Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

We should give Foley a pass, and be nice to him....

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 05:47 PM
Original message
We should give Foley a pass, and be nice to him....
Yes, that is what the RW is basically saying in their most recent attacks (see below for example). WHY? Well, because dems did not do enough in their own party with situations similar to his.

So let's turn this about eh? The rw was all about going after clinton for whitewater and lying under oath about an affair he had. IE, they felt a sitting president should be examined in great detail via spending millions - for the good of the nation.

What about the rest of the bush family and it's hands in the cookie jars? How about Marvin bush and Stratesec (the whole wtc thing) and Wirt Walker (oooh looks like stratesec filed bankruptcy in 2004...interesting stuff there too). And of course Neil Bush and the no child left behind (or is that Foley's saying.....) debacle.

Yeah - let's let this guy totally off the hook, fair is fair eh? Let's also let everyone else off the hook as bush was a coke head (illegal), and...well I could go on all night but would run out of beer.

Hey lurking wingers, are you REALLY saying that Foley should get a pass? Take that to church this Sunday and preach about Mmmm K?

You folks crack me up.

Example:

Here is a RW rag (IDB) take on it:

In 1983, then-Democratic Rep. Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was caught in a similar situation. In his case, Studds had sex with a male teenage page something Foley hasn't been charged with.

Did Studds express contrition? Resign? Quite the contrary. He rejected Congress' censure of him and continued to represent his district until his retirement in 1996.

In 1989, Rep. Barney Frank, also of Massachusetts, admitted he'd lived with Steve Gobie, a male prostitute who ran a gay sex-for-hire ring out of Frank's apartment. Frank, it was later discovered, used his position to fix 33 parking tickets for Gobie.

What happened to Frank? The House voted 408-18 to reprimand him a slap on the wrist. Today he's an honored Democratic member of Congress, much in demand as a speaker and "conscience of the party."

In 2001, President Clinton, who had his own intern problem, commuted the prison sentence of Illinois Rep. Mel Reynolds, who had sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer and pressured her to lie about it. (Reynolds also was convicted of campaign spending violations.)

You get the idea. Democrats not only seem OK with the kind of behavior for which Foley is charged, but also they protect and excuse it. Only when it's a Republican do they proclaim themselves shocked shocked! when it comes to light.

http://www.investors.com/editorial/editorialcontent.asp...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
niyad Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 05:55 PM
Response to Original message
1. ummm, idiots--studds wasn't CAUGHT in 1983-- the incident in
question happened TEN YEARS PREVIOUSLY. and apparently the people in his district didn't think it mattered, since they elected him at least 5 more times. hmmmm.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
IChing Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 06:01 PM
Response to Original message
2. 9 points
The real difference can be expressed in 9 simple statements, based on what we've been told so far about both cases:

1. As far as we know Studds was not forcing his unwelcome attentions on a series of pages, one after the other.

2. No page went to the Democratic leadership asking for protection from Studds, only to be rebuffed and ignored.

3. The Democratic Party did not run on a platform of "righteousness" and anti-homosexuality, while behaving hypocritically in private.

4. The Democratic Speaker of the House did not make statements about the incident that were immediately revealed to be outright lies ... by fellow Democrats.

5. The Democrats did not then begin an orchestrated media campaign to blame the entire problem on ... the Republicans (or the young man, for that matter).

6. Democrats did not take to the airwaves with talking points that were transparent lies.

7. Pro-Democratic writers (there weren't any bloggers then, remember?) didn't violate the privacy of the young man involved and give his name out to the press. They didn't call the young man a "beast" or blame him for Studds' behavior, either. (Have you heard any Republican leaders criticize the bloggers who gave out the young victims' names?)

8. How many times does this need to be said? It's the cover-up, stupid.

9. The Democratic leadership did not protect a predator, conceal his wrongdoing, and allow him to continue his activities in secret.. The Republicans did.

Let me repeat that last point, because it's getting overlooked:

The Democratic leadership did not protect a predator, conceal his wrongdoing, or allow him to continue his activities in secret. The Republicans did.

http://www.smirkingchimp.com/node/1483
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Poppyseedman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 06:04 PM
Response to Original message
3. Actually, I think the harder we push the more it can hurt us.
Edited on Sun Oct-08-06 06:05 PM by Poppyseedman
Every time we push the issue, we give the rethugs a chance to point out we didn't take care of our own "problem" congressman. Most people don't remember the Studds, Frank, Condi events and we let them be reminded daily though GOP talking points !!! :crazy:

For some strange reason we think the Foley affair is going to push rethugs voters to our side because he is a sleaze ball, when we as a party didn't do anything about our issues with similar events.

Personally, I don't get it.

As a party we have real issues to get the voter engaged with and we are pushing Foley because it makes rethugs seem hypocritical.

I think almost ALL voters think ALL politicians are some what hypocritical, so we are only confirming their beliefs and not drawing a distinction on substantive issues.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Redstone Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 06:05 PM
Response to Original message
4. H'e's a pervert, but he's OUR pervert, so it's OK. That's exactly what
they're saying, yes?

Redstone
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
The Straight Story Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 06:18 PM
Response to Reply #4
5. Pretty much, damn said eh :)
When sides choose perverts and defend em.

Morals and values, good for the people, not for the law makers and power brokers. What are they scared of I wonder...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
elfin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-08-06 06:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. Oh sure, let's "forgive" him ala Oprah
and the Amish --- NOT.

While I sympathize with his difficulties in being gay And embedded in the homophobic GOP --- being a predator AND a hypocrite to boot is not forgiveable in my book.

He needs to pay whatever is coming and then live free to be a gay (and non-predatory) American in a Democratically controlled government.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 25th 2014, 04:59 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC