Probably doesn't know about Myspace yet: U.S. Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL)

-Ney (jail)
-Dukester (jail)
-Delay (indicted, will hope ta God go to jail)
-Foley (quit, will probly get investigated)

Jonah Goldberg: I have no worthwhile instapunditry. But, I think if the allegations are true this is just one more reason to add to the phonebook-sized list of reasons why grown men shouldn't mess around with underage boys. It goes some considerable distance after, "it's gross" and a good bit before "it takes time away from yard work."

xpost

did they find their dignity yet?

xpost: shut up or you get moogles after your posts

uh, what?

John Podhoretz: Take a Break from Foley and watch this powerfully moving trailer for a new movie called Home of the Brave about American soldiers in Iraq and afterwards.

http://www.calpots.com/sp_exhibits/political_poster/reagan.gif

Shut up!

The aliens amuse me. (They horrify me as well but they amuse me, 'cause I have to laugh to keep from crying.)

sick sick sick sick sick sick sick sick sick sick sick sick sick

oh yeah, and this was not directed at blount, obv

a: don't bend the pages over!

You like to watch, don't you

http://www.wonkette.com/assets/resources/2006/09/FoleyKids2.JPG

Liberals love pedophiles, because they must do so to keep their own belief system intact.

_Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., chairman of the Page Board that oversees the congressional work-study program for high schoolers, said he did investigate but Foley falsely assured him he was only mentoring the boy. Pages are high school students who attend classes under congressional supervision and work as messengers.

_The spokesman for Speaker Dennis Hastert, Ron Bonjean, said the top House Republican had not known about the allegations. Shimkus said he learned about them in late 2005...

1) cyber sex is really dull
2) the kids know this guy is a creep, and that he was outed by said kid, gives me hope fo the future of america
3) JUST COME OUT ALREADY, nothing is secret anymore, nothing can be kept discreet, so put yr shit on the line, first thing
4) they have known he was a fag for almost a decade, and this is out now, for a variety of reasons, and well that said, im looking forward to 2006, as sheer entertainment, the US has given up its soul, and well i like the way the flames flicker

roffleing so hard dudez

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001643.php

it's gonna take about six more of these scandals in the next month to get a Dem house again

lets cyberfuck

Foley on Clinton.

National Republican Congressional Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds (N.Y.) issued a statement Saturday in which he said that he had informed Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) of allegations of improper contacts between then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) and at least one former male page, contradicting earlier statements from Hastert.

GOP sources said Reynolds told Hastert earlier in 2006, shortly after the February GOP leadership elections. Hastert's response to Reynolds' warning remains unclear.

Hastert's staff insisted Friday night that he was not told of the Foley allegations and are scrambling to respond to Reynolds' statement.

Foley also received an 84% approval rating from the Christian Coalition in 2004, the most recent year we could find spur of the moment.

Indeed, Foley made get-tough laws on sexually exploited children -- particularly exploitation over the Internet -- one of his primary crusades in Congress. He was even Co-Chair of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus.

He also introduced a bill to ban online "child modeling" sites, claiming they are "nothing more than a fix for pedophiles."

"They don't sell products, they don't sell services," he said. "All they serve are young children on a platter for America's most depraved. These sites sell child erotica and they should be banned."

On Bill O'Reilly's show this May, he said, "Our kids are precious. Their lives are vulnerable. The predators are winning as we speak."

Sometimes a fudge on party lines is just a fudge on party lines.

Foley is on the verge of becoming the poster child of a party that is concerned about little more than preserving its power. This could very well cost Republicans more than Florida's 16th congressional district, which at this point they probably deserve to lose even if they somehow manage to replace Foley on the ballot or come up with another candidate; it might be the Democrats’ October surprise.

yeah, that line made me laugh, too.

i have an idea; maybe a good idea would have been to NOT let him co-chair all the children boards he worked on

Like:

"Let's talk about how what the Media did was just as bad, if not worse."

And:

"if he was sixteen, [he] is really more of a "young man" and should be able to make his own decisions regarding his sexual habits"

The depth of worthlessness and hypocrisy to which some people will sink just blows my mind. It shouldn't, but it does.

RedState: "Black ops! Dirty operations! (We'd never do the same or anything.)"

lol

how dare these liberals try to politicize a congressman molesting children!!!

WHAT STRIKES ME ABOUT THE Foley scandal is the great human tragedy that it is. At least one life was ruined (Foley’s)

the person he identifies with most isn't the kid, but the predator? I'm speechless.

thing is, this has always been the case for the last few years (or longer). Hell, remember what they did to Jill Carroll when she made it back alive, or even to the two Fox News guys who were kidnapped in Iraq and later released. We get wonderful examples of authoritarian culture and the behaviour of its followers every day.

this foley guy is scum can't believe he's one of ours truly sick individual hard to spot these guys cause they hide you know the batch of emails we saw weren't incriminating we only asked him about them cause they were brought to our attention that's how vigilant we are but really there's nothing so bad about them whatd he do ask the kid how old he is just being nice as far as we could tell we're gonna have a new panel though so nothing like this can ever happen again dude totally tricked us and wouldve tricked anyone totally devious and really good at hiding and stuff and its the fbi's fault really.

Going into rehab is 100% bullshit, it's cover so he can claim to be incompetent when he starts getting those time-sensitive letters from the DOJ.

One kinda assumes he didn't resign for shits and giggles.

haha no, they're all fake. he just couldn't handle the public besmirchment of his character, that's why he quit now.

I'm hoping this all brings "pederast" back into everyday usage for at least one news cycle.

xpost to shits and giggles

"What's a... pederast?"

are you suggesting the former representative enjoyed his hot lunches, hot carls, and glass-bottom boats served up by strapping young bucks?

Out of curiosity, is the first time you've ever noticed a politician -- or for that matter any public figure -- admitting errors and stepping down/aside and checking into rehab and all that, or did previous examples slip past you?

Nothing about the language of his twin statements -- the resignation or the rehab announcement -- is surprising, and the content of the second message is utterly unsurprising.

i could see the party losing voters and a few politicians on the margin, but it's not like the rest of them are gonna become democrats.

oh and here it is for those of you who can't get there

Right after the 2004 election, it seemed as if Thomas Frank had been completely vindicated. In his book “What’s the Matter With Kansas? How Conservatives Won the Heart of America,” Mr. Frank argued that America’s right wing had developed a permanent winning strategy based on the use of “values” issues to mobilize white working-class voters against a largely mythical cultural elite, while actually pursuing policies designed to benefit a small economic elite.

It was and is a brilliant analysis. But the political strategy Mr. Frank described may have less staying power than he feared. In fact, the right-wing coalition that has spent 40 years climbing to its current position of political dominance may be cracking up.

At its core, the political axis that currently controls Congress and the White House is an alliance between the preachers and the plutocrats — between the religious right, which hates gays, abortion and the theory of evolution, and the economic right, which hates Social Security, Medicare and taxes on rich people. Surrounding this core is a large periphery of politicians and lobbyists who joined the movement not out of conviction, but to share in the spoils.

Together, these groups formed a seemingly invincible political coalition, in which the religious right supplied the passion and the economic right supplied the money.

The coalition has, however, always been more vulnerable than it seemed, because it was an alliance based not on shared goals, but on each group’s belief that it could use the other to get what it wants. Bring that belief into question, and the whole thing falls apart.

Future historians may date the beginning of the right-wing crackup to the days immediately following the 2004 election, when President Bush tried to convert a victory won by portraying John Kerry as weak on defense into a mandate for Social Security privatization. The attempted bait-and-switch failed in the face of overwhelming public opposition. If anything, the Bush plan was even less popular in deep-red states like Montana than in states that voted for Mr. Kerry.

And the religious and cultural right, which boasted of having supplied the Bush campaign with its “shock troops” and expected a right-wing cultural agenda in return — starting with a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage — was dismayed when the administration put its energy into attacking the welfare state instead. James Dobson, the founder and chairman of Focus on the Family, accused Republicans of “just ignoring those that put them in office.”

It will be interesting, by the way, to see how Dr. Dobson, who declared of Bill Clinton that “no man has ever done more to debase the presidency,” responds to the Foley scandal. Does the failure of Republican leaders to do anything about a sexual predator in their midst outrage him as much as a Democratic president’s consensual affair?

In any case, just as the religious right was feeling betrayed by Mr. Bush’s focus on the goals of the economic right, the economic right suddenly seemed to become aware of the nature of its political allies. “Where in the hell did this Terri Schiavo thing come from?” asked Dick Armey, the former House majority leader, in an interview with Ryan Sager, the author of “The Elephant in the Room: Evangelicals, Libertarians and the Battle to Control the Republican Party.” The answer, he said, was “blatant pandering to James Dobson.” He went on, “Dobson and his gang of thugs are real nasty bullies.”

Some Republicans are switching parties. James Webb, who may pull off a macaca-fueled upset against Senator George Allen of Virginia, was secretary of the Navy under Ronald Reagan. Charles Barkley, a former N.B.A. star who used to be mentioned as a possible future Republican candidate, recently declared, “I was a Republican until they lost their minds.”

So the right-wing coalition is showing signs of coming apart. It seems that we’re not in Kansas anymore. In fact, Kansas itself doesn’t seem to be in Kansas anymore. Kathleen Sebelius, the state’s Democratic governor, has achieved a sky-high favorability rating by focusing on good governance rather than culture wars, and her party believes it will win big this year.

And nine former Kansas Republicans, including Mark Parkinson, the former state G.O.P. chairman, are now running for state office as Democrats. Why did Mr. Parkinson change parties? Because he “got tired of the theological debate over whether Charles Darwin was right.”

Meantime, it warms my heart to see Kudlow starting to cry.

always the best defense.

