Absolved: The alcohol made me do it...

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

A source with firsthand knowledge of events says that this coming Thursday, Kirk Fordham — former chief of staff to both Foley and more recently Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y. — will testify that a few years ago he was told by then-House clerk Jeff Trandahl that Foley had been stopped while trying to enter the pages' dorm in an apparently intoxicated state. The source said Fordham will testify that he recalls this being the event that convinced both him and Trandahl to warn Hastert's office, with Fordham designated to have the conversation with Hastert's chief of staff, Scott Palmer. The source said that both aides had been watching Foley's behavior with pages and that Fordham had counseled Foley to watch his behavior.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2550501&page=1

Which still doesn't implicate direct knowledge on the part of Hastert.  All it looks like is one gay trying to keep it quiet and protect another gay.  I want to know why Trandahl and Fordham didn't march over to Hastert's townhouse and tell him directly when it happened.  Essentially, it all sounds like a cover-up of sexual harassment by the minions, not the leaders of the house.

[aoxamaxoa]

Yesterday, according to David Letterman, a call girl business in DC was busted. Dave joked that we now had a sex scandal the whole family can watch.

But I was wondering if the police were sent in there by a higher authority to get dirt on politicians.

Nah, that would be a conspiracy theory and that's not cool.

I am thinking of starting a new thread for predictions on an October surprise.

[aoxamaxoa]

http://satiricalpolitical.com/?p=350

WOODWARD'S OCTOBER SURPRISE: THRUST ASIDE BY DEEP THROAT
By Don Davis
More than 30 years after his career was launched by one Deep Throat, Bob Woodward, in the ultimate of ironies, is losing valuable airtime and publicity due to another type of  "Deep Throat," Mark Foley.

Woodward, promoting his book, State of Denial, confessed to Mike Wallace on 60 Minutes, "this Foley prick is choking off my oxygen and leaving me twisting slowly in the wind."

"In other words," the still sharp-as-a-tack Wallace replied, "a Congressman on the back of a page, is knocking you off the front page."

The original Deep Throat — finally revealed last year as the FBI's Mark Felt — has now passed the torch to a new generation Deep Throat, who Congressional pages often referred to as "Mark-Felt-Me-Up."

Commentator Pat Buchanan, making his record 104th MSNBC appearance in a single day, astutely pointed out that Mark Foley is really the ideal successor to Mark Felt, since Foley would have been extremely comfortable working with J. Edgar Hoover.

Meanwhile, Woodward, greatly upset that the Foley scandal is dominating programs such as Hardball, is frantically working to get out  a second edition, to be entitled State of the Vile.

Early galley editions of this new work, obtained by this reporter, reveal that Woodward has documentary proof that the page scandal goes beyond the walls of Congress, and into the White House itself.  

Indeed, a confidential memorandum from Attorney General Gonzalez to Bush warns that "there's a dancer on your Presidency."

Woodward also turns up evidence that Defense Secretary Rumsfeld denied requests to issue protective condoms to White House staff.  

Finally, Woodward, now convinced that books on gay issues are likely to outsell those on foreign policy, told Larry King that his next project will be devoted entirely to the gay culture, to be called War With Bush.

[okiebybirth]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

A source with firsthand knowledge of events says that this coming Thursday, Kirk Fordham — former chief of staff to both Foley and more recently Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y. — will testify that a few years ago he was told by then-House clerk Jeff Trandahl that Foley had been stopped while trying to enter the pages' dorm in an apparently intoxicated state. The source said Fordham will testify that he recalls this being the event that convinced both him and Trandahl to warn Hastert's office, with Fordham designated to have the conversation with Hastert's chief of staff, Scott Palmer. The source said that both aides had been watching Foley's behavior with pages and that Fordham had counseled Foley to watch his behavior.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2550501&page=1

Which still doesn't implicate direct knowledge on the part of Hastert.  All it looks like is one gay trying to keep it quiet and protect another gay.  I want to know why Trandahl and Fordham didn't march over to Hastert's townhouse and tell him directly when it happened.  Essentially, it all sounds like a cover-up of sexual harassment by the minions, not the leaders of the house.

