Soooo, now we deflect the story from the folks responsible for the story occurring to those dirty dastards on the left. I have to hand it to you righties you have been well schooled by Lee Atwater/Karl Rove.

Toss out a bone -what a rotten so and so that Foley is. Then change the subject as rapidly as possible. The folks who shout from the rooftops about "personal responsibility" and "values" change the subject as fast as you can. Hardly a word about the "responsibility" of those who may have covered this up. Not a word about the "value(s)" of those like Hastert and other leaders of the party of values who have given so many different stories they can't remember which one is the one of the day.

Actually, if it turns out to be a "nefarious" "political" trick by those dirty rotten scoundrel lefties I'd think you'd be standing and applauding. Remember Atwood and the Willy Horton ad designed to stir up racism and fear? Remember the smear campaign against McCain in 2000 with the phony claim about his "illegitimate black baby?" And the illegitimate daughter? Remember in 2000 when Murdoch's NY Post claimed Hillary called one of Bill's aides a fu***** jew bastard? Remember the 2002 smear of Max Cleland as unpatriotic? Remember how whenever there was bad news for Mr Bush in 2004-2005 there just happened to be elevations in that silly terror alert?

So , forget what really happened here, and hand the (maybe) messenger(s). If that's not typical of your bankrupt ideology I don't know what it.

The crazies may now respond with your litany of dem dirty tricks because as usual you can't stand up and own what this scandal is really all about. A corrupt congressional party with corrupt leadership.

Funny you should bring up Willie Horton, Hugh. He was first made a political issue in the Democratic primaries back in 1988 -- by Al Gore. So kindly share a little of your venom towards him, will ya?

Oh, and I think you mean "Atwater." Yeah, I remember Lee Atwater -- in fact, I mentioned him a week or two ago.

I don't recall the "smears" of Cleland as "unpatriotic." I recall a certain questioning of his judgment and positions that some people categorized as such, but nothing like what you make it out to be.

OK, that's enough of your crap. Nice attempt at deflecting the issue, but do a little more homework first next time.

J.

Well....with this post we are seeing clear evidence that there really is a disorder among the right. It has been called CRS, short for Condi Rice Syndrome, a pathologial innability to identify and accept reponsibility and a frantic, panic, flailing attempt at obfuscation.

It's getting crowded over at Republican Rehab.

Hardly a word about the "responsibility" of those who may have covered this up.

I know you're a liberal so reality isn't your strong suit... but I believe you'll find a few entries on this very blog that state that anyone involved in 'keeping this quiet' should be prosecuted. In fact, I beleive you posted on those entires. Keep trying, sport.

Some unrepentant Republicans are grasping at straws.
So one of the pages was 18 at the time. So now we can all walk away and ignore the behavior and cover-up. You think there was only one? How about Foley showing up drunk at the page's dorm? What other behavior has yet to surface in coming weeks? You are not only morally and ethically blind, you are politically stupid.

Michelle Malkin and Richard Viguerie have it right on this one, listen to what they say.

Jay:

That post sounded a bit like the "Bush blew up the WTC and the levies" to me. When some 50 year old Hollywood star marries a 20 something starlet, everybody sayes "whow!", but no one calls him a "scum bag". The fact that Foley was possibly after a barely legal young man might not suite your fancy, but it doesn't rank on the send him straight to hell list.

As for Hugh and lava, Foley is not the entire, nor even representative of, Republican Party. You are so blinded by your hatred of the Bush administration, that you are incapable of puting up even remotely interesting comments. We understand that "you hate Bush", please try saying something else once in a while.

So let me get this straight ...

You discover that a Congressman is preying on Congressional pages, teens 16 to 18 years old. But instead of immediately going forward to the police or other appropriate authorities, you decide to sit on the information until five weeks to an election so you can help your party win.

And you think you deserve a medal? How morally bankrupt is that? Foley is already a condemned man. And we need to find out who had this information from 2003 and held on to it until now.

It's like discovering someone sat passively by as a woman was being raped and only leaped into action when he saw cameras. If you think that person deserves only praise then you are almost as sick as he is.

And to be honest, I'm sick and tired of the "Poor Victimised Willie Horton" myth that's become such an article of faith on the Left. It's untrue (the Bush Campaign did not run that ad) remarkably insulting to African Americans.

Did Willy Horton rape and torture two people while out on Dukakis' furlough program? Yes? Was he not the most notorious recidivist in the furlough program in Massachusetts even before the ad? Then why the heck should I care if he's the color of the sky on a bright summer day?