By Justin Rood - October 2, 2006, 11:37 AM

Here's a twist: disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) had a more-than-passing acquaintance with the Church of Scientology, reports Wayne Garcia, political editor for the Tampa, Fla. alt-weekly, Creative Loafing.

Four or five years ago, Garcia found himself at a party at the Scientology Celebrity Centre in Hollywood, Calif.

"There that night were Beck, Giovanni Ribisi, Doug E. Fresh, Mark Isham, Danny Masterson, and Erika Christensen, among others," Garcia wrote in Blurbex.com, a blog by the Creative Loafing Tampa staff:

Milling in the crowd before the gala began, however, I literally ran into Congressman Foley, who I recognized from some political consulting I had done down in West Palm Beach. I didn't get a chance to chat with him or ask what he was doing there before being swept away in a shoulder-to-shoulder crowd.

"One thing I can say," Garcia said: "he was not escorted by a young boy."

In 2003, the Scientologists threw Foley a fundraiser in support of his short-lived Senate bid, Garcia noted. (You can see a pic and a blurb here.) They presented him with "leatherbound copies of Dianetics and The Way to Happiness," according to the group's newsletter.

http://www.tpmmuckraker.com/archives/001654.php

if you forget about, you know, the kids being victimized thing. you know.

Good ol' Tony Snow: "simply naughty emails"

Much ado about nothing. Foley did bad things - Foley is gone. The rest is playing into Democrat hands and they're playing the right like a fiddle. Wake up, folks. Hell, we still have a Democrat senator sitting in the Senate who killed an intern with his drunk driving, leaving her to drown whilst he saved his own fat butt. All Foley did was write some nasty notes - and he resigned..

Michael | 10.02.06 01:16 PM

We will also be watching the stock market to see if there’s any blowback on this front.

EW

It was just a bit of fun!

xpost

Clown bridages like this usually come out the wagon right around this time of the year.

The Representative Foley "scandal" is really worthy of a whole book on hypocrisy. On the one hand, we have a poor misguided Republican man who had a romantic thing for young boys. He sent them suggestive e-mail. I agree, that's not great. On the other hand, we have a Democratic party that worships (not likes, WORSHIPS) a man named Bill Clinton who did not send suggestive e-mails as far as we know, but who had a barely legal intern give him oral sex kneeling under his desk in the Oval Office while he talked on the phone to a Congressional Committee Chairman, took great pleasure in putting a cigar in her orifice and then smelling it and tasting it, and having her fellate him when in the sacred seat of power of the world's leading Republic. And the Democrats cheer themselves hoarse for him. His wife has a great shot at being our next President.

We have a Republican man in Congress who sent e-mails to teenage boys asking them what they were wearing, and an entire party, the Democrats, whose primary constituency, besides the teachers' unions, is homosexual men and lesbian women. I hope it won't come as a surprise to anyone that a big part of male homosexual behavior is interest in young boys. (Take a look at anyone renting Endless Summer next time you are at the video store.)

Don't get me wrong. My very best friend is gay. I have many gay friends and they are great people. But how the Democrats, the party of gays, can be coming down this hard on a MC who's gay is simply beyond belief. One of my top, favorite congressmen, Barney Frank, is openly gay. Might he say a word in defense of his fellow gay MC right about now? Hmm, I thought not.

her wiki sez Monica's DOB is July 23, 1973, putting her at 22-23 in 95-96, and which would make her pretty much old enough to be the mother of this kid.

xpost

xpost 2 Tom

Go uptown, buy a bag of brown
You sucker MC, a sad face clown

man Ned every time you start like this, I know for sure that the GOP will continue to hold the House, that they're not even in any danger of losing it at all, because left-leaning folks will always get really smug when there's a bump in the opposition's road and then just sort of assume that everybody feels the schadenfreude they feel

you gotta stay hungry man

x-POST

As it stands, and what nails it -- this really *is* stirring up some shit among a lot of the usual suspects, and the reactions are fascinating (personally I'm intrigued by the fact that the normally busy NRO blog has, for a weekday, dried up a hell of a lot). I have no clue what this will actually mean on Election Day, but I'm not taking any hopes on my end as a slam dunk.

The simple fact is that Foley's downfall has pretty nearly decapitated the leadership of the House GOP with just five weeks to go before election day. And that's devastating.

What do I mean by decapitated? Let's assume, for the sake of discussion, that nothing else really comes out about how the House leadership handled this. No more shoes drop. Not a safe assumption from what seems to be in the reporting pipeline. But let's assume it.

Rep. Tom Reynolds (R-NY) is in a tight race for reelection and he's chairman of the NRCC, the Republican House campaign committee. He's in charge of the effort to keep the majority.

What's the number one thing on his mind right now? I doubt it's the NRCC or even his race for reelection. I think Reynolds is, to put it mildly, distracted right now.

How about Denny Hastert and John Boehner? I don't see them going on shows or making any public appearances for a while. They'll get asked awkward and possibly unanswerable questions about Foleygate. I'd say they're out of commission for fundraisers too.

And pretty much any campaign joust or jab at the Democrats from one of these guys, on whatever issue, will be instantly transformed into some sex-with-pages snark. "How can we trust them to protect America when they can't even protect the summer interns on Capitol Hill."....

Foleygate has made it very hard for the leaders of the House GOP to go on the offensive on anything relevant to the election. For political purposes they're basically out of commission. And they've given Democratic challengers in every district around the country a slew of questions with which to pummel GOP incumbents or any Republican, for that matter, who puts his head up on television. This is in the context of an election that was already going very badly for House Republicans. Foleygate has now made them all but politically defenseless in the final stretch of the campaign. And that is a very big deal.

jesus, this just makes it even better.

still, folks, we should remember that he's not necessarily gay, just a pederast.

xpost

It's not going away quickly, firestorm has only gotten started.

...it's not too soon to say that Republicans in the 109th have been a major disappointment. The best thing about this Congress is that by doing little at least it did little harm.

which still doesn't prevent them from getting as many shots in at the other side as they can.

I'm looking for any reason to have low expectations for 2006 myself. I don't want to happen to me mentally two years ago happen again this year.

Tim Mahoney, running against Foley (site has sound)

John Laesch, a union carpenter running against Denny Hastert in the 14th District of Illinois.

lol at this breed of Democratic challengers pummelling anyone, unless they're exhausted by pummelling their GOP cousins debating the torture bill.

uh, okay, well I apologize for that too then I guess, although I'm not aware of where I was being condescending (plz feel free to point it out if you feel like it)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Willie_Horton

Go to the 1988 Presidental Election section

Republicans would pick up the Horton issue after Dukakis clinched the nomination. In June of 1988, Republican candidate George H.W. Bush seized on the Horton case, bringing it up repeatedly in campaign speeches. Bush's campaign manager, Lee Atwater, bragged that "by the time this election is over, Willie Horton will be a household name." [1] Media consultant Roger Ailes was reported to remark "the only question is whether we depict Willie Horton with a knife in his hand or without it."

Yeah, ditto -- you need to explain why this is a Bad Thing now, whereas it wasn't for the Repubs circa 1998-1999.

mega xpost!

I'm showing age here, but a "Willie Horton" was a colloquialism for any type of scandal that's "guaranteed" to damn a candidate or party at the relative eve of an election.

both of these are bad options.

Dan Perry, if only the liberal bloggers knew how to talk like that! I feel sorry for our Republican friends. Clearly, the job is too much for them.

http://images.google.com/images?q=tbn:bT1WEsNs5CEfYM:http://eyeonwilliamson.org/wp-content/uploads/2006/06/PICT1644a.thumbnail.JPG

House Approves Strip Search Bill
Wednesday, September 20, 2006

A bill approved by the U.S. House yesterday would require school districts around the country to establish policies making it easier for teachers and school officials to conduct wide scale searches of students. These searches could take the form of pat-downs, bag searches, or strip searches depending on how administrators interpret the law.

The Student Teacher Safety Act of 2006 (HR 5295) would require any school receiving federal funding--essentially every public school--to adopt policies allowing teachers and school officials to conduct random, warrantless searches of every student, at any time, on the flimsiest of pretexts. Saying they suspect that one student might have drugs could give officials the authority to search every student in the building.

DPA supporters and others who opposed this outrageous bill called their members of Congress this week to express their disapproval. However, House leaders circumvented the usual legislative procedure to bring the bill to a quick vote. It did not pass through the committee process, but went straight to the House floor. There, it was passed by a simple voice vote, so constituents cannot even find out how their Representative voted.

The bill moves next to the Senate, but it is unlikely to be considered there this session.

Bill Piper, DPA's director of national affairs, said, "It looks like this bill was rushed to the House floor to help out the sponsor, Rep. Geoff Davis (R-KY/4th), who is in a tight re-election race. This vote lets him say he's getting things done in Washington. But I would be surprised to see a similar push in the Senate."

HR 5295 is opposed in its current form by several groups, including the Drug Policy Alliance, Students for Sensible Drug Policy, the ACLU, the American Federation of Teachers, the National Parent Teacher Association, the American Association of School Administrators, and the National School Boards Association.

DPA will be watching the bill so that if and when it does come up again, this wide array of opponents can mobilize to stop it.

or fukuyama vs. chicken little, i guess.

god i can't believe i ever liked kunstler

not to mention "immigrant"

whoah. karma

xp

Malkin

Hewitt

Barber

Readers who actually plunge into the book as opposed to the clips of talking heads discussing it may be surprised at how much admiration they develop for the relentless Rumsfeld.