One gay covering up for another gay?  How about one Republican covering for another Republican?  Or how about one self-loathing closet case pandering to the Republican party who wants to keep them in the closet and leading duplicitous lives that ruin not only them but helps breed this self-loathing sickness?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

A source with firsthand knowledge of events says that this coming Thursday, Kirk Fordham — former chief of staff to both Foley and more recently Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y. — will testify that a few years ago he was told by then-House clerk Jeff Trandahl that Foley had been stopped while trying to enter the pages' dorm in an apparently intoxicated state. The source said Fordham will testify that he recalls this being the event that convinced both him and Trandahl to warn Hastert's office, with Fordham designated to have the conversation with Hastert's chief of staff, Scott Palmer. The source said that both aides had been watching Foley's behavior with pages and that Fordham had counseled Foley to watch his behavior.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2550501&page=1

Which still doesn't implicate direct knowledge on the part of Hastert.  All it looks like is one gay trying to keep it quiet and protect another gay.  I want to know why Trandahl and Fordham didn't march over to Hastert's townhouse and tell him directly when it happened.  Essentially, it all sounds like a cover-up of sexual harassment by the minions, not the leaders of the house.

One gay covering up for another gay?  How about one Republican covering for another Republican?  Or how about one self-loathing closet case pandering to the Republican party who wants to keep them in the closet and leading duplicitous lives that ruin not only them but helps breed this self-loathing sickness?

That takes a good stretch of the imagination, my guess is you were blessed with a far more limber imagination than I was.

[okiebybirth]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

A source with firsthand knowledge of events says that this coming Thursday, Kirk Fordham — former chief of staff to both Foley and more recently Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-N.Y. — will testify that a few years ago he was told by then-House clerk Jeff Trandahl that Foley had been stopped while trying to enter the pages' dorm in an apparently intoxicated state. The source said Fordham will testify that he recalls this being the event that convinced both him and Trandahl to warn Hastert's office, with Fordham designated to have the conversation with Hastert's chief of staff, Scott Palmer. The source said that both aides had been watching Foley's behavior with pages and that Fordham had counseled Foley to watch his behavior.

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/story?id=2550501&page=1

Which still doesn't implicate direct knowledge on the part of Hastert.  All it looks like is one gay trying to keep it quiet and protect another gay.  I want to know why Trandahl and Fordham didn't march over to Hastert's townhouse and tell him directly when it happened.  Essentially, it all sounds like a cover-up of sexual harassment by the minions, not the leaders of the house.

One gay covering up for another gay?  How about one Republican covering for another Republican?  Or how about one self-loathing closet case pandering to the Republican party who wants to keep them in the closet and leading duplicitous lives that ruin not only them but helps breed this self-loathing sickness?

That takes a good stretch of the imagination, my guess is you were blessed with a far more limber imagination than I was.

The stretch of imagination is on your part, assuming that gays are protecting each other from being exposed as pedophiles.  I find that offensive that you'd reach for the "blame the gays" to defend your position that Haskert is free from liability.  How far will you go?  Suppose Fordham and Foley were black, would you then say it was one black man protecting another black man?  Or does that make you a little uncomfortable whereas you feel free to say it looks like a cover-up by gays?

[Conan71]

The stretch of imagination refers to your constant fantasies, referrals, and insinuations of Hastert being a closeted gay.  Secondly, based on any evidence leaked by the media so far, Foley's not a pedophile, since these were not pre-pubescent boys.

Being identified as gay isn't too popular with the far right of the GOP, which was the reason Foley didn't run for Senate a few years back.  

He was advised at the time that Democrats would out him during that campaign, but it sounds as if they were willing to leave him alone if he'd have lesser aspirations for power.  Or now it would seem, until the Dems needed a boost in the polls.  Call me skeptical, but if the Dems would have had the approval numbers in the areas of public opinion on substantive issues, they wouldn't have needed Foley.

Fordham is an admitted homosexual, so is Foley.  They aren't black so I'm not going to debate hypotheticals with you.  Can you come up with any other reason, other than Fordham wanting to help save a friend's political career for not contacting Hastert mono-a-mono, instead of Hastert's minions?

