And now we learn Foley had sex with one of his pages (when the page had reached the age of 21, it is important to note).
Yes, it was consensual (and they were both legal adults), but at this point it doesn't matter. The hypocrisy the Republican party has shown towards homosexuals will wreck the party's majority come November, as the outright hypocrisy and bigotry of the party has now been exposed for the sham it always was.
The ultimate lesson here is that you cannot have it both ways. You cannot be the party of 'traditional values' and have gay Congressmen, or women in your midst. You cannot be the party of 'the sanctity of marriage' and meanwhile gays are running some of your most important committee assignments and committees.
This is not the fault of the Democrats. We don't care what a person's sexual orientation is. You're the party that made this an issue.
Now reap what you sow.
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 48
They (GOP politicos) are now turning against each other in this mess. Things now resemble a GOP circular firing squad.
The issue here is HYPOCRISY!!!!!!! You both have totally missed the point of all of this which is the point that Sean is making here. The Democrats ARE NOT the party of GOD or "FAMILY VALUES" or anti Gay..., sure they have gay folks who have been caught in transgressions, but theywere not hidden in a closet, pretending to be something they were not. (see Barney Frank, who is gay but also is regarded as one of the most intelligent men in the House).
Hypocrisy is the byword of the Reublican party, and it is finally coming around to bite them all on their big fat assess (Hastert has to be one of the widest loads in congress)...
Newt Gingrich said the Republicans didn't want to talk about it because they'd be accused of being homophobic, to which Jon Stewart had a funny retort: "Yes, connecting pedophilia with homosexuality, maybe that's what you call... HOMOPHOBIC!!!"
It's just totally despicable, how they're trying to minimize this whole situation. Why not just grow a pair and take the rap: if they didn't know about it, just say so, and if they did and they covered it up for the sake of their party, well they need to either resign or be kicked out on their asses. OR they need to have criminal charges filed against them.
But you know, the thing that's really disheartening is that probably lots of people knew what was going on, but they're probably doing similar crap themselves, gay OR straight, and they're falling into line behind the "don't call me on my crap and I won't call you on yours" philosophy.
And of course, the Democrats are walking a razor-thin line here, because Gary Studds was a Democrat. They need to stay focused on the hypocrisy issue, and they would do well to let the situation speak for itself and not get too partisan about it.
But really, the guy who's in charge of investigating child sexual abuse via the internet -- it's just too much.
That notwithstanding, the central issue here is, as Cynthia says, hypocrisy. The Democrats are not the party of 'traditional values' or the 'sanctity of marriage.' We stand for tolerance.
And to Sally R. I would simply say, "wrong: we already had our scandal. His name was Bill Clinton."
Cynthia, you made me laugh. And Wendy, don't worry about Representative Harris. She's in a Senate race with Bill Nelson, and the polls indicate that he's so far ahead, he could probably beat her twice.
Most people admit that the Republicans were already croaking before the Foley scandal. The majority of Americans have had enough of war, torture, civil rights infringement, and an unstable economy. This recent development may simply put a button on the midterms.
I can't wait for November. Bring it on.
Bush's ratings have plummeted accordingly.
But, that's not the entire story of hypocrisy. For quite some time there have been rumblings about the Iraq war and what a mess it is. The party line has been "stay the course" but the membership is not so sure. There are a few smatterings of Republicans saying this now. Look for more to come out for a change in direction in Iraq.
"The hypocrisy in the general policy of both parties to compromise with their core values, selling out to extremist ideas, and abandoning what made them worthy of representing "We The People."
Absolutely. The Dems may have been the minority, but they could have been more vocal and less compromising on a number of issues. I know the internal thinking was, let's not rile the Rep's, or give them anything they can use against us, let's not make trouble. Well, the Rep's didn't give them credit for compromise, continued to lie, deceive, and mischaracterize the party, and blame everything on the Dems..... the Dems had nothing to lose, and could have at least claimed some semblance of integrity.
I still believe we need balance in Congress, and with an increasingly power hungry executive branch, I hope the Dems take both chambers.
I think the primary issues that scares and scared damned near everyone out of their Liberal socks was the stand on homosexuality, and abortion. After that. The party became areligious and frankly kind of libertine instead of liberal. The Conservative Revolutionaries jumped all over that, and were in full swing with the Scorned Again Christians (We scorned them. Refused to even court them. And remember. If it hadn't been for the black Christians in the South, the Kennedy Administration most likely would have blown its dick off trying to shoot themselves in the foot dealing with both The War, and The Cubanos... not to mention young vulnerable white women).
What I mean to say is, balance in The Party most come with gathering those of us who said "F" it. We don't vote. We see those who do as sell outs, and naive. And we're not wrong. The Repiglakkkans proved that it's not the economy. It's the morality stupid! I don't mean you're stupid, Mr. T. I mean.... you know what I mean... I hope.
It is the Democrats who not so long ago championed their own bona fide pedophile to a higher standing within their party.
Now for the Democrats to call for the resignation of Hastert because of some "overly friendly" messages is HYPOCRISY in aces.
I would rather marry a goat than one of those guys.
Exactly when did the Democratic leadership learn of these and the more lurid messages that have been revealed? They had to have sufficent time to orchestrate their display's of mock outrage.
If the Democtatic leadership did indeed have foreknowledge of these messages and did wait for the correct political timing to act, then they themselves have made Mark Foley THEIR problem, they failed to act to protect these young people from an obvious threat for reasons of political posturing which is just as dispicable as what you and they are accusing the Republicans of doing.
I don't know whether the Democrats knew about Foley or not. And I was not one to defend Clinton for the whole Monica thing so please, don't try to paint me with THAT brush. But it is totally irrelevant, whether the Democrats knew about it or not. What is CLEAR is that the REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP knew about it and did nothing. If they acted to cover it up, it might even be a criminal offense. Simple as that.
I agree with Abu -- the Democrats don't win any prizes for integrity. Washington is totally bought and sold at this point, and anyone who thinks that ANYTHING goes on in Washington that's not about money is just naive. But to defend the Republicans in this situation is just plain -- well, ridiculous. If they DIDN'T know anything about it, that would be one thing, but since they apparently did (and they own up to the fact that they heard about it), bingo.
The question you pose IS being asked and the question I pose is also being asked, both are valid questions and if both are not asked then pedophilia is being enabled.
If you (as it seems) are trying to give a pass to the Dems and heap all of the responsibility for the security of those young people on the Republicans then you are doing those young people a disservice.
"What is CLEAR is that the REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP knew about it and did nothing. If they acted to cover it up, it might even be a criminal offense. Simple as that."
And what did they know? I've heard that they knew of some overly friendly messages and took appropriate action. You don't send your people out for public stoning based upon minor transgressions, but that in no way amounts to a "coverup". About President Clinton I didn't care what he did with Monica, it was when he Perjured himself before the courts that I got a little pissy.
Jesus, Mary, and Joseph! Fooly and his funky fiendish Repiglakkkan fellows is a non issue.
What did Hastert know and when did he know it?
Resign from Congress: 45%
Resign Leadership only: 25%
Remain Speaker: 26%
Oops, Dan, that's gotta hurt. I don't see any polls calling for Pelosi to resign for her supposed involvement in the cover-up, do you?
If you are not willing to fight the wrong on all fronts then you have no business to ask for a fight at all.
I do not give a pass to the Republicans I do however realize that it will not end unless there is an unbiased battle to protect these children.
No the poll you post does not hurt at all, when one realizes that it is nothing more than a reflection of the posturing of the Democtats and the media's coverage that posturing without a representation of ALL of the facts.