There is a time and place for attacking the Dems and the MSM. Now is not that time. Parents need assurance that their kids are safe on Capitol Hill. If Beltway GOP elites can't understand this, they are beyond hope.

http://lonestartimes.com/images/Bramanti/palpatine.jpg

And if anything, these kids are less innocent — these 16 and 17 year-old beasts…and I've seen what they're doing on YouTube and I've seen what they're doing all over the internet — oh yeah — you just have to tune into any part of their pop culture. You're not going to tell me these are innocent babies. Have you read the transcripts that ABC posted going into the weekend of these instant messages, back and forth? The kids are egging the Congressman on! The kids are trying to get this out of him. We haven't got the whole story on this.

I hope they run with that drudge blame-the-victim line, parents will love that one

I mean "beasts" omg

I dunno, I'm tired, I just really every time I see threads goin "oh yeah for sure this is the nail in the coffin for the Republicans" think "yeah, you all say that every fuckin' time, and then the entire left side of the spectrum drops the ball because they're so busy rubbing their hands together Snidely Whiplash-style instead of actually seizing the opportunity"

this is how it plays out a lot, perception-wise.

Maybe I'll think differently after a drink and some sleep, but unless Karl Rove finds Iraq's old WMDs in Syria, these look to be an impossible five weeks.

ok here is how the nytimes covers this on its web site. the big foley story up now focuses, as the times routinely does, not on the NEWS (i.e. what/when/where/how/why) but on some "game behind the game" angle, how the players are trying to play it, literally reporting on spin as if the spin itself is news (headline: "g.o.p. tries to limit damage in foley case"). in some limited way, spin is news of course, as it always can be, and it can be interesting, even revelatory, to peek behind the scrim and see the gears of activity that lie behind the press conferences. HOWEVER. "what's the spin" is a particular kind of story of interest to politics junkies and few others. it can always be written because it is always there to write, if you can't find anything very substantive to add or can't find an angle you like, and/or are playing desperate catch-up with other news orgs who have beaten you to this story. the danger is that in relying on this kind of angle so much it becomes a habit, and habit hardens into standard practice. i.e. campaign coverage of any race ever!!!

as far as i can tell, there is no real news to be had, at this hour. but that doesn't stop the new york times! if some republican, somewhere, is spinning, the new york times will be there to write it all up. it even notes that the republican leadership is making a conscious effort to talk only about certain IMs:

But Mr. Hastert, who took no questions after making a brief statement, seemed to want to focus today only on instant messages that Mr. Foley exchanged with a page in 2003, which were much more explicit and sexual in nature

In Washington, House Speaker Dennis Hastert called instant messages that Mr. Foley exchanged with a page in 2003 as “vile and repulsive,” and he said he first saw those messages on Friday.

“I repeat again: The Republican leaders of the House did not have them,” the speaker said about those particular messages. “We have all said so and on the record. But someone did have them, and the ethics committee, the Justice Department, the news media — and anyone who can — should help us find out who.”

sounds like drudge is taking a special interest in the teens himself

Shouldn't you be ordered to get back into the cage via your RIAA smart collar or something.

http://www.washtimes.com/op-ed/20061002-102008-9058r.htm

shut the fuck up and get the fuck off my thread.

I mean, it's not like Congress hasn't dealt with this sort of issue before. If no laws were broken (which is currently the position of the FBI, although the investigation is still continuing and it seems a safe bet that Foley probably broke the law at some point) then everything becomes a tad murkier; there are a lot of people who yelp that a person's "private" life should remain just that. That doesn't wash with me at ALL when it comes to boorish behavior with a minor, but I'm sure that there are some ignoramuses out there who will try to make that argument. For me, the consent/minor issues are a sideshow from what is a lack of ethics by Foley--it's not a sign of good judgement to be chasing tail in the company locker room. That he went after a minor so flagrantly, so hypocritically, is gas on the fire.

-- like murderinging, October 2nd, 2006 10:54 PM. (modestmickey) (link)

What no thread needs, on any of these boards, is you, definitively. And I already posted, so no thanks.

this thread belongs to the children that shall inherit it

WTF x a million?!!?

“maf54” signed off at 7:14:58 AM.

'maf54' is in use by a registered user. If you are that user you can log in below, otherwise go back and enter a different name.

Yeah, when I heard that and thought the same thing.

http://opinionjournal.com/editorial/hc_markfoley.gif

otm

Hastert faces a spreading revolt among some conservatives over the way he and other GOP leaders handled the matter when first alerted to the contact between Foley and one former House page. Hastert said again yesterday that no House Republican leader knew about the most graphic communications until they surfaced on Friday, but that did little to satisfy some conservative activists.

David Bossie, who runs a group called Citizens United, called yesterday for Hastert's resignation and said other conservative leaders are likely to follow suit. Bossie said the initial e-mails alone, which included Foley's request of a minor's picture, should have prompted an immediate inquiry. "That was a cry for an investigation," Bossie said. "Why couldn't the speaker of the House muster the will to stop this?"

Leaders from about six dozen socially conservative groups held a conference call late yesterday afternoon, and participants were described as livid with House GOP leaders.

"They are outraged by how Hastert handled this," said Paul M. Weyrich, a conservative activist who participated in the call. "They feel let down, left aside. How can they allow a guy like [Foley] to remain chairman of the committee on missing and exploited children when there is any question about e-mails?"

Vin Weber, a GOP lobbyist close to the White House and to congressional leaders, said many Republicans outside of Washington are echoing Bossie.

"From what I hear, it is resonating badly and our candidates are on the defensive about this," Weber said. "The maddening thing about this is if they had done the right thing" by informing Democrats early on and investigating it fully, "there would be no political fallout," he said.

The St. Petersburg Times and The Miami Herald, which had been given copies of the e-mail with the Louisiana boy last year, defended their decisions not to run stories.

"Given the potentially devastating impact that a false suggestion of pedophilia could have on anyone, not to mention a congressman known to be gay, and lacking any corroborating information, we chose not to do a story," said Tom Fiedler, executive editor of the Herald.

(Note: My wife works for Roy Blunt, who ran against Boehner for the majority leader position, but that really has nothing to do with my reasons for thinking this is a mistake by Boehner's staff.)

...or Levin's continuing heart attack:

If Foley's behavior was an "open secret," then why didn't ANY member of Congress raise a loud stink about it? Just because they didn't hold the title "Speaker" doesn't mean they couldn't have acted or spoken out. The point is illogical to me. (And if it was an "open secret," it seems that precious little information was provided to the Speaker by anyone.) If, for example, it's an "open secret" that a member of Congress actually molested a page, it's not solely the Speaker's responsibility to address it. And if it's an "open secret," I assume Nancy Pelosi knew about it. So, I suppose we should damn the entire House. Yes, the Speaker runs the place, or tries to, but every member has a duty to report unethical or criminal activity should they become aware of it.

Eventually he might twig to the idea that maybe the GOP isn't perfect.

Is there any doubt that any Republican who has miss-handled this matter, including the Speaker, should step down? Even if their hearts were in the right place, which you’d have to be awfully credulous to buy, they blew it and did so big time. They put the welfare of a colleague above that of vulnerable kids.

In doing so, they created a political disaster. Since they are first and foremost politicians, that’s a professional failing of some magnitude. Generals who lead disastrous campaigns know the right thing to do and usually do it. For their probable moral failings and their certain professional ones, we can only hope the Republican House leadership will show the same knowledge and character.

And the man himself:

The Washington Times wants Speaker Hastert to resign. To do so would be to capitulate to Democratic-activist-induced and MSM-abetted hysteria. Not only should Hastert not resign, he should use every opportunity to swing back hard at a MSM deeply compromised by its ideological extremism and a Democratic Party committed to retreat and defeat in Iraq and fecklessness in the war generally. If Republican candidates recognize that the "clamor" is just the echo chamber, they'll quickly come to understand that this is another Wellstone Memorial Service moment, when the left has persuaded itself that the American electorate is stupid and easily stampeded, and where overreaching appeals to emotional and unjust conclusions cannot be sustained in the new media environment.

I try not to bother with Hewitt more than necessary, for my sanity's sake -- but I think this is the most desperate and grasping he's sounded in years.

Malkin continues to be unimpressed:

I'm not arguing with Allah Pundit about this: "If someone knew what [Foley] was up to and didn’t act to stop it immediately, they’re complicit in child abuse." Well, of course. As you'll see, we all agreed on that point on the show tonight. What I am saying, simply, is that there are some operatives and apologists on my side going overboard in blaming the messengers--and the victims.

And RedState starts to be deeply concerned:

Yesterday, I was privately telling the contributors that I had received several phone calls from people on Capitol Hill informing me that GOP Members of Congress had actively begun plotting to throw the Speaker under the bus should the GOP somehow manage to keep control of Congress.

This morning, a baker's dozen of staffers had all emailed me the same article, found here. It's the editorial in the Washington Times entitled "Resign, Mr. Speaker." (See Gerry's take here.)

Let's be clear -- now is not the time to have a leadership struggle. We're five weeks from an election that isn't looking very good. But, should the GOP somehow be able to keep the House in Republican hands (and Lord I hope they can!), the Speaker must go when the House returns.

Right now, however, we must fight. We must fight like our lives depend on it. Make no mistake, the timing of the Foley allegations were not designed to persuade swing voters to vote Democrat. They allegations were designed to suppress the GOP turnout. We must not let the Democrats be successful at this.

While we know the GOP is far from perfect and, under Denny Hastert's recent leadership, has been a disappointment, we know the Democrats would cut all funding from Iraq, unleash investigative hordes on the President, and block all tax reforms and social security reforms.

Onward and along.

hee hee. this is as good as the "they's secret socialists!" line that blount came up with, which describes the thinking of these folks, my dad, and even one or two ilxors, in terms of trying to either amp up or project baseless fears...

