Absolved: The alcohol made me do it...

[snopes]

Man, the guy is really sick. Flush him. He's also really STUPID! For the record, I voted that he should face criminal charges in the online poll. I do believe that these charges will need to be backed up by facts though and not just lock him up and throw away the key without any evidence.
Also, if anyone else knew about this and did nothing, they oughtta go up on charges as well. Anyone that condoned his pedephilia by turning the other head needs to either be in jail or at the very least out of office.
And ANOTHER thing. Using alcoholism as an excuse is about as lame as it gets.

I do suspect that there are Republicans who kept it quiet for shameful, yet obvious reasons, and Democrats that kept it discreet for release at a very opportune time. Those are merely suppositions on my part.

[aoxamaxoa]

This is a GOP issue.
Like it or not.

When one party claims moral superiority over the other...which the GOP has done to get votes....it better be willing to face the consequences.

GOP moral values:

1) Torture is OK.
2) No more habeus corpus.
3) Macacas
4) come here, little boy.....


yep, it's getting better all the time

[iplaw]

I think it's safe to say that the conversation had taken a more balanced tone throughout the day until aox graced us again.  We get it aox...we understand you like the democrats...too bad you can't see that you're position is the pinnacle of hypocrisy.

Maybe you'd like to explain why the democrats kept Studds in office?

[Conan71]

quote:Originally posted by rwarn17588

Back on topic: More news about Foley, and it gets even sleazier:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2006/10/new_foley_insta.html

More news?  Isn't this what he was accused of in the first place?

Why, pray tell, didn't these pages come forward in 2003, instead of waiting until a more politically opportune time?  Hmmmmm? How much money has changed hands to get someone to come forward?

That has nothing to do with my registered party affilliation, it has to do with my cynicism and skepticism of the Washington power machine.

To those of you who defended Studds by saying his acts were consensual, the contents of the IM look nothing less than consensual.

Hey, I'm not condoning, it's wrong, very wrong. But in the context to which people have tried to defend the actions of Studds, I don't see the difference, except that there's been no evidence brought forth about physical contact with Foley.  There's also been no evidence other than a lone Democrat who thinks information was withheld from him.

If anyone refuses to see the irony in the timing then you are following the Democratic party line.

[rwarn17588]

Conan blames the victims, instead of the predator.

[}:)]

[iplaw]

Come on rwarn, you're a bigger person than that.  Nothing in his response can be construde as blaming the victim.

What did he say that could possibly be construed as saying that he is blaming anyone other than Foley.

[rwarn17588]

The joke just writes itself:

[iplaw]

So we've now devolved back into this being only a republican issue...sounds like the thoughts of a true "independent" there rwarn.  

You never did answer why it was okay that the Democratic congress allowed Studds to remain in office after the exact same offense...

[rwarn17588]

Beats me, I wasn't even 20 years old at the time, and don't even remember it.

I was in college, and didn't pay attention to things as much then. I'd never ever heard of Studds until this week.

[iplaw]

It's amazing how people (you and lon ok) suddenly can't read or research when they are presented with evidence that what they are saying is GARBAGE.  

Try looking it up and explaining to me why this issue isn't selective outrage that fits the agenda of a particular party.

[snopes]

Rwarn has a selective memory. History doesn't seem to matter. I realize Rwarn that what this guy has done (or purported to do) is bad, but to neglect the track record of the democrats because you were only 20 is sad.

[rwarn17588]

Well, it's hard for me to feign outrage when I didn't follow the Studds story at the time. It's hard for me to get outraged 23 years after the fact, especially when said congressman has been long gone.

I'm in the here and now, not 23 years ago when it doesn't matter NOW.

But if you wish ...

OOOOOHHHH!!! The OUTRAGE!!!

[}:)]

[snopes]

Thank you. Even if the smiley is as about as sarcastic as you can get.

[rwarn17588]

Hey, I always chortle when a self-righteous politician self-immolates.

[Conan71]

Here's some history for you RWarn:

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

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

I have looked high and low and cannot find anywhere that Studds expressed an ounce of remorse for his actions.  Both Foley and Crane have expressed contrition.  Also, Studds affair took place in 1973 and wasn't outed until 1983.

Now are you willing to be objective, as the independent you claim to be, and assume as you have so readilly with Foley that there might have been some sort of cover-up amongst the Democratic ranks to keep that silent for TEN YEARS?

What party was in control of congress back then?

What shocks me even more than the fact that neither Studds nor Crane was jack-booted from the House, is that Studd's district kept re-electing this guy through 1994, while Crane's constituents were smart enough to give him the heave-ho in the next election.

Please don't say "That's ancient history."  It's relevant because Democrats want Foley and any Republican who knew about this run out of town on rails.  That is a double-standard and it's as if they want a different set of ethics and morals for their own members than the Republicans, how can you not draw that conclusion.  I can't even begin to imagine the screeching from the left if Bush were caught in an extra-marital affair, after saying Clinton's affair was irrelevant for so many years.

The entire Congress needs to hold itself to the highest moral and ethics codes, without exception.

The Republicans have taken the proper direction by washing their hands of this guy instead of trying to defend him, and demanding a full investigation.  Doesn't sound like the actions of a bunch of guys afraid of being implicated in a cover-up.  If there was a GOP cover-up, I want to see anyone involved booted out of Washington.  At this point though, a cover-up is nothing but pure speculation.