I've seen that ad. It made no reference to his race other than showing his picture. The ad would still have been as effective if Horton had been white. He's a rapist and murderer, Hugh, not the saint you Lefties have turned him out to be.

When I look at him, I see a rapist, torturer and first degree murderer. That is what he is. That was why Al Gore was the first person to introduce him into the 1988 campaign during the Democrat Presidential Primaries.

But you, Hugh, look at him and only see his race. So who is the racist here, Hugh? How come after everything he has done; the raping, the torturing and murdering, how come the only thing about him that looms largest for you is the color of his skin?

As predicted, the early returns are in. Nary a mention of part 2 of the sandal....the bankrupt congressional leadership.

Mike - I did a cursory review of the blogs and comments on this site since the story broke. About 8 blogs with about 700 or so comments. Maybe 10% from the right address the issue of the leadership and hold them to account.

USMC - I don't believe Foley is typical of the Republican party either. Most are good decent folks just as most dems are. What is too typical today is the corruption of the leadership of your party. That's self evident.
I've said a million times I don't hate Bush. I despise him. There is a difference between the two.

Martin - all I have to say is a picture is worth a thousand words. I don't see Willie Horton as a victim of anything. I see Lee Atwater and Karl Rove as completely without principle.

I have no sympathy whatever for Foley. By all accounts, he's a creep and a predator. He deserves the disgrace he's brought on himself.

That said, and regardless of whether the story is true or not, does any grown-up believe this was not a carefully timed political dirty trick right out of the DNC official playbook? This story has 'engineered scandal' written all over it. Go read the Radar article at http://www.radaronline.com/exclusives/2006/10/the-bogus-blog-behind-foleys-fall.php.

Martin - all I have to say is a picture is worth a thousand words.

Would you be objecting to the ad if Horton had been white? If your only reason for objecting to Horton ad is the fact that Horton is black ...

In other words, you saw a sadistic rapist and murderer but because he was black, all you saw was the color of his skin.

So you naturally made the assumption that was what everybody else would see. Not a rapist and murderer .. but the everyday black man.

There's something wrong with you, Hugh. Very wrong.

Foley is scum. Period.

If the Repubs leadership covered for him they are scum too.

the Dems had better learn that one thing the public will think is worse than a pedophile is someone who would cover up for him until they could use it for political advantage.

Whatever party handles this badly will have it blow up in their face this November. If the Left thinks this is a slam dunk issue for them they underestimate the backlash potential if it is revealed they covered it up too.

Even my most ardent BDS afflicted left wing liberal lesbian couple living next door find the thought that someone sat on this for political gain to be worse than the scum bucket Foley.

Someone getting tagged as letting a pedophile continue just so they can continue to score political points will NOT go over well in a majority of American homes regardless of the political party.

One quibble with Faith's comment:

"Whatever party handles this badly will have it blow up in their face this November."

Both parties are already handling it very badly. The question is, which will handle it worse? That's what will decide November's elections.

Unless, of course, the NEXT scandal bumps this off the radar.

J.

Hugh:

hate: to have strong dislike or ill will for; loathe; despise

Sounds pretty much the same to me. If you had directed your dislike towards his policies, as opposed to him personaly, I could understand it, but making it a personal thing gains you nothing.

I have to wonder what it is that stirs you up so much. The economy is great, unemployment is low, he used a liberal approach to education (throw money at it), has not sealed the borders, does not veto the pork comming out of congress, and although given many opportunities, doesn't make fun of Nancy Pelosi. Sounds like a perfect Democratic president to me. Aah, it must be Iraq. If so, you are hanging your hat on the biggest looser for the DNC in November.

Martin, your ignorance is mind boggling. The ad would never have been aired under the blessing of Atwater/Bush were Horton white. That's the point. It was as obvious as the nose on your face. It was race baiting/fear mongering at its best. Atwater was proud of it.

I see people like Hugh coming onto this forum only to fan the flames of discontent, rarely if ever to offer vision and ideas for a better future. Any damage that you can conceive of doing to those causes and entities whose view of things differ from your own are vilified and negated, dispensed with at the flick of your wit, which comes nowhere near amounting to the erudition you imagine.

If others offer a different view from those like yourself who arrive here burdened with agenda, your disdain and accusations fly like spittle from a madman's raging mouth in his mindless fury that any should contend with him.

There are truths you do not wish to see because they do not support your antagonism to conservatives, but rather offer a somewhat more well considered and investigated view than the shallow hatred you attempt to pass off as wisdom from God knows where.