I'm just thinking out loud here. What if somebody got to the page and said, you know, we want you to set Foley up. We need to do a little titillating thing here. Keep it and save it and so forth. How would you get a kid to do that? Yeah, who knows? You threaten him or pay him. There's any number of ways given the kind of people that we're dealing with and talking about here.

Now, folks, I don't want to be misunderstood here. I'm not trying to mount any kind of a defense. That's a bad word. I'm not trying to get into a defense of what Mark Foley did. Please don't misunderstand. I'm just telling you that the -- the -- the orgy and the orgasm that has been taking place in the media since Friday and with the Democrats is -- it's all coordinated, and it's all -- it's all oriented toward the election. There's no concern about the kid -- no concern about the children.

There is -- there is -- there's not even any real problem with what Foley did, as we've discussed. In their hearts and minds and their crotches, they don't have any problem with what Foley did. They've defended it over the -- over the years.

Ah Mr. Limbaugh. You remain an unusual man.

-- Maria :D (djdutc...) (webmail), October 3rd, 2006 7:02 AM. (later)

i'd be surprised if he didn't actually do something in real life.

nicely worded there Rush-o

yeah, we got another faulkner on our hands.

Rush knows the 16- and 17-year-old beasts, he's seen the american apparel adverts. they just like to coyly egg you on.

xp

Well, let's see...

* Frist is planning to hand Afghanistan back to the Taliban
* Condi is negotiating involving Saudi Arabia in the reconstruction of Iraq
* And, yeah, that War Crimes bill that just passed.

"Republicans: not protecting your children. not protecting you from terrorists"

In those messages, he was definitely trying to set something up.

I don't think he would keep after those kids if he hadn't been successful at least once. I dunno. Poor guys, how many of them had the idea that this is just the way the game is played in DC? :(

http://www.wonkette.com/politics/mark-foley/exclusive-mark-foley-chat-204861.php

Meanwhile, Boehner plays defense:

I disagree with the editorial board of the Washington Times ("Resign, Mr. Speaker," Oct. 3, 2006). We are all outraged about Mark Foley's abhorrent and reprehensible conduct. He preyed on children entrusted to our care and he disgraced our institution.

Mr. Foley lied to his fellow members, he lied to the Clerk of the House, and I believe everyone wishes they knew more and knew it earlier so we would have caught Mr. Foley's lies and deceit. Those of us in the Republican leadership have done our best to provide an accurate chronology of our recollections and conversations with Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA) regarding Mr. Foley, but one thing is certain: no one in the leadership, including Speaker Hastert, had any knowledge of the warped and sexually explicit instant messages that were revealed by ABC News last Friday. Had Speaker Hastert or anyone else in our leadership known about Mr. Foley's despicable conduct, I'm confident the Speaker would have moved to expel Mr. Foley immediately and turn him over to the appropriate authorities.

Our congressional pages and their parents deserve a fair and full investigation by the Justice Department, and I'm confident they will get one. We also need to know why these messages surfaced only last week, on the final day of legislative business before the November elections. If this evidence was withheld for political purposes, one can only speculate as to how many additional children may have been endangered before this information was finally revealed.

Sincerely,

John Boehner (R-OH)
House Majority Leader

yes, yes, so you don't have to answer questions about this on the campaign trail, we all get it.

That's what I said.

"Doing away with the political system seems to me to be the right answer."

can't spell woodward without wood

HASTERT ON RUSH
Some quick notes:

Resign? "I'm not going to do that."

"We took care of Mr. Foley. We found out about it and asked him to resign. He did resign."

After learning of the "overly friendly" e-mail: "Foley said he wouldn't do it any more, he was sorry, he was just trying to talk to the kid...We told him not to do it any more, with him or with anyone, period."

At one point, reporters asked if he could make the children leave so they could as adult questions, and he refused.

this is getting into Michael Jackson shit here.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1grvzsk936c

No wonder all the muslims in the Middle East want to kill us. Our own members of Congress are a bunch of perverts and pedophiles.

Posted by: mike jones | Oct 3, 2006 1:56:24 PM

ABC's Teddy Davis reports: In a radio interview with 700 WLW radio in Cincinnati, House Majority Leader John Boehner (R-OH) placed responsibility for the Foley matter not being handled properly on House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL).

"I believe I talked to the Speaker and he told me it had been taken care of," said Boehner. "And, and, and my position is it's in his corner, it's his responsibility. The Clerk of the House who runs the page program, the Page Board—all report to the Speaker. And I believe it had been dealt with."

Please note that by saying that he talked with the Speaker about Foley, Boehner is reversing course and going back to his original position.

On Friday, Boehner told the Washington Post that he "had learned in late spring of inappropriate e-mails Foley sent to the page, a boy from Louisiana, and that he promptly told Hastert, who appeared to know already of the concerns. Hours later, Boehner contacted The Post to say he could not be sure he had spoken with Hastert." LINK

According to today's radio interview, Boehner has gone back to saying that he did talk to Hastert about Foley.

All of this comes as Hastert faces intensifying questions about why Republicans had not reacted more assertively to Foley's messages.

lol xpost

It seems to me that a lot more details and context are needed here.

Posted by: along | Oct 3, 2006 1:50:15 PM

I know!

> Republican Pedophilia -- A Long but Distinguished List
>
> * Republican Congressman Mark Foley abruptly resigned from Congress after "sexually explicit" e-mails surfaced showing him flirting with a 16-year-old boy.
>
> * Republican executive Randall Casseday of the conservative Washington Times newspaper was arrested for soliciting sex from a 13-year-old girl on the Internet.
>
> * Republican chairman of the Oregon Christian Coalition Lou Beres confessed to molesting a 13-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican County Constable Larry Dale Floyd was arrested on suspicion of soliciting sex with an 8-year-old girl. Floyd has repeatedly won elections for Denton County, Texas, constable.
>
> * Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year-old girl and was sentenced to 10 years' probation.
>
> * Republican Party leader Bobby Stumbo was arrested for having sex with a 5-year-old boy.
>
> * Republican petition drive manager Tom Randall pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 14, one of them the daughter of an associate in the petition business.
>
> * Republican County Chairman Armando Tebano was arrested for sexually molesting a 14-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican teacher and former city councilman John Collins pleaded guilty to sexually molesting 13- and 14-year-old girls.
>
> * Republican campaign worker Mark Seidensticker is a convicted child molester.
>
> * Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year-old girls.
>
> * Republican Mayor Tom Adams was arrested for distributing child pornography over the Internet.
>
> * Republican Mayor John Gosek was arrested on charges of soliciting sex from two 15-year-old girls.
>
> * Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.
>
> * Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.
>
> * Republican Committeeman John R. Curtain was charged with molesting a teenage boy and unlawful sexual contact with a minor.
>
> * Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth is a convicted child rapist in Florida.
>
> * Republican zoning supervisor, Boy Scout leader and Lutheran church president Dennis L. Rader pleaded guilty to performing a sexual act on an 11-year-old girl he murdered.
>
> * Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.
>
> * Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years' probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year-old black girl, which produced a child.
>
> * Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.
>
> * Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican advertising consultant Carey Lee Cramer was sentenced to six years in prison for molesting two 8-year-old girls, one of whom appeared in an anti-Gore television commercial.
>
> * Republican activist Lawrence E. King Jr. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
>
> * Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.
>
> * Republican Congressman Donald "Buz" Lukens was found guilty of
> having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.
>
> * Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child
> porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.>
>
> * Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.
>
> * Republican activist Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child.
>
> * Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.
>
> * Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his stepdaughter.
>
> * Republican Judge Ronald C. Kline was placed under house arrest for child molestation and possession of child pornography.
>
> * Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.
>
> * Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.
>
> * Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. "Republican Marty"), was
> taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.
>
> * Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year-old boy and possession of child pornography.
>
> * Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year-old babysitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.
>
> * Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced to jail after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.
>
> * Republican talk-show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican anti-gay activist Earl "Butch" Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year-old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.
>
> * Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.
>
> * Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the Internet from a 14-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year-old boy.
>
> * Republican legislator Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e., exposing himself to children).
>
> * Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was found guilty of molesting a 15-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican County Councilman Keola Childs pleaded guilty to molesting a boy.
>
> * Republican activist John Butler was charged with criminal sexual assault on a teenage girl.
>
> * Republican candidate Richard Gardner admitted to molesting his two daughters.
>
> * Republican Councilman and former Marine Jack W. Gardner was convicted of molesting a 13-year-old girl.
>
> * Republican County Commissioner Merrill Robert Barter pleaded guilty to unlawful sexual contact and assault on a teenage boy.
>
> * Republican City Councilman Fred C. Smeltzer, Jr. pleaded no contest to raping a 15 year-old girl and served 6 months in prison.
>
> * Republican activist Parker J. Bena pleaded guilty to possession of
> child pornography on his home computer and was sentenced to 30 months in federal prison and fined $18,000.
>
> * Republican parole board officer and former Colorado state representative, Larry Jack Schwarz, was fired after child pornography was found in his possession.
>
> * Republican strategist and Citadel Military College graduate Robin Vanderwall was convicted in Virginia on five counts of soliciting sex from boys and girls over the Internet.
>
> * Republican city councilman Mark Harris, who is described as a "good
> military man" and "church goer," was convicted of repeatedly having
> sex with an 11-year-old girl and sentenced to 12 years in prison.>
>
> * Republican businessman Jon Grunseth withdrew his candidacy for Minnesota governor after allegations surfaced that he went swimming in the nude with four underage girls, including his daughter.
>
> * Republican campaign worker, police officer and self-proclaimed reverend Steve Aiken was convicted of having sex with two underage girls.
>
> * Republican director of the "Young Republican Federation" Nicholas Elizondo molested his 6-year-old daughter and was sentenced to six years in prison.
>
> * Republican president of the New York City Housing Development Corp. Russell Harding pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer.
>
> * Republican benefactor of conservative Christian groups, Richard A. Dasen Sr., was found guilty of raping a 15-year-old girl. Dasen, 62, who is married with grown children and several grandchildren, has allegedly told police that over the past decade he paid more than $1 million to have sex with a large number of young women.

