innocent, trustworthy bosses who would have turned Foley in within a second, you bet.
It just keeps getting nastier and more disgusting. Who’s drawing up the list of gay Pubbie staffers? Those who’d know: gay Pubbie politicos. Citizen Coen, you’ve got company …
No one has acted on it yet, but given the level of desperation the Pubbies have evinced, it’s hard to see them not going for this one …
[QUOTE=Pochacco]
Hastert is toast.
[/QUOTE]
Maybe. The local ABC affilate here in Chicago just ran a story on the late news that Hastert has not left his house in Plano all day. The reporter did note that “he peered from behind some curtains as if to assess the situation outside.” (I will admit that is not an exact quote but I would say it is close.)
They also mentioned a fundraising appearance in Kentucky for a local congresman has been cancelled. Definitely not a good sign.
Nitpick: Cohn.
[QUOTE=Kolak of Twilo]
Hastert has not left his house in Plano all day.
[/QUOTE]
He’s said to be giving a press conference thursday morn.
[QUOTE=Pochacco]
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.
[/QUOTE]
You really think allowing scumbags to get away with betraying the public trust was my agenda? I just want to extend the envelope to include some scumbags who might otherwise slip away. Everyone in Congress knew about Foley. Let 'em all sizzle on the grill a bit. Why just the Republicans? That’s intellectually lazy.
I’m pissed that Foley is using “I’m gay” like it’s a drug problem and we should feel sorry for him. Ah, poor guy. Just needs some Zoloft. Fix it right up.
Bullshit. He’s a perv. Don’t pull out the Gay-card.
Oh, my…Hastert no-showed John Williams’ WGN radio show tonight. His office claims they never booked, but the show’s producer said that not only were they scheduled, but Hastert’s staff was making excuses, saying Hastert was on an important phone call and may not be able to make the broadcast window. At the time that Hastert was supposedly on this important phone call, a WGN television cameraman was filming Hastert arriving and entering his home in Plano.
[QUOTE=Kolak of Twilo]
Maybe.
[/QUOTE]
I agree with Pochacco. Unless Hastert’s people can completely and immediately debunk what Kirk Fordham said today about telling them three years ago, and I don’t know how they’d do it, Hastert is sunk as Speaker.
Interesting bit of time line information.
Friday: Foley resigns.
Saturday: Hastert says he never saw any reason to take action.
Wednesday: Hastert says he asked Foley to resign.
So, did Hastert ask Foley to resign for no reason whatsoever, or did he lie when he said he had no information, or did he lie when he said he asked for Foley’s resignation?
The fact that lies were told is pretty much established by the order of events. Deciding who to lie to, how to deny it are pretty much secondary to blaming someone else for everything, and protecting personal power, and party power.
I only wish I found some small part of this in some way a tiny bit out of the ordinary.
If you hold elective office, you should resign. All of you. Send in the second team.
Tris
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
Everyone in Congress knew about Foley.
[/QUOTE]
You keep saying this but you have absolutely no evidence that it’s true. And Left Hand and I have been pointing out why it doesn’t make any sense.
Jesus, don’t you think if the Republicans could drag the Democrats into this right now they’d be doing so? They’d love to spread the guilt around. Then it’s an institutional problem, not a Republican problem. And if everyone is to blame then no one is.
The fact that the Republicans aren’t pushing this as a bipartisan scandal is another really good indication that the Democrats really didn’t know what crap Foley was up to.
[QUOTE=Pochacco]
You keep saying this but you have absolutely no evidence that it’s true. And Left Hand and I have been pointing out why it doesn’t make any sense.
[/QUOTE]
You and Left Hand are hung up on the idea that the Dems wouldn’t snatch this up. “Yeah, a scandal!”
I don’t think they ever recognized it as a scandal.
Just because the Dems didn’t snatch it up doesn’t mean it isn’t a juicy scandal.
Nor does it mean they didn’t know about it.
You seem to think, if Dems knew about this hypocritical pervert heading up a “protecting children from predation” program they’d be all over it.
You overestimate Democrats.
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
You and Left Hand are hung up on the idea that the Dems wouldn’t snatch this up.
[/QUOTE]
No, I’m hung up on the FACT that absolutely NO news reports have said that ANY Democrats whatsoever are involved.
You say the Democrats are just as much to blame as the Republicans? Prove it.
[QUOTE=Pochacco]
No, I’m hung up on the FACT that absolutely NO news reports have said that ANY Democrats whatsoever are involved.
You say the Democrats are just as much to blame as the Republicans? Prove it.
[/QUOTE]
How can I prove Democrats know just as much about what goes on in Congress as Repulicans?
I wish I had that kind of knowledge, but I don’t. I have no doubt both Democrats & Republicans had equal knowledge their pages were “creeped out” by Mark Folely but did nothing. Absolutely nothing.
You really think Republicans knew all about it and Dems didn’t? Don’t give me this “prove it” stuff. Is that what you really think?
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
I wish I had that kind of knowledge, but I don’t.
[/QUOTE]
Then perhaps you shouldn’t be making accusations based on nothing more than your own imagination.
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
I have no doubt both Democrats & Republicans had equal knowledge their pages were “creeped out” by Mark Folely but did nothing.
[/QUOTE]
How do you know this? It contradicts everything that has been reported in the media so far.
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
You really think Republicans knew all about it and Dems didn’t?
[/QUOTE]
Barring evidence to the contrary … yes. I have not read a single news report that indicates that Foley’s PUBLIC interactions with the pages were suspicious. And ALL of the people who saw the disturbing PRIVATE communications were Republicans. Even the snitch who leaked the emails to the press was a Republican.
[QUOTE=levdrakon]
You really think Republicans knew all about it and Dems didn’t? Don’t give me this “prove it” stuff. Is that what you really think?
[/QUOTE]
Great Debates is the ‘prove it’ place. You have made the claim the Democrats knew. Others have put their case that if they did the Gathering Of Perverts would be smearing shit around and observe that that dog is not barking in the night. It is now up to you to provide evidence for your claim or retract. That is how things work around here.
There is a forum provided for the Head up your ass handwaving approach to arguing. The Pit.
[QUOTE=Pochacco]
No, I’m hung up on the FACT that absolutely NO news reports have said that ANY Democrats whatsoever are involved.
[/QUOTE]
Well, technically… 
Which is truly amazing – sort of like if the Washington Post had referred to Clinton as a Republican at the height of Monicagate.
I’m reminded of those stories about casinos in Monte Carlo planting cash on corpses, so that nobody there ever died broke. There are no guilty Republicans, because they automatically become Democrats.