Behind the Foley Mess

Needless to say, I’m disgusted by Mark Foley’s behavior, and less than pleased that the House of Representatives is unable to punish him in any way (the worst they could do would be to kick him out of Congress, which they can’t, because he already resigned).

I’m gravely disappointed in Speaker Dennis Hastert, whom it appears knew enough, long enough ago, that he should have taken action. Worse, the conspiracy theory about Democrats holding back for an “October surprise” was just transparently blame-shifting.

But, it’s not like there was no election-oriented scheming involved… The Hill reports that it was a Republican staffer who disclosed the e-mails to a source who then acted as an intermediary to the media. In JULY.

That Foley’s scandalous communications came to public light during Congress’s final week in Washington was largely determined by the media outlets which obtained the suspicious e-mails in the middle of the summer, said the person who provided them to reporters several months ago.

So, it wasn’t the Democrats who held this damaging information until it would do the most harm to Republicans in general; it was ABC News.

Foley should be labeled a predator. There’s no evidence that he actually molested anyone, but at the very least, he’s guilty of sexual harassment, and there ought be a registry for people like that. Of course, it’s not really necessary now, since everyone with a pulse knows about it at this point.

Hastert should resign his speakership now, along with any other of the leadership team who knew, and failed to act.

And ABC News should be censured for political gamesmanship by a supposedly unbiased media organization. Their credentials weren’t very good to begin with (in my opinion), but now they’re shot.

It’s time to restore some bipartisan dignity and honesty to our government.

8 Responses to “Behind the Foley Mess”

  1. on 07 Oct 2006 at 9:39 pm daco

    Okay, obviously Hastert is trying to divert attention to ABC, Clinton, little green men, etc. This isn’t a politically charged question, and I only ask it to be educated….Do we really know for a fact that Hastert was aware of the REAL problem? Fill me in.

  2. on 07 Oct 2006 at 9:51 pm Netmom

    According to Roll Call, NRCC Chairman Tom Reynolds has said publicly that he informed Hastert just after the February leadership elections, seven months ago.

    Since the whole thing is a “he said-he said” at this point (until or unless someone can produce a postmark or e-mail), it’s hard to say for certain. But why would the head of the NRCC say so, if it wasn’t so? What would he have to gain, unless he’s one of the few interested in cleaning up the place?

  3. on 07 Oct 2006 at 10:03 pm daco

    I don’t know. My real question is what did Reynolds tell Hastert. If Hastert is guilty of covering something up…off with his head, but I’m not jumping on the band wagon without some real facts. So far it sounds like white noise out there.

  4. on 08 Oct 2006 at 12:07 am AnotherAtomicCitizen

    The Cover Up; the whole legislative branch is a cover to a high cash flow pressure cooker. I am not surprised of the cover up. The child has something to say also, but your Roll Call stated this from the parents: “the parents didn’t want the matter pursued,.” Well if this doesn’t sound like the Koons issue we have here.

    I am fearful government office has left the plane of control and is plane out there. One office has no idea of what is going on in other offices. Corker has this same problem when he goes through his governmental dreams. I can only imagine behind the scenes when that aquarium was built. It was favoritism all the way, and that is Foley’s character and the page’s weakness.

    Isn’t there a central office for these pages to report and pick up schedules? I can only believe there are more children at risk because this goes all the way down to probation officers and school teachers. If you stand back and look at our children’s lives, the government is closer to them than what time some of the parents is spending with their children. I’m going to hug mine longer while I can. The government keeps hiding more than E-mails.

    I can say that some of the parents are not so innocent. I believe I can get myself out of a child lying about me before the day is over if not in minutes. I feel the story of sexuality on the hill is the sickest it has ever been, and the pages are just enjoying the parent approved free porn. Thank you for being firm against a mentally weak man Netmom. I will post my belief that Foley must never be allowed in government anywhere again.

  5. on 08 Oct 2006 at 8:45 am daco

    That made no sense to me. You preface your comment as “the cover up” and then immediately jump the tracks.

    Do you hve something to add that is actually on topic AAC?

  6. on 08 Oct 2006 at 11:04 am AnotherAtomicCitizen

    The cover up is inherited, but being sexual to children is damaging. More damaging than covering up a boiler that will let out steam at some point.

    My point is the cover up is a band aid to a more serious problem of kids and adults engaging in sexual acitvity. That is the real story there and here.

  7. on 08 Oct 2006 at 5:57 pm daco

    Okay, well I guess you tried.

  8. on 12 Oct 2006 at 1:28 am YoungBadFrog

    Gerry Eastman Studds, a Democratic congressman, molested an underage page and his punishment was bad words. No more serious action was taken by his party. We won’t go chapter and verse on the other numerous Democratic offenses.

    If the Democratic party position on this was milder it would be hypocrisy (it is too over the top to be hypocrisy). I almost choked when I realized the Foley was being castigated for bad emails…

    On the other hand, it we don’t hold at least one party to high standards we will have no standards.

Trackback this Post | Feed on comments to this Post

Leave a Reply