The House voted that evening on HR 1559, Emergency War Time supplemental appropriations.
*********

This gets better and better! If he's using the drunk messaging defense, he's going to have to claim he was drunk on the job.

teen: will cyber for yea vote on HR 2456
Maf54: you got it

For Immediate Release:

Foley Hosts Internet Safety Training For Children At Wellington Landings Middle School

April 21, 2006

WELLINGTON, FL.

Congressman Mark Foley (FL-16) will host internet safety training for more then 350 sixth graders at Wellington Landings Middle School (1100 Aero Club Drive, Wellington) provided by the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children. The program is designed to teach children about the dangers on the internet. Recent national reports have brought attention to the issue. Members of the press are invited to attend.

Monday, April 24th, 2:00 p.m.

WHAT: Internet Safety Training for Children.

WHO: Reps. Mark Foley, Representatives from the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children and 350 sixth graders...

o rly? i mean, rly?

where'd that email come from M.?

A wacky friend.

But it didn't take long at all after Foley's resignation for the Democrats to call for an investigation of the entire Republican leadership in the House, charging that GOP stalwarts knew early on that Foley, as they like to say in the rehab business, had a "problem."

Democrats have begun losing their once-significant lead in the polls, and a mere five weeks remain until the midterm elections. Is this scandal the Democrats' own "October Surprise," meant to throw the GOP into a tailspin shortly before the vote?

Recent polls show Democrats aren't doing very well on several key issues. What better way than a good, old-fashioned sex scandal to get people's minds off such things as the importance of winning the war in Iraq, our ongoing vulnerability to terrorist attack and the necessity of keeping the Bush economic boom going?...

Meanwhile, O'Beirne, who I'm sure would much rather be talking about the Washington Post and her husband at this point:

I won't be surprised if the calls for Speaker Hastert to resign owing to his alleged malfeasance in the Foley scandal increase owing, in part, to frustration with his misfeasance in handling the fallout. Taking him at his word, if he doesn't recall learning about the "overly friendly" e-mail exchanges until the end of last week, others are far more responsible than he is for the negligent response last year — including his aides who were informed, the House clerk and Congressmen Alexander and Shimkus. (If they didn't think there was anything wrong/alarming with the exchange why speak to Foley? If it did strike them as wrong/alarming satisfying themselves with a conversation with him was not enough And hiding behind the page's parents' wish that nothing more be done is indefensible. One set of parents, who are only concerned with the well-being of their own son, cannot be allowed to decide how aggressively other parents' children are going to be protected. Note: Page parents who want to cut off contact with a member of Congress should set off deafening alarm bells given that a successful stint as a page would be marked by having made contact with influential congressmen who take an interest in their offspring).

Now, according to Byron's notes on his interview with Rush, Speaker Hastert explains that after learning of the Foley e-mails last year "We told him not to do it anymore. . . " What's with the "We?" He's embracing the earlier negligent response as adequate?

And others more directly involved are more responsible than John Boehner and Tom Reynolds but their buck-passing is unbecoming of public officials. The well-being of the young people in their charge should be a personal concern of every member. Their responsibility is not discharged when they make no detailed inquiries and merely pass along some version of the Foley affair to Hastert because it was "in his corner" of responsibility or because he's the "supervisor."

York, for instance:

Without citing any specific sources, it seems clear that Republicans believe Democrats and their supporting groups are playing a role in the ongoing series of Foley revelations, like the latest IMs from 2003 published by ABC News. At this point in the story, most Republicans aren't saying it, because they don't want to be seen as trying to minimize the seriousness of what Foley did....

If the Justice Department follows up on Hastert's request, the House is going to be faced with some of the same issues it encountered in the investigation into Rep. William "Cold Cash" Jefferson. How far can executive branch investigators go in getting information from the offices of members of Congress? In the Jefferson case, Hastert took a hard line with the Justice Department, and those investigators still haven't seen some material from Jefferson's office. Now, how much will Hastert cooperate with the investigation that he himself has called for?

aw c'mon, call him that and more folks will vote for him.

"All indicators are doing splendidly! The public thinks otherwise! Clearly the administration is not doing its best to convey the truth!"

aka, anything Kudlow has said for months (years?) now.

is that latin for "likes wang measurements"?

xpost

Departure

Desperation

Defiance

Directors: "[N]ow is not the time for a leadership contest. Anyone who suggests otherwise is a fool or a foe."

Their ethical transgressions remain a matter for investigation. Their political malfeasance does not. They got the word that a gay Member who had a reputation for lusting after young men and being overly chummy with the page program had sent inappropriate emails. How the House leadership could have failed to detect the potential for calamity here is beyond me. Call me a loon, but I think our political leaders should have a finely honed acumen for politics. The current House leadership has been consistently deficient in this regard, and this time it might do some serious political damage.

...vs. good ol' Hugh:

Mark Levin just joined me in an interview in which we both blast the allegedly conservative pundits who are working overtime to toss Republicans under the bus on the basis of zero truthed evidence of GOP leadership complicity other than e-mails which major newspapers, ABC's Brian Ross and evidently the FBI all deemed as insufficiently interesting to publish with dispatch or investigate further.

The pundits/activists calling for hastert's resignation should be asking where those IMs have been for three years and why they are being leaked now? There is an innocent explanation --the Foley target has kept them and has now decided to pass them out, and that would be his right. But there are far from innocent explanations as well, and given the Rathergate example of two years ago, pardon me if I am suspicious.

These elections could put Nancy Pelosi in the Speaker's chair --third in line for the presidency--along with John Murtha as Majority Leader, John Conyers at the head of Judiciary and Charles Rangell (and William "The Freezer" Jefferson) at the top of Ways and Means. Given the stakes for this country's safety and security not to mention its economy, I think the center-right would be well served by a lot less posturing and a lot more digging from its new media members.

For those unfamiliar, Hewitt talks like that last paragraph *all the time* -- nothing else matters and he's the most humorless robot as a result.

Barnett, at least, has a crack in the facade, though his narrative is yawnsome:

We’re at a rough point in history. We’re going to be at war for a long time with a dangerous enemy. The Republicans haven’t put forth an inspiring vision on that war because we don’t know what victory will look like. We hoped it would look like a peaceful and democratic Middle East joining the family of nations, and it still may, but it’s going to be a long road from here to there.

But the Democrats don’t even know we’re at war.

WE'RE AT WAR??????????????????

Speaker Hastert: There's two sets of e-mails first of all — or text messages I guess what they are — and one set or bunch of them were done in 2003. We never knew about it. Someone else held those all the way from 2003 until now. The next set was — the other one was — something that the family asked Representative Alexander to look into. He contacted the counsel in our office. Our counsel put him to the page board. The page board confronted Foley, and this was Katrina message that said, basically, "How did you get through the hurricane? Are you okay?" But the parents wanted him... We did know what the text of that message was because the parents held it and they didn't want it revealed, but we stopped it. We went to Foley; told him to stand down, "Don't do this." We asked if there was any sex or explicit language in this message. There was not, and we thought we had the thing revolved. On the other hand, we're trying to do better. As I said, since I've been speaker we've taken the pages out of a dilapidated building; put them in a safe building, given them 24-hour supervision, put more people in the page building so that they have contacts. They have people who look over them and work with them all the time. They are under, basically, 24-hour supervision while they're in Washington. This happened when the pages left Washington — and, you know, we're in the same situation with parents all over America in trying to make sure our kids are safe, and we want to work to make sure all this text messages messaging stuff and computer stuff is safe, too.

RUSH: Mr. Speaker, I'm hearing a lot of people — I'm in Florida, and of course there's a lot of press talk about this and individuals including in Washington — who are saying, "Well, we've known for a long time of Mr. Foley's sexual orientation." When the first set of e-mails hit and the red flags of alarm went up, was there any hesitation on the part of the Republican leadership to not deal with this in public at that point because of his sexual orientation and not to appear to be gay bashing?

SPEAKER HASTERT: No. First of all, what we knew is exactly what I told you. The parents contacted us. They wanted someplace to go to because they didn't want this contact to go on, and what we knew about it was that Foley contacted this kid through e-mail and asked him how he got through the hurricane, the Katrina hurricane. He was from New Orleans, I guess. The other part of it was, well, we didn't know anything else other than what they told us. We went to Foley, confronted him. He said he wouldn't do it anymore. He was sorry. He was just trying to talk to the kid — he liked the kid, nice kid — and he wouldn't do it anymore. We told him not to do it anymore there or to anybody. Period.

Lowry on Hastert:

Like Defending FEMA after Katrina

That's a little bit like what Hastert is trying to do here. After Katrina, it made political sense for Bush just to say, "Look, I'm not happy with the response and we're going to fix it" (which eventually he said).Hastert should be doing the same thing, instead of trying to defend what will strike most people as the indefensible response to the Foley warning signs. Of course, the longer Hastert does it, the harder it will be for him to pull out of it.

Rich,

I'm a former House Republican staffer who now follows Washington for a small investment banking firm. I don't why if there's anything surprising by what I'm writing but please don't cite my name as the firm might not be thrilled.

All of this decapitation talk is only about timing. Hastert is finished. The only question is whether it is now or later. Regardless of the election outcome, Hastert won't be Speaker next year. If the Democrats take the House, then, obviously, Pelosi will be Speaker. If the Republicans somehow hang on, there are enough House Republicans who will withhold their support so he won't have enough votes to remain as Speaker and he won't have his patron, Tom DeLay, around to twist arms for votes to keep him in the Speaker's chair.