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

Call me skeptical, but if the Dems would have had the approval numbers in the areas of public opinion on substantive issues, they wouldn't have needed Foley.

Substantive issues? The war in Iraq? Lies about WMDs? 650,000 dead Iraqis? The struggling economy? Secret prisons? Spying on Americans by the federal government? What kind of substantive issues do you want?

[Conan71]

The GOP had been seeing surging gains in opinion polls about national security, the economy (it takes a lot of spin to say the economy is suffering), moral issues, etc. prior to the Foley scandal.

One of the lib propagandists was gloating the other night about how the Democrats have surged so nicely since Foleygate broke.

[iplaw]

quote:
The war in Iraq?

Okay. I buy this one.

quote:
Lies about WMDs?

We've been over and over this one.  If he was lying, so was every other intelligence agency on the planet.

quote:
650,000 dead Iraqis?

I haven't read the paper on this one yet, but I am getting ready to right now.

quote:
The struggling economy?

Lowest unemployment in recent history, record DOW levels, extremely low interest rates, relatively little inflation and the highest ever recorded tax renvenues, and a deficit which is shrinking rapidly as we saw in the news this morning.

quote:
Secret prisons? Spying on Americans by the federal government?

We've been over these ad infinitem as well.

quote:
What kind of substantive issues do you want?

How about some that aren't regurgitated air-america talking points.

[okiebybirth]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

The stretch of imagination refers to your constant fantasies, referrals, and insinuations of Hastert being a closeted gay.  Secondly, based on any evidence leaked by the media so far, Foley's not a pedophile, since these were not pre-pubescent boys.

Being identified as gay isn't too popular with the far right of the GOP, which was the reason Foley didn't run for Senate a few years back.  

He was advised at the time that Democrats would out him during that campaign, but it sounds as if they were willing to leave him alone if he'd have lesser aspirations for power.  Or now it would seem, until the Dems needed a boost in the polls.  Call me skeptical, but if the Dems would have had the approval numbers in the areas of public opinion on substantive issues, they wouldn't have needed Foley.

Fordham is an admitted homosexual, so is Foley.  They aren't black so I'm not going to debate hypotheticals with you.  Can you come up with any other reason, other than Fordham wanting to help save a friend's political career for not contacting Hastert mono-a-mono, instead of Hastert's minions?

Foley was a closet case, not a admitted homosexual.  He declared his homosexuality as he slunk off to rehab.

I haven't had constant fantasies about Haskert, that is your term, I merely stated once what was out there on the web and admitted it was just heresay at this point.

There could be many reasons Fordham didn't go directly to Haskert, one of them being he may have been following the chain of command; I don't know the answer to that question but I wouldn't grab a chapter from the book of the Family Research Council and throw it out there that it's some gay conspiracy that is tainting the good name of Republicans.

By you saying it was one gay covering for another gay doesn't reflect well on you.  As far as changing the word "gay" for "black" in your sentence, I wouldn't expect you to attempt that because it would amplify what you really were doing, scapegoating.

[aoxamaxoa]

You mean like, "are you better off today then you were 4 years ago?"

This thread is getting tired.

Bring on Mel Gibson.

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

The stretch of imagination refers to your constant fantasies, referrals, and insinuations of Hastert being a closeted gay.  Secondly, based on any evidence leaked by the media so far, Foley's not a pedophile, since these were not pre-pubescent boys.

Being identified as gay isn't too popular with the far right of the GOP, which was the reason Foley didn't run for Senate a few years back.  

He was advised at the time that Democrats would out him during that campaign, but it sounds as if they were willing to leave him alone if he'd have lesser aspirations for power.  Or now it would seem, until the Dems needed a boost in the polls.  Call me skeptical, but if the Dems would have had the approval numbers in the areas of public opinion on substantive issues, they wouldn't have needed Foley.

Fordham is an admitted homosexual, so is Foley.  They aren't black so I'm not going to debate hypotheticals with you.  Can you come up with any other reason, other than Fordham wanting to help save a friend's political career for not contacting Hastert mono-a-mono, instead of Hastert's minions?

