Oops, They Did it Again!
I have not posted on the Mark Foley incident on purpose. I find that time yields perspective and additional facts. That has proven true yet again. First, the conduct of United States Representative Mark Foley is reprehensible. At best it is immoral and unethical. At worst, it is illegal. I don’t know Mark Foley and I don’t care to. I don’t know what kind of a person that he his but I judge his behavior and I hope that he bears the full consequences of his actions.
That said, I’m a little confused. It now appears that the blog that revealed these messages, IM and e-mail, was created for the sole purpose of outing this incident. It also looks like ABCnews, Brian Williams, and other media had information that a potential pederast was loose in the Capitol building but did not do anything about it until the moment that it would wield the greatest political damage to the Republicans. It appears that the creator of the blog was also more interested in politics because it/he/she/they never once contacted the authorities but instead shopped it around to various media outlets. This entire incident also has all of the trappings of something out of the Clinton/Carville war room.
Last election cycle, the Dems sprung their trap too soon. Their lackey in MSM, Dan Rather, broke the National Guard story in the beginning of September and it gave the Republicans time to discover the truth and discredit the fabrications. This time around they have waited until the end of September, after congress was set to adjourn for the session so that they could go home and campaign. But apparently they’ve miscalculated the speed at which data travels on the internet. The Dems are now finding out that the one IM made public was between the congressman and someone who was of legal age to consent to a relationship with an adult. Oopsie.
They have succeeded in outing a closeted homosexual unwillingly. I thought that when anyone else did that they were called homophobic. They contradict their own declarations of tolerance in attacking a member of the opposite party.
When Gerry Studds was found to have engaged in a relationship with a 17 year old boy, he was censured but supported by the Democratic faithful. He was eventually elected to 5 more terms.
When it came to light that Barney Frank’s employee and boyfriend was running a gay prostitution ring from Frank’s apartment, the Dems refused to censure him and insisted on a reprimand instead. Frank claimed that he didn’t know that all of the men that were coming to the apartment were paying to have sex there, even though he met his boyfriend through a paid encounter.
When Bill Clinton was accused of exposing himself to Paula Jones, she was attacked as trailer trash.
When Clinton was accused of having an affair with Jennifer Flowers, Hillary went into attack mode but didn’t “…just stand by [her] man.” Later, Clinton admitted under oath to having a lurid encounter with Flowers.
When Clinton was found to have engaged in elicit activities with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval office, Dems once again cried foul and said from the floor of the house, “So what? It’s only sex.”
The difference in these instances and the current one are glaring. One, as soon as the historical revelations came to light, they were made public and authorities were notified of potential illegal activities. Two, the Dems did not condemn immoral activity by their own but they defended it and attacked the accusers. Three, the Republicans didn’t use the sad episodes as a bludgeon in any upcoming elections.
Now, the Republicans have demanded the resignation of Mr. Foley for his immoral (and possibly illegal) conduct. It appears that the Dems have exaggerated or even fabricated news once again in an effort to influence an election. It won’t work. People like me are the core of the Republican party and this only incites us to vote for worthy candidates. Mr. Foley deserves the public scorn and humiliation that he is receiving. He will deserve any punishment that he gets if he committed a crime.
I don't know who the "they" is behind this October Surprise. The facts seem to bear out that this is being orchestrated at a very high level within or near the DNC. The Democrats deserve to be defeated for manipulating this sordid episode for political gain.
UPDATED: Drudge reports that the IM's were a prank carried too far. Will we ever know what really happened?
That said, I’m a little confused. It now appears that the blog that revealed these messages, IM and e-mail, was created for the sole purpose of outing this incident. It also looks like ABCnews, Brian Williams, and other media had information that a potential pederast was loose in the Capitol building but did not do anything about it until the moment that it would wield the greatest political damage to the Republicans. It appears that the creator of the blog was also more interested in politics because it/he/she/they never once contacted the authorities but instead shopped it around to various media outlets. This entire incident also has all of the trappings of something out of the Clinton/Carville war room.