The relevant question is whether it is in the Republicans' political interest for him to step down now or later. I don't know if there is time to do so, but I think it would help the base if he announced that he was stepping aside and said that the House needs new Republican leadership. It might be a little messy but they should consult with Newt and Rove about how to project a message of a new start returning to conservative ideals (avoid the word "values"). They can still run on a positive agenda that might save the House. The current path will lead to Speaker Pelosi.

dude already quit the W&M committee months ago, didn't he?

and it amuses me how much these guys reaallly don't like Nancy Pelosi.

hahaha oh how the military talk has permeated these guys' entire subculture

NEVER ATTEMPTED TO HAVE SEXUAL CONTACT W/A MINOR!

he's a closet drinker - never drank @ work just @ night.

"I just remember 1. R0n touched me and it got a bit confused."

someone is asking him about the im's foley wrote during a house vote and if he was drunk then - although he says that mark was drunk when he wrote the naughty im's he was never drunk @ work. (something makes me think we might not be totally leveled w/here)

the lawyer admitted foley to rehab himself.

(how long before the other shoe drops)

according to chris mathews foley went to catholic school.

boo

Maggie Gallagher, meanwhile, is on the warpath:

Rep.
Dennis Hastert is a basically decent man who happens to head up a party that failed to investigate evidence that a GOP congressman (widely known among insiders to be gay) was seeking inappropriate contact with minor boys entrusted to his care. The Washington Times is right: He should resign his leadership post.

So should Rep. Tom Reynolds, the House GOP campaign chairman, who according to news accounts said: "I don't think I went wrong at all; I don't know what else I could have done."

I do.

The Democrats' response is a transparently political and deeply despicable effort to confuse voters into believing that GOP leaders knew about and ignored sexually explicit e-mails. But I don't care. It is enough for me that GOP leaders knew that a parent and child had lodged a complaint. They should at a minimum have questioned other pages to find out if other boys may have been involved.

A full investigation must now take place, and Dennis Hastert simply cannot credibly oversee it. Yes, that investigation must include finding out why this sordid story, involving potential threats to children, emerged only a few weeks before an election. Anyone who sat on or set up this story with partisan motives should be exposed. But first things first.

With great power comes great responsibility. Memo to GOP House leaders: Have the decency to accept responsibility and resign from leadership. Or come November, I vote to let the other side put their bums in charge.

Context -- Gallagher is a former NRO editor.

Rep. Hyde, meanwhile, feels somewhat perturbed at all these nasty questions:

Calls for Speaker Hastert to step down from his leadership position are an overreaction based on what we know. The Speaker has stated that he was not aware of the text messaging between Congressman Foley and a page.

It’s important to separate the email that was reported to the Speaker’s staff, the Clerk of the House, the FBI, and the St. Petersburg Times a few months ago from the text messages that were reported by the media this week. The email was evidently determined by all to be overly friendly but not of a sexual nature while the text messages, just revealed were explicitly sexual.

Any text messages that were sexually explicit should have been turned over to the Speaker, to the Ethics Committee, and to the FBI as soon as they were discovered. Speaker Hastert has recommended that the Attorney General launch an investigation into Foley’s actions and also into who knew about the messages and why they were held to be given to the media five weeks prior to the election rather than to law enforcement officials right away.

This is a sad day for all of us who serve in Congress. Every time a member becomes involved in misconduct, it casts a shadow over the entire membership. The young people who come to Washington to serve as pages and interns should be protected and held in high esteem by everyone serving in that body.

Speaker Tip O’Neill was not asked to resign when scandals involving pages with both a Democrat Congressman and a Republican Congressman surfaced in 1983. It would be unfair to cast blame on the Speaker and others in the Republican Leadership for the despicable actions of one man.

his lawyer's pretty hilarious - excellent combover/disheveled look w/ extreme mouth gnashing enunciation.

Barber and Bainbridge get testy.

http://combatarms.mu.nu/archives/Osama-bin-Laden-Bill-Clinton.jpg

HH: I begin today with Speaker of the House of Representatives, Dennis Hastert. Mr. Speaker, welcome back to the Hugh Hewitt Show.

DH: Hugh, it's great to be on with you.

HH: Now the Washington Times called for your resignation today. Are you going to quit?

DH: No.

HH: Why not?

DH: Well, first of all, what happened with the Foley affair, I'm sorry it happened. We did the best we did with the information that we had at the time. And we're going to try to do a better job. We are going to do a better job. The fact is that we've had...put these kids in a new dormitory, safer, gave them electronic protections, gave them more supervision, almost, it is 24 hour supervision, more people on the job. And what we've been able to do over the last few years is just make it much more safer for them, but evidently, not safe enough. So we've got to not only protect kids when they're in Washington, we also have to protect kids when they're out away from Washington, and at home. And that's exactly what happened there. We're working to do that.

(as do I)

"the media are being quite disingenuous to try to make it a partisan issue--if anything, the republicans didn't know about these issues, and we're gonna be very anxious to find out who in the media are on the other side of the aisle knew about it and kept this from the public interest because, our children are at stake"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7kFyY0hOKQ

also, http://www.theonion.com/content/node/53614

what a fucking obnoxious regurgitation of nannystate nonsense. the best way to "protect kids" is to keep the fucking BAD GUYS off the streets. Hey Dennis, how about exploding with anger and apologies? What a pud.

"Well, I think the House leadership is really scrambling to figure out what they knew, when they knew it and what they did about it. And, you know, they can't all seem to get on the same page." (My emphasis.)

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/10/03/142231

Okay. FOLEY GOT ELECTED.

Do you know his claim to fame? He loves to give parties. He's known as GAY. And, this did not impede his WINNING his elections. At least 3 of them.

What you're learning is that different districts elect different "types."

Murtha? Gets the job done in a depressed area (Johnstown, Pa) that lost jobs when we allowed the steel industry to leave America.

How did Murtha do it? Believe it or not, it took lots of owrk. He got cooperation from Pennsylvania's governor. And, senators. It looked good to the DEFENSE INDUSTRY CONTRACTORS. Others were probably also vying for these factories.

Now? It seems Murtha is free to diss our men in the military without having a single defense contractor bat an eyelash. Business is business.

While FOLEY is another matter. His constitutents LOVE TO PARTY! Hardy party. And, that's why Foley keeps winning.

Well, if you go t a donk district in Georgia you saw a freak, Cynthia McKinney, returned to Congress. Until she punched a cop. And, also appeared to have very bad hair days. Now she's lost. And, somebody else fills this seat.

Hastert, meanwhile, gets GOPsters from all over the map. What, exactly, was he supposed to do with FOLEY? The guy masturbates behind closed coors.

And, just to remind you: THE DEMOCRATS FORBID PHONE TAPPING. You can't use this to find out what the terrorists are up to. And, so, Hastert was supposed to mind-read?

We've got 35 days to go to election day. So far, all the Fake but Accurate stuff ends up reducing the donks attempts at gaining the majority.

And, this is the big hyped story that's supposed to work?

At least the Internet lets us add color.

In the old days kids were lied to about masturbation. Since FOLEY is not blind. And, he doesn't have hair growing on his palms.

But interestingly enough, he can "type dirty." Where in the old days the story would have been he was using his penis to dial.
Posted by: Carol_Herman [TypeKey Profile Page] at October 3, 2006 11:54 PM

(The longer post earlier is possibly even more beamed-straight-from-planet-Tharg.)

Well, if you go t a donk district in Georgia you saw a freak, Cynthia McKinney, returned to Congress. Until she punched a cop. And, also appeared to have very bad hair days.

Sure, the guy is pretty creepy. He sends suggestive emails and indulges in lewd instant messaging with teens. As far as I can see, none of said teens are under 16. Legal consent seems to vary from state to state in the U.S., but certainly 16 would be legal in most if not all Western European countries, and so it should be. So from the evidence, the guy is not a pedophile, he has not actually sexually abused anyone, he hasn't threatened anyone, he's merely sent some lewd, cybersexual IMs to guys who, in the vast majority of Western countries in the world, would be considered above the legal age of consent.

When I was 16-18, I had that blond angelic look that was very appealing to certain types of gay guys, and working as a waiter I used to get hit on regularly, by customers and by guys I worked with. And sometimes it was a bit lewd and a bit creepy. But as long as the guy backed off when I made it plain I wasn't interested, it didn't unduly bother me. I certainly wouldn't have wanted anyone professionally ruined because of it.

As I say, devil's advocate here, and perhaps I haven't been following the story properly.

xpost

If the length of ILX threads accurately reflected the gravity of events, then it'd be a strange old world indeed.

Killing Amish girls = utterly horrendous, but not necessarily many political ramifications.
Congressman in sex scandal = not nearly so horrendous, but serious ramifications for upcoming elections.

foley is getting sensationalist coverage too of course but theres a LOT of important shit going on here & its not going away any time soon - i think GOP systematically covering this up is a good deal more important than some lone nut murder/suicide, which will happen again next week & every week for the end of time but probably in a slightly less exploitable setting - the kind of person who is interested in prizing this story over foley is an idiot at best, rightwing propagandist at worst

vs all the other republican congressman pederasty cover-ups in 2006

A former colleague, Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said on Fox News Channel: "I don't buy this at all. I think this is a phony defense. The fact is, I think he's responsible for what he did here and I think it's a gimmick."

http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2524410

shocker

http://hotlineblog.nationaljournal.com/archives/2006/10/republicans_bla.html

gop really misfiring here - reminds me of the terry shivo debacle in that the only people this behavior can please is their hardcore base - while it grosses everyone else out. seems like the best thing to do would be boot hassert et al asap and say sorry. the longer the guilty parties hang on the worse it gets. and yeah i am enjoying their flailing death throws immensely.