Foley was a closet case, not a admitted homosexual.  He declared his homosexuality as he slunk off to rehab.

I haven't had constant fantasies about Haskert, that is your term, I merely stated once what was out there on the web and admitted it was just heresay at this point.

There could be many reasons Fordham didn't go directly to Haskert, one of them being he may have been following the chain of command; I don't know the answer to that question but I wouldn't grab a chapter from the book of the Family Research Council and throw it out there that it's some gay conspiracy that is tainting the good name of Republicans.

By you saying it was one gay covering for another gay doesn't reflect well on you.  As far as changing the word "gay" for "black" in your sentence, I wouldn't expect you to attempt that because it would amplify what you really were doing, scapegoating.

You insinuated or directly stated in three different posts about Hastert being gay.

If Fordham and Foley tried to keep their little secret to themselves, then that would be a conspiracy between two gay men, would it not?  I don't read Family Research Council clap-trap.

[okiebybirth]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

quote:Originally posted by okiebybirth

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

The stretch of imagination refers to your constant fantasies, referrals, and insinuations of Hastert being a closeted gay.  Secondly, based on any evidence leaked by the media so far, Foley's not a pedophile, since these were not pre-pubescent boys.

Being identified as gay isn't too popular with the far right of the GOP, which was the reason Foley didn't run for Senate a few years back.  

He was advised at the time that Democrats would out him during that campaign, but it sounds as if they were willing to leave him alone if he'd have lesser aspirations for power.  Or now it would seem, until the Dems needed a boost in the polls.  Call me skeptical, but if the Dems would have had the approval numbers in the areas of public opinion on substantive issues, they wouldn't have needed Foley.

Fordham is an admitted homosexual, so is Foley.  They aren't black so I'm not going to debate hypotheticals with you.  Can you come up with any other reason, other than Fordham wanting to help save a friend's political career for not contacting Hastert mono-a-mono, instead of Hastert's minions?

Foley was a closet case, not a admitted homosexual.  He declared his homosexuality as he slunk off to rehab.

I haven't had constant fantasies about Haskert, that is your term, I merely stated once what was out there on the web and admitted it was just heresay at this point.

There could be many reasons Fordham didn't go directly to Haskert, one of them being he may have been following the chain of command; I don't know the answer to that question but I wouldn't grab a chapter from the book of the Family Research Council and throw it out there that it's some gay conspiracy that is tainting the good name of Republicans.

By you saying it was one gay covering for another gay doesn't reflect well on you.  As far as changing the word "gay" for "black" in your sentence, I wouldn't expect you to attempt that because it would amplify what you really were doing, scapegoating.

You insinuated or directly stated in three different posts about Hastert being gay.

If Fordham and Foley tried to keep their little secret to themselves, then that would be a conspiracy between two gay men, would it not?  I don't read Family Research Council clap-trap.

Stating their sexual orientation and implying it's relevant to them keeping a secret to themselves is gay-baiting and scapegoating.  And you are the one throwing out there that they conspired to keep it a secret, not any reputable media.  You are the one who is tying the information supposedly not getting to Haskert because Fordham and Foley are gay.

(Let me replace "gay" with "black" in your statement and see how it sounds.) All it looks like is one black trying to keep it quiet and protect another black.  Not quite what you'd say in polite company, huh? Conan, it doesn't sit well if you would have said it about two black men and it doesn't sit well that you said it because they are gay.  Instead of it being about race or sexual orientation, it's more than likely because of party affiliation that things occurred however they happened.

[papaspot]

quote:Originally posted by Conan71

The GOP had been seeing surging gains in opinion polls about national security, the economy (it takes a lot of spin to say the economy is suffering), moral issues, etc. prior to the Foley scandal.

One of the lib propagandists was gloating the other night about how the Democrats have surged so nicely since Foleygate broke.

Surges don't mean much for Republicans OR Democrats. Talk about spin...I'd say it's spin to say that the Republicans were even experiencing a surge at all.