Home > General > Journalists miss the point, again, news at 11:00.

Journalists miss the point, again, news at 11:00.

October 4th, 2006

Steve H. has more.

Seems to me that this is what happened:

1. Some slug in the DNC knew about Foley.
2. Said slug told the kid to IM Foley and record the text, OR said slug had an impostor do it.
3. Said slug created the blog and wrote the text.
4. Said slug told Nancy Pelosi and others in the Democratic Party to lie when the news came out, deliberately confusing IMs and emails, in order to take down not just Foley, but Hastert. Decapitating the GOP in the House for the second time in less than a year.

Sounds pretty plausible to me. As long as we don’t forget that Foley was scum, lets also not forget the stunning hypocrisy of Democrats crying a river over an elected official behaving badly.

powered by performancing firefox

  • Share/Bookmark
Comments appear entirely at the whim of the guy who pays the bills for this site, and may be deleted, edited, ridiculed, or otherwise pissed over as he in his capricious fancy sees fit. Thank you.
  1. MikeyNTH
    October 4th, 2006 at 14:19 | #1
    Reply | Quote
    If the Dems did that, then kudos for a well-organized tactical battle-plan, and boos to the Rebulicans for leaving themselves vulnerable right there.

    For some reason, the more these people are in the spotlight, the more outrageous they act.
    Dummies! It isn't 1958, you're not Jack Kennedy, and the press and the opposition party are not going to ignore your shenanigans, so a little discretion please; close the blinds and don't put anything in writing!

  2. Randy Rager
    October 4th, 2006 at 14:48 | #2
    Reply | Quote
    I'm still trying to wrap my head around what exactly the Republican leadership did wrong. They were informed of the emails (not the IMs) a year ago, and told at that time that the family did not wish to pursue the matter, and law enforcement had been notified. The emails were creepy but nothing like the IM's.

    In any case, what everyone is overlooking here is this: 16 is the age of consent in D.C. Foley didn't have sex with the page, and wouldn't have been breaking the law if he did.

    Just another case of Democrats being hypocrites by trying to paint Republicans as moral degenerates.

  3. MikeyNTH
    October 4th, 2006 at 16:34 | #3
    Reply | Quote
    The Republican leadership didn't think, Randy. They didn't put on their thinking caps and ask themselves "What would an average person think if they heard of a congressman getting a little overly-friendly with teenage boys? Would that person think 'Nah. Nuthin' to see here', or would that person think 'Ewww, icky'?"

    If you find innocent stuff, do not forget to do a little damage control and pull the guy aside for a heart-to-heart chat. Adults are to keep their hands off of high school kids, male or female, end of story. Even if above the age of consent, keep the hands off. If you are in a position of power and authority that story is pure plutonium and yes - it will get out.

    This ain't 1958.
    No one here is Jack Kennedy.
    A little instinct for self-preservation, please.

    N.B. Politically speaking, it is the same as John Kerry being surprised by the Swiftboat Vets. That is, the surprise is that he was surprised.

  4. Randy Rager
    October 4th, 2006 at 17:26 | #4
    Reply | Quote
    I believe critics of the Republicans on both sides of the aisle are crediting them with a bit more omniscience than they actually possessed. Given the information they had, they did the right thing.
  5. Jersey Dave
    October 4th, 2006 at 19:47 | #5
    Reply | Quote
    Agreed. This really sucks, as there are kids involved. I hope we find out just who sat on the IM info for so long. It may not be who the media are leading us to believe. If it is some Dem group, there could be backlash, if they stonewalled or did not inform the investigators, so they could have it as a club against the whole party....
Comments are closed.