Last election cycle, the Dems sprung their trap too soon. Their lackey in MSM, Dan Rather, broke the National Guard story in the beginning of September and it gave the Republicans time to discover the truth and discredit the fabrications. This time around they have waited until the end of September, after congress was set to adjourn for the session so that they could go home and campaign. But apparently they’ve miscalculated the speed at which data travels on the internet. The Dems are now finding out that the one IM made public was between the congressman and someone who was of legal age to consent to a relationship with an adult. Oopsie.
They have succeeded in outing a closeted homosexual unwillingly. I thought that when anyone else did that they were called homophobic. They contradict their own declarations of tolerance in attacking a member of the opposite party.
When Gerry Studds was found to have engaged in a relationship with a 17 year old boy, he was censured but supported by the Democratic faithful. He was eventually elected to 5 more terms.
When it came to light that Barney Frank’s employee and boyfriend was running a gay prostitution ring from Frank’s apartment, the Dems refused to censure him and insisted on a reprimand instead. Frank claimed that he didn’t know that all of the men that were coming to the apartment were paying to have sex there, even though he met his boyfriend through a paid encounter.
When Bill Clinton was accused of exposing himself to Paula Jones, she was attacked as trailer trash.
When Clinton was accused of having an affair with Jennifer Flowers, Hillary went into attack mode but didn’t “…just stand by [her] man.” Later, Clinton admitted under oath to having a lurid encounter with Flowers.
When Clinton was found to have engaged in elicit activities with Monica Lewinsky in the Oval office, Dems once again cried foul and said from the floor of the house, “So what? It’s only sex.”
The difference in these instances and the current one are glaring. One, as soon as the historical revelations came to light, they were made public and authorities were notified of potential illegal activities. Two, the Dems did not condemn immoral activity by their own but they defended it and attacked the accusers. Three, the Republicans didn’t use the sad episodes as a bludgeon in any upcoming elections.
Now, the Republicans have demanded the resignation of Mr. Foley for his immoral (and possibly illegal) conduct. It appears that the Dems have exaggerated or even fabricated news once again in an effort to influence an election. It won’t work. People like me are the core of the Republican party and this only incites us to vote for worthy candidates. Mr. Foley deserves the public scorn and humiliation that he is receiving. He will deserve any punishment that he gets if he committed a crime.
I don't know who the "they" is behind this October Surprise. The facts seem to bear out that this is being orchestrated at a very high level within or near the DNC. The Democrats deserve to be defeated for manipulating this sordid episode for political gain.
UPDATED: Drudge reports that the IM's were a prank carried too far. Will we ever know what really happened?
Labels: Politics
posted by Moneyman at 10:50 AM
2 Comments:
"Three, the Republicans didn’t use the sad episodes as a bludgeon in any upcoming elections." - No, they only tried to impeach Clinton and ending spending more money on those investigations than Bush spent on the WTC investigations. Come on, Hastert knew about this stuff for a while before it was public, so where's that detail in your story? It plays both ways. Of course Dems want to capitalize on it, but you make it sound like they practically dragged a bound and gagged underage boy into his office and left him there to see what would happen as they filmed it in secret. C'mon, there's only so much you can try to twist this to make it appear this pervert and the Repub coverup around it, is actually the 'liberal' media and Dems fault. Besides, would you complain if this was the other way around and Karl Rove was smearing the living hell out of a Democrat in similar circumstances?
Oh darn. You got me. The Republicans only impeached Clinton because they hated him. It couldn't have been because he lied under oath, disparaged the office of President, and brought the seedier side of Arkansas politics to the national stage.
As for how much money was spent, crawling through the tar pit of Clinton obstruction was a far more demanding task than identifying a group that was shouting from the mountains "We did it!".
Post a Comment
<< Home