None of the people who think to come here and take down their opponents through clever and base manipulation of facts and events that we too are aware of and that we too understand, seem to think that there could possibly be truth anywhere but in their own minds and on their own lying lips.

The only thing your kind will ever accept from the other side of the aisle is that those unlike yourselves must all fall upon the sword you proffer and refrain from challenging your absurd interpretation of these things, such thinly constructed rhetoric that it's hardly worth the time it takes to rebuke.

Hugh, don't you mean Atwood? Your mythical bogeyman from your first comment?

Heaven forfend you acknowledge that I had to correct your own attempts to derail the conversations, and fix YOUR talking points.

Goober.

J.

USMC

My feelings about Bush come from the man and his policies both. As for the man, I see him as a hypocrite....a man who talks out of both sides of his mouth (I suppose one could say that about most politicians but I'm only talking about him at the moment). A man unwilling to admit mistakes, a man who has no curiosity, a man who preaches compassion on the one hand and signed death warrants with the other. Just a few reasons why I despise him as the man.

As for his policies. I don't know where you live but where I do the economy has not benefited most of the people. The middle class has gotten no great benefits from his policies. I think throwing money at education as the solution is idiotic and more pandering on his part. He doesn't make fun of people or do the dirty work - just his surrogates at every opportunity.

As for Iraq...it is the issue that is killing him and his party more than any other. You must live on another planet if you can't see or admit that.

Hugh

Hugh:

When I requested that you post something other than "I hate Bush", I was in hopes that it might be something responsible. Your post to Martin made absolutely no sense at all, and you have no evidence of any of it. Your saying the RNC would have passed up a golden opportunity just because it was a white man?

Jay, an intelligent reply about a typo. Make you feel big?

As for Horton. The history is clear. Gore never brought up Horton in the debate. He brought up the furlough program. Atwater (spelled ok now?) chortled and crowed about the ad. It was deliberately intended. Deny all you want. The truth is the truth. That's pne of the problems with some of you folks. The truth hits you in the face and you do what wingnuts are so good at doing. Simply say it didn't happen.

Keep on trucking -Barney

MC:

Multisyllabic verbiage addressed to trolls =

pearls to swine.

What strikes me most abour Foley's transgressions is that they are again a person in power preying on low level employees. That kind of behavior immediately violates sexual harrassment boundaries. Forget the age or sex of the individuals targeted. Such individuals do not belong in our democratic government.

Unfortunately, both sides of the aisle of both the Senate and House would have many empty seats if this standard were upheld. I say unfortunately not because I think it shouldn't happen, but because it hasn't.

Hugh:

Funny how different people see things. I see President Bush, although I dissagree with him on many issues, as one of the few presidents in my life time to be firm in his beliefs and to stick with them despite the polls. A quality that I much admire.

As to the economy, I'm sure you can always say that someone, somewhere isn't doing well, but it is judged by the national statistics, not how well your neighbor is doing.

Jay plays three card monty with the truth --

"..the key element of the expose' was that the person in question was NOT a minor at the time of the most explicit and incriminating conversations."

but there is this:

"The young man clearly was under 18-years-old when at least one of the IM conversation took place, "i'm not 18 till feb 23" and Foley's trolling for young teen boys was hardly a Hill secret. - Kevin Aylward - Wizbang Blog

I guess Jay doesn't read Wizbang!

Jay continues his three card monty, ignoring the truth again --

"if -- IF -- that person sat on the information until such time as suited their own political agenda, then they, too, ought to be held up for public contempt."

And now we know that Hastert knew three years ago about Foley's problem - and sat on the information.

A longtime chief of staff to disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., approached House Speaker Dennis Hastert's office more than three years ago, repeatedly imploring senior Republicans to help stop Foley's advances toward teenage male pages, the aide said Wednesday.

So where is Jay's contempt for Hastert, the party responsible for sitting on the information for three years? You won't find Hastert mentioned once in Jays post.

Instead, it's just a fast hand of three card monty with the truth.

We saw this in the 2004 elections -- bloggers playing fast and free with the facts in an attempt to fool the voters. They discredit the maisnstream media, hoping to fill the information void with their lies instead -- sinking to lows such as Jay's deflection of responsibility away from Republicans and over to those liberals -- who you know if you read Wizbang! are in bed with terrorists, by the way...

Wake up America, there is an enemy of the truth within our borders, and they want your vote.

Lee:

Take off your rose colored glasses, and reread Jay's post. He is quite clear in his condemnation of everyone involved in any cover up. He simply suggest that the Dems are equally guilty if they withheld this to drop it just before the elections.