((What is there really to say about the gun shootings? "Oh, how terrible! We need stricter gun control laws." As if thread count is somehow a barometer of how much this community cares about this or that.))

All things considered, I don't give a shit about this.

"I'm rather devastated on another front. Our Congress passed bills this past week that dismantle habeas corpus, that legalize torture and free-for-all wiretapping. The emperor's new edicts target anyone, including citizens, who might have a bad hair day in the President's almighty estimation . . .

"Yet this new regime is apparently a big yawn with the American public. Snooze on, Victoria. Everyone who watches TV knows all about Foley's boxer shorts, but the loss of one's right to privacy, or a jury trial, doesn't seem to make anyone's dick hard . . .

"That odd select few, the voting crew who put this club in office, are so precious that they don't believe that tewworist-related nastiness will ever happen to them. George Bush wouldn't dare waterboard anyone in YOUR family! Terrorists are easy to spot because they incite hysterical racist feelings you can't control!

"And I'm supposed to care about Tom, Dick, and Mark-Foolery?

"I'm not worried about 16-year-old pages insofar as their age is concerned. It's damaging to infantilize them. They are NOT children. When I was sixteen, and my boss harassed me, I was outraged, but I didn't want to be treated like a child; I had my own personal sex life as I pleased.

"These pages deserve respect. Their concerns are a legitimate labor complaint, and they are interns dealing with a hostile work atmosphere, rather than babies without a minder.

"Foley is gross, and resignation is too good for him — but the reason he disgusts is his politics, his ethical vacuum. It's not that he's gay, or thinks hard-bodied young athletes are hot. I'd love to Gitmo him and any of his brethren at dawn, but don't give me this pedo-titillation crap like that's what I'm supposed to care about."

http://www.susiebright.com/susie_brights_journal_/2006/10/i_am_having_an_.html

you could be right but it's just not in these guys' DNA to do that

it doesn't say anything, is the thing. Gun control might be really useful for restricting impulse crimes, crimes of passion, 1-on-1 revenge hits, etc - I think it would be. But a guy like this dude was going to murder a lot of children one way or the other, and the only way to stop him would have been if somebody (a doctor, a mental health worker, a social worker) had noticed the pressure building up and gotten him help. Access to a gun only determined the specific trajectory of his insanity. Insane people have been doing shit like this throughout recorded history. It's terrible, but it's not "important," in the sense that there's really nothing to do about it but mourn.

apparently bob novak is reporting in his column today that the head of the national republican congressional committee (rep. tom reynolds, who knew about the initial batch of emails) urged foley, who was thinking of retiring, to run.

I don't think Susie Bright's viewpoint is supposed to be political in the first place...and possibly not in the second or third or.... I still think she's talking sense.

Just like the ports 'scandal' ... or Katrina... or...

i'm not being all this is the big one dudes. but happening so near the election and cutting so close to the gop's quick, i do think it's a big deal that could swing a few seats - certainly already swung one.

xpost

SIIIIINCE U BEEN GOOOOOOONE!!!

rather

Under indictment and out of the leadership, DeLay was fighting for his political career when Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-La.) brought Foley's suspicious e-mails to the leadership in November 2005. That same month, Cunningham pleaded guilty to accepting $2.4 million in bribes.

With DeLay gone and Rep. Roy Blunt (Mo.) serving as both majority whip and majority leader, the House leadership simply lacked the bodies to forcefully take on the Foley issue, the former aides said. The page program was the speaker's domain, but the speaker, already disposed toward delegating responsibility, was getting tired of all the scandals.

"The speaker has been preoccupied and distracted for more than a year," one former leadership aide said.

"Frankly," said the second, "he was tired."

but i'm sooo sweepy :(

xp

i just like this

Dobson touched on the uproar over former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, D-Florida, who resigned Friday in a scandal over electronic messages he sent to former teenage male congressional pages.

what the fucking fuck.

Don't even pretend the national attention span isn't down to about 72 seconds.

this is one of my least favorite misanthropic tropes - been around for as long as i can remember - pretty soon we're going to be forgetting what we were talking about midsentence.

The chief of staff for Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds, Kirk Fordham, resigned after questions were raised about his role in the handling of the congressional page scandal, according to Republican sources on Capitol Hill.

Those sources said Fordham, a former chief of staff for Congressman Mark Foley, had urged Republican leaders last spring not to raise questionable Foley e-mails with the full Congressional Page Board, made up of two Republicans and a Democrat.

"He begged them not to tell the page board," said one of the Republican sources.

People familiar with Fordham's side of the story, however, said Fordham was being used as a scapegoat by Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert.

They said Fordham had repeatedly warned Hastert's staff about Foley's "problem" with pages, but little was done.

The complaint about Foley was brought to the chairman of the page board, Congressman John Shimkus (R-IL), last spring, and he then consulted with the Clerk of the House of Representatives, Jeff Trandahl.

At Fordham's urging, according to the sources, the matter was not given to the full board, and instead Congressman Foley was privately approached and told to stop all contact with the page he had been e-mailing.

"This is something we should have been aware of, and we weren't, and I'm very unhappy about that," said Congresswoman Shelley Moore Capito (R-WV), who also serves on the page board.

The Democrat on the page board, Congressman Dale Kildee (D-MI), said it was "unprecedented" to have handled the matter without informing the board members.

Fordham was also instrumental in orchestrating Foley's abrupt resignation last week hours after ABC News confronted the congressman with sexually explicit instant messages allegedly sent to pages.

Fordham offered ABC News a deal if it would not publish the content of the instant messages.

"He said we could have the exclusive on the resignation if we did not run direct quotes from the instant messages," said Maddy Sauer, the ABC News producer who dealt with Fordham.

ABC News refused to make any such deal.

Capitol Hill sources say Fordham's firing is being demanded by Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, whose job is on the line because of his handling of the page scandal.

Repeated phone calls to Fordham for comment have not been returned.

KILL THE PIG
SPILL ITS BLOOD

-Piggy (I didn't know, i did what i could, fuck you i ain't quittin')
-Boehner (Fuck Piggy, it's his fault)
-Shimkus (head of the Page program)
-Reynolds (took $100,000 from Foley w/in last year, $500K total, possibly/probably after shenanigans discovered)
-Alexander (Rep of the district that kid came from, i think)

Kirk Fordham today issued the following statement:

"I have resigned today from Congressman Tom Reynolds' office. It is clear the Democrats are intent on making me a political issue in my boss's race, and I will not let them do so.

I want to clarify a few things: When I sought to help Congressman Foley and his family when his shocking secrets were being revealed, I did so as a friend of my former boss, not as Congressman Reynolds' Chief of Staff. I reached out to the Foley family, as any good friend would, because I was worried about their emotional well-being.

At the same time, I want it to be perfectly clear that I never attempted to prevent any inquiries or investigation of Foley's conduct by House officials or any other authorities.

Like so many, I feel betrayed by Mark Foley's indefensible behavior. Again, I will not allow the Democrats to make me a political issue in my boss's race, and I will fully cooperate with the ongoing investigation."

Roy Blunt says he would have handled Foley matter differently

By MARCUS KABEL Associated Press Writer

SPRINGFIELD, Mo. (AP) _ House Majority Whip Roy Blunt said Wednesday he would have advised his congressional colleagues to ask more questions if he had been told earlier about former Rep. Mark Foley's electronic communications with underage male pages.

Blunt said he learned of Foley's actions when the news became public late last week.

He said he was not criticizing the House Republican leadership for its handling of the matter, but he said he would have handled it differently. Blunt noted he has experience handling difficult staff issues from past work as an administrator and as former president of Southwest Baptist University.

''As a former university president and somebody who's had lots of people work for him over the years, I could have been helpful if I'd have known about this,'' Blunt said.

''I think I could have given some good advice here, which is you have to be curious, you have to ask all the questions you can think of,'' he said. ''You absolutely can't decide not to look into activities because one individual's parents don't want you to,'' he said.

Blunt was speaking after announcing $10.5 million in new federal funds for expansion and research projects at a research center under development by Missouri State University in downtown Springfield.

''I'm both disappointed, disgusted and outraged at Mark Foley's conduct,'' Blunt said.

Blunt said Republican House leaders had no reason to inform him about the Foley matter because his position as House whip was not involved in the page program.

Blunt defended two contributions totaling just under $5,000 to Foley's re-election effort by a political action committee that Blunt is honorary chairman of.

The donations were made in April, according to The Joplin Globe, which first reported them.

Blunt, who said he recommends what contributions the Rely on Your Beliefs PAC makes, said he had no reason at the time not to back Foley in a competitive re-election race.

Foley resigned last week and has checked into an undisclosed facility for treatment of alcoholism.

Pro-Homosexual Political Correctness Sowed Seeds for Foley Scandal

Democrats seeking to exploit the resignation of Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) are right to criticize the slow response of Republican congressional leaders to his communications with male pages. But neither party seems likely to address the real issue, which is the link between homosexuality and child sexual abuse. Foley, an unmarried 52-year-old representative, had always refused to answer questions about his sexual orientation. Now that his emails and messages to teenage male pages have been revealed, it appears clear that Foley is a homosexual with a particular attraction to underage boys. While pro-homosexual activists like to claim that pedophilia is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality, evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two. Although almost all child molesters are male and less than 3% of men are homosexual, about a third of all child sex abuse cases involve men molesting boys--and in one study, 86% of such men identified themselves as homosexual or bisexual. Ignoring this reality got the Catholic Church into trouble over abusive priests, and now it is doing the same to the House GOP leadership. They discounted or downplayed earlier reports concerning Foley's behavior--probably because they did not want to appear "homophobic." The Foley scandal shows what happens when political correctness is put ahead of protecting children.