"The fact is Hastert covered up Foley's bad deeds and enabled pedophilia," I was not aware that Foley had sex with a minor
"and by trying to turn this into the Democrats problem isn't working." It is not a matter of me "trying" it is a matter of FACT that if the Dems knew and did not disclose ASAP they too are guilty of allowing these children to remain in harms way.
Resign from Congress: 45%
Resign Leadership only: 25%
Remain Speaker: 26%
Oops, Dan, that's gotta hurt. I don't see any polls calling for Pelosi to resign for her supposed involvement in the cover-up, do you?
Those are Hastert's numbers. The American people aren't with you Dan, although the Republican sycophants are.
Repeating your posts doesn't make it any better or more valid the second time around. It is still a reflection of one sided reporting by the media. The poll still doesn't hurt.
But since you are such a big fan of polls;
Newsweek poll 10/5&6/2006 asked should Hastert resign,
43% said he should
36% said he should not
Not a large difference I would say.
Your creative posting of figures on the other hand is not that moving unless there is a hugh number who actually want him to resign.
How about some more,
Same survey, "will the mark foley matter and the way the Republicans handled it make any difference in how you will vote this fall",
65% "no difference at all"
Seems that the Dems are not making much political hey out of this one.
one more
"Do you think the Democrats have gone too far or have not gone too far in trying to use the Foley matter for partisan advantage?
37% too far, 43% not far enough. six point difference on that one, I think that is just about right in considering the difference in the ability of those capable of critical thought and those willing to fall lock step with the Dems and the media.
I have no doubt that as the FACTS of this case are revealed these numbers will change and I am sure it will not be to your liking.
I agree, people like Foley who prey on our young people should be drummned out of the corp so to speak and if the Republican leadership actually knew about him beyond those "a little to friendly" messages then they should step down.
Four weeks before congressional elections, a new USA TODAY/Gallup Poll shows Democrats hold a 23-point lead over GOP candidates. That's double the lead Republicans had a month before they seized control of Congress in 1994.
President Bush's approval rating was 37%, down from 44% in a Sept. 15-17 poll. The approval rating for Congress was 24%, down 5 points from last month.
And what about this:
On the question of which party's candidate would receive their vote if the election were held today, Democrats held a 23-point lead over Republicans among every type of person questioned — likely voters, registered voters and adults. That's the largest lead Democrats have held among registered voters since 1978 . . .
That's like since Carter and all, right?
Oopsie-daisy:
Government corruption, Iraq and terrorism were the three most important issues to poll respondents. They said Democrats would do a better job on all three. The party had a 21-point advantage on handling corruption and a 17-point advantage on Iraq. A longstanding GOP advantage on terrorism vanished; Democrats had a 5-point edge. (emphasis added)
Looks like your long time ace in the hole went down the drain, so to speak.
And this:
Voters gave Democrats a 54%-28% advantage over Republicans concerning which party would handle gasoline prices better despite the recent drop in prices.
There are more polls out there too, if you want, I'll be happy to link to them.
Please check the difference between the polls that claim polling of likely voters (as the usa/gallup poll) as it compares to Registered voters, the Dems still claim a lead in the lower teens with registered voters but that lead is not unsurmountable.
Government corruption? Don't even think the voting citizens of this country do not include the Dems in that category, the Dems are front and center when it comes to corruption and the people know it.
Bushes approval rating....I didn't realize he was running this fall.
Iraq and terorism... The voters know the Dems offer no protection from the terrorists that is a loser for the Dems.
Sean your poll is one of 622 likely voters it doesn't hold much weight as to what the voters will actually do come election day. Don't get your hopes up.
yes please link some more polls.
While I share your disappointment in the totality of the American political "system", there is one particular vulnerability it's proforma quest for power opens up the nation to, which concerns me more than any "reform" or "legitimising" of the parties. I think you will agree that if that particular threat is not overcome in Nov., the much to be desired reform of the system will become a distant possibility, gone along with what remains of the American "experiment".
I'll take any port in this storm.
;-)