"Wake up America, there is an enemy of the truth within our borders, and they want your vote." -
Who is the enemy? The same people that try to impose speech codes and shut show a talk radio show in Seattle (USSR? Nazi?) because they didn't like what they were saying? Or threatened a network with loss of license over a factual movie? Who is the enemy?

Martin, your ignorance is mind boggling. The ad would never have been aired under the blessing of Atwater/Bush were Horton white. That's the point. It was as obvious as the nose on your face. It was race baiting/fear mongering at its best.

No.

Unlike you, I do not believe it is ignorance if I do not believe Democrat mythology about all Republicans being racists.

Fact: Horton, a convicted first degree murderer, was released on Dukakis' furlough program and from there he went on to Maryland where he raped and tortured a couple over a period of more than 48 hours. He was the furlough program's most famous and brutal recidivist bar none.

Bush's line of attack was that Dukakis was soft on crime. I have seen the ad. Contrary to what your beliefs about black people tells you, it was effective precisely because of what Willie Horton did, not his race.

There was no other reference to Horton's race apart from his mug shot. Are mug shots suddenly racist? I defy you to explain to me what difference a white man's picture would have made to the ad if Horton had been white.

Would you be more supportive of the furlough program if Horton had been white? Was it his crimes or his race that should bother you the most?

So I don't care what you imagine to have been on Lee Atwater's mind. What I do know now is that what sticks in your mind when you see a black murderer, sadist and rapist, is the color of his skin. And somehow, you've come to believe that's what everyone else sees.

Now that we have established the BJs aren't sex, we now know the left considers typing on keyboards sex. Good to know when you are dealing with lefties.

I'm glad to see the lefts version of the truth is out there, as Howard Dean says. But, I didn't know truth came in versions, but Dean does, so it must be true.

Anyone for a round a Plame lies?

Wake up America, there is an enemy of the truth within our borders, and they want your vote.
------------------------------------------------
Thank you Lee for speaking the truth about the Dems whether you know it or not. The more we know the more we find out how dishonest and corrupt the Dem party has become.

No decent American who claims to care about the truth and the country can vote for the Dems.

I think I'm going to hold off on debating this one for awhile. There are still too many 'if's' to my liking

Hugh, Lee, and Condi Rice Syndrome Man have one very big, fundamental problem.

They argue that the leadership of the Democratic Party in the House is more moral and responsible than the Republican leadership.

That is an absolute f'n howler if there ever was one.

Please. The party of Barney Frank, partial birth abortion, etc are intellectually, as well as morally bankrupt. Ms. Pelosi's vineyard employees illegals, but she speachifies that she is the saviour of the unions.

Please.

USMC Pilot: "Take off your rose colored glasses, and reread Jay's post. He is quite clear in his condemnation of everyone involved in any cover up"

How can you condemn "everyone involved' and not mention Hastert? and insinuate that it is some grand conspiracy instead? That's not condemnation - that's an attempted coverup of the truth.

Watch the cards, Pilot. Jay's playing pretty fast with the truth on this one... There will be an ethics committee investigation targeting Hastert - and I wouldn't be surprised if Hastert does the wrong thing and holds onto his post -- keeping this steamy pile of Republican misdirection in the news for a long time.

Hastert should resign.

Can Foley be charged with a crime? If not, how can anyone else be charged with a crime? If so, then an investigation needs to be done along with FBI subpeonas to dig down to the mystery blogger.

Maybe I am politically naive, but what does this have to do the issues? I am more concerned with who's going to protect the borders and keep us safe from terrorists than who knew what, when where and how. That's for investigators to worry about.

Martin:

I don't have to imagine what was in Atwater's mind here's a quote from him:

Atwater:" You start out in 1954 by saying, 'Nigger, nigger, nigger.' By 1968 you can't say 'nigger' - that hurts you. Backfires. So you say stuff like forced busing, states' rights and all that stuff. You're getting so abstract now [that] you're talking about cutting taxes, and all these things you're talking about are totally economic things and a byproduct of them is [that] blacks get hurt worse than whites.
And subconsciously maybe that is part of it. I'm not saying that. But I'm saying that if it is getting that abstract, and that coded, that we are doing away with the racial problem one way or the other. You follow me - because obviously sitting around saying, 'We want to cut this,' is much more abstract than even the busing thing, and a hell of a lot more abstract than 'Nigger, nigger...."

Now go learn the truth. Research. Read.

To his credit, while dying he repented for much of the filth he spewed. But then you probably didn't know that either.