UHHHHHHHHHH DUH

Since when have the Democrats ever insisted a politician be held accountable for a sex scandal involving a staffer, let alone the politician's party leaders? Take Durbin. Did he vote on any impeachment counts against President Clinton for perjury or obstruction of justice over Clinton's sexual relations with intern Monica Lewinsky?

Did Democrats -- the party of feminism, the party that hates sexual harassers -- demand accountability when President Clinton was accused of putting Kathleen Willey's hand on his crotch as she asked for a job? Or demand accountability when President Clinton was accused of dropping his pants in front of Paula Jones and asking that state employee to kiss his genitalia?

You know the answers. Let's continue.

Did Democrats -- who must have chortled at the 1996 GOP convention when NBC anchor Tom Brokaw suggested the Republicans don't think much about "women's issues" like rape -- demand answers from President Clinton when Juanita Broaddrick tearfully recounted to NBC in 1999 how Bill Clinton raped and brutalized her in a Little Rock hotel in the late 1970s?

Go beyond Clinton to see the media-Democrat complex and its partisan standards on sex scandals. On Aug. 25, 1989, The Washington Times revealed Rep. Barney Frank's male-prostitution scandal. Frank's lover, Stephen Gobie, ran an illicit gay sex ring out of Frank's home, and Frank fixed his local parking tickets. Did Frank resign? No. Was there a wave of media pressure on this lawmaker with law-breaking going on in his own home? No. He's still in the House today...

xpost

OH NOES JUST OVER 1/4 OF MOLESTERS LIKE THEIR OWN SEX! RUN AWAY!!!!!!!

Memo to Self [John Podhoretz]
If I ever hire Kirk Fordham, DON'T FIRE KIRK FORDHAM.

http://www.bottradionetwork.com/station_memphis/images/BattleForMarriageJuly2004/TonyPerkins300.jpg

'I'm only into cock if it's like, this big, dudes'

Even if we grant, for argument's sake, that there was negligence on the part of Hastert and the leadership, I think throwing Hastert under the bus for this smacks of the very line of thinking National Review has quite correctly challenged for three years running on Bush and Iraq — namely, the suggestion that reliance on faulty intelligence (which there was reason to know was faulty) should now be seen as malevolent or reckless because, as it turned out, we didn't find WMD in Iraq.

Everyone condemning Hastert, like those libeling Bush (who "lied" so "people died"), already knows how the story turned out. That's not what Hastert knew at the time. If you could look only at what Hastert knew and be certain you could have accurately predicted those vulgar instant messages, you are a better investigator than most people who investigate for a living.

I have issues with these assertions.

So over the next few weeks we will have to hear all sorts of advice over the next few weeks from sites like Hugh Hewitt’s in which they will be offering helpful tidbits (because they care). What you should understand is that they are scared- the more they squeal, the harder you hit. Dean Barnett may not have figured it out, but teh GOP sure has- this issue is explosive.

Why else would the GOP be trying to tie this to Democrats? Think Katherine Harris’s “What did the Democrats know” was just her thinking on her feet? Think it was a mistake that Mark Foley was labeled a Democrat several times on Fox? There is a reason Fordham, Reynolds, Shimkus, and the rest of them can’t even get their stories straight. Think it is a coincidence that despite resigning today, Fordham still dumped this on Hastert and leadership? Republcians and their spinmeisters know how bad this is- it is why they can’t get a sentence out on the topic without mentioning Barney Frank and Gerry Studds (Red State and Barnett both manage to work Ted kennedy into the equation- BOO! Scary Democrats! Kennedy! Booo!). It is why Reynolds, yesterday, in one of the most pathetic displays ever, wrapped himself in children at a day care center to have a press conference.

The Republicans are scared- and they should be. Think of every bullshit law that has been passed in the past ten years by the ‘values’ party- drug laws, terrorism bills, video game labeling, internet monitoring, porn crackdowns- virtually every right wing nutjob wishlist bill has been passed based on support from the public because it was ‘for the children.’ And with Foley, you have the Republican party, when it matters the most- protecting kids in the most basic sense, deciding to look the other way because it might get in the way of their never-ending pursuit of more and more political power. Or they were just too busy to do anything. You choose.

So yeah. They are scared. They should be. And Dean Barnett’s ‘advice’ should be read for what it is- a plea that you stop hitting Republicans over the head with the issue. Right now, only a fool would stop swinging.

This is a misdirection. It's not an issue of faulty prediction that Hastert's being blamed for but for failing to adequately investigate based on the info that he did have.

O'Beirne clawing back groupthink in the face of this is kinda funny. Let's see how long that lasts.

I wonder how DeLay would've handled this.

I can't wait to read George Will's inevitable you-silly-knaves column.

http://www.crooksandliars.com/images/2005/09/11/George-Will.jpg

http://www.connollyco.com/discography/david_bowie/heroes.jpg

that John Cole thing is totally otm. it's always a good idea when the GOP proclaims its advantage on an issue to ask what fear lies behind the proclamation. this time they can't even get any bluster going.

Has everyone forgotten Bob Packwood already?

I think the Dems are probably wise in sitting back and refusing to take advantage of this

they aren't?

As an exposure of the hypocrisy and cynicism of the Republican Party appeal to “family values,” the Foley affair has few equals. Foley was the Republican co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus, a group whose announced purpose included fighting against “online child sexual exploitation.” President Bush hailed Foley and his colleagues as a “SWAT team for kids” only two months ago—at a time when Foley’s conduct was widely known within the top leadership of the House Republicans.

At the same time, the enthusiasm with which congressional Democrats have seized upon the scandal stands in sharp contrast to their unwillingness to oppose the Bush administration and the Republicans on far more significant issues. The same Democrats who issue moralizing pronouncements against the verbal abuse of 17-year-old boys have no problem voting military appropriations so that the Bush administration can send 19-year-olds to their deaths in imperialist wars in Iraq and Afghanistan.

The Foley affair underscores the descent of both big business parties to the point where all issues of political substance are suppressed in favor of scandal-mongering and mudslinging. This process has debased political discourse in the United States and stultified public consciousness. At the same time, ever-larger sections of working people are becoming alienated from the entire political establishment.

After resigning from Congress on Friday, Foley checked himself into a rehab center and issued a statement that he had an alcohol problem. Late Tuesday afternoon, Foley’s attorney issued a statement on behalf of the ex-congressman, confirming that Foley was gay and revealing that he had been molested by a clergyman as a teenager. Foley had never had sex with an underage boy, his attorney said.

This account, which seems plausible, only underscores the element of political savagery in the response by congressmen of both parties to Foley’s evident psychological and emotional problems. Both parties react by calculating the advantages and disadvantages in their struggle over positions and political power, while seeking to outdo one another in denouncing their erstwhile “esteemed colleague.”

otm

My oblique point was that I think the WSWSers don't get that even if the Dems were jumping on this more than other things (which they aren't - this seems to confuse "the Dems" with "the mainstream media"), it's because the public cares about this more than the things the Dems are otherwise concerned with caring about. The WSWSers seem not to want to admit that the public isn't comprised of workers of the world thirsting to unite, but of lots of parents who don't like what they see on their televisions.

i meant don, sorry.

completely ridiculous. there is nothing in foley's attorney's account which is "plausible" whatsoever. any fool watching it could tell you that he was pwned by the reporters asking questions.

i don't like much of the boilerplate leftist language that wsws uses in this and other articles but i think they sometimes state things bluntly in a way that i greatly appreciate.

(also the afghan war does seem to have an imperialist dimension in a broad sense, to me.)

Behold.

Lowry meanwhile does a service in identifying some of the recent points of contradiction between Fordham and others (and just between various people in general) as captured in this Post story. Which makes O'Beirne's last feeble whistle in the wind today that much more enjoyable. (For more of this kinda fun, Malkin vs. Hewitt.)

And:

so far there is no evidence that he actually bent a page, as it were

Funny man, that Jonah.

I was thinking about some larger ramifications myself today and was trying some counterintuitive ways of summing up what this is all indicating. I'll have to think on this further before suggesting anything concrete.

Speaker Hastert Announces Page Program Tip Line Number (Washington, D.C.) House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert today announced the official Page tip line number. Following is his statement:

“As the Speaker I take responsibility for everything in the building. The buck stops here. The safety and security of the students in the Page program is imperative.

“That is why I directed the Clerk of the House to establish a hotline for reporting any information concerning Pages or the Page program. As of this morning, the Clerk of the House has activated the tip-line. It is for anyone with information regarding the Foley matter. This number can also be used to report any other concerns regarding the Page program.

“The Page program tip line is 866-348-0481.” The greeting for the tip line is as follows:

“Thank you for calling the tip line for the United States House of Representatives. If you have information regarding former Congressman Mark Foley and his contacts or communications with any current or former House Pages, or any other information or concern about the House Page program, please leave your information at the tone. Please speak slowly and clearly, and please spell out any names to which you refer. You are encouraged, but not required, to leave your name and contact information. You should be aware of any information you provide may be referred to federal and state law enforcement authorities and/or to House investigative authorities. Thank you for your call.”

“All information will be collected and maintained. Information concerning the Foley matter or other similar activities will be shared with the appropriate authorities. Experts and professionals will be consulted who specialize in these kinds of matters for recommendations on the monitoring, handling and response to these calls.”

Podhoretz's response:

Speaker Hastert, if you keep behaving like a clueless comic schmo, I'm going to stop defending you. Please stop behaving like a clueless comic schmo. Thank you. Signed, one of the five people in the United States who is still defending you.