« Bravo | Main | Shindig »

A flawed comparison, corrected

With the passing of former Congressman Gerry Studds (D-MA), I was disappointed to see that the Foley mess was given yet a fresh set of "legs" and brought up yet again. After all, Studds' own sexualescapades with pages were often brought back up as a point of comparison for Foley's Folly.

The more I thought about it, though, the more I realized that it was a pretty weak comparison. Both were certainly reprehensible, but they had far more in common with other scandals than with each other.

For example, let's look at what Gerry Studds did:

  • Had sexual relations with someone nominally his subordinate
  • Went to great lengths to conceal the relations
  • Denied the relationship right up until confronted with proof
  • When unable to deny it any longer, fully acknowledged it had happened
  • Was fiercely defended by his fellow party members
  • Ended up even more popular than ever, even lionized for his courage
  • Almost certainly broke the law, either during the relationship or in trying to conceal it
  • Retired "honorably," and was still highly regarded years after leaving office
  • Was a highly regarded Democrat

Toss in a black beret and a cigar, and you have the Bill Clinton/Monica Lewinsky scandal in a nutshell.

Now, as regards to the Foley mess:

  • Most-publicized offense was very clumsy sexual come-ons, not actual sexual congress
  • Did not violate any existing laws, or at least skirted them
  • Rapidly became a laughingstock and punchline to jokes
  • Resigned in disgrace after being abandoned by his party
  • Became a pariah
  • Instead of either embracing the offense or admitting it as a personal failing, fell back on excuses such as alcoholism to "explain" the misconduct
  • Backed many laws that helped greatly those he allegedly victimized

That sounded awful familiar, so I started racking my brains, and then it hit me:

Mark Foley is the new Bob Packwood.

(And just to complete the comparison, both Foley and Clinton ran afoul of laws they themselves had championed -- Foley was tireless in fighting the online sexual exploitation of children, Clinton had signed the law that made the accused's past sexual conduct legally admissible in lawsuits alleging sexual harassment.)

(Can't believe I forgot to add this)


If you're going to survive a sex scandal, two elements will greatly assist you:

1) Be a Democrat.

2) Actually have sex.


Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A flawed comparison, corrected:

» The Concord Journal linked with N.H. Blog-Con

» Eclipse Ramblings linked with The correct headline

Comments (86)

But I consider Foley a bett... (Below threshold)

But I consider Foley a better man (tongue in cheek) than Studds or Clinton. He was wrong, admitted and left his position. The other two were heaped praise on and stayed. Clinton and Studds are the poster boys of what the democratic party stands for; nothing.

Hmmm....2 persons commit in... (Below threshold)

Hmmm....2 persons commit inappropriate sexual acts = a "party" that stands for nothing. That's an intelligent comment.

That is a bit of a gross ov... (Below threshold)

That is a bit of a gross overgeneralization, Hugh. Care to refute it with a few concrete, solid examples of what the Democratic Party stands FOR?

And no cheating, no laundry list of Republican things you don't like and saying they stand "against" or "for fighting."

Also, feel free to cite actual examples.

I double-dog dare ya.


Hugh wrote:"Hmmm.... (Below threshold)

Hugh wrote:
"Hmmm....2 persons commit inappropriate sexual acts = a "party" that stands for nothing. That's an intelligent comment."

Jay's point was that the party backed these inappropriate actions from the highest mucky-muck right down to the lowliest "dead" voter. Ergo: the "Party's" values are called into question.

Burt:I wasn't clea... (Below threshold)


I wasn't clear enough. i was referring to the thread posted by Jo and not Jay's. As to a "parties" values being drawn into question - please don't act sanctimonious about that. Both parties have had and, unfortunately, will have corruption and corrupt politicians.


Glad you asked since my guess is you've never done any research to find out. Here are some 15 or so very specific "examples" for you. If you take the time to read it please follow all threads for the specifics. You may disagree with each and every one of them which is fine. But to be ignorant and repeat a stupid republican talking point is to be, well, ignorant.


Honor hunting & fishing ... (Below threshold)

Honor hunting & fishing heritage via more conservation lands.

That made me laugh.

Hugh, How can any ... (Below threshold)


How can any Democrat look at the public and claim that they are for Affirmative Action (awarding contracts, college admissions, job hiring, and school assignment by race) while claiming that they are against racial profiling. AA is racial profiling. It is racial profiling of whites and Asians.

The Democrats are treating racist actions just like sexual harassment. When Republicans do it its bad but when Democrats do it its good.

"f you're going to survive ... (Below threshold)

"f you're going to survive a sex scandal, two elements will greatly assist you:

1) Be a Democrat.

2) Actually have sex"

3) And do not represent the party of hypocrites.

"Family values" they say, but behind closed doors....

At least dems don't PRETEND to be the holiness party.

Hugh, you have my thanks. T... (Below threshold)

Hugh, you have my thanks. That page -- which was, you'll recall, rejected back in 2004 -- will give me fodder for some time to come. Gringo's already pointed out one absurdity, but look at the second item: "Support right to choose even if mother cannot pay." In other words, abortion on demand, even if it means that the government (meaning you, me, and everyone) pays for it. Hell, I'm squishily pro-choice, and I think that's ludicrous.

Hugh, maybe you could find something a bit fresher and more substantive? "Platforms" are generic boilerplate and pablum.


Hugh:That list mad... (Below threshold)
USMC Pilot:


That list made me think of a youngster being ask "what do you want to be when you grow up?" and answering "rich". There are so many items at cross purposes with each other, it would take all day to list them. One of the items was to cut out the pork from legislation. That whole list smelled of pork at election time. You just realy can't make it on a platform of " I love God, mother and applepie" any more.

Man, that's weird. The Demo... (Below threshold)
Gander sauce:

Man, that's weird. The Democrats support Studds, a well known sexual predator of children; but they are all 'outraged' when Foley sends improper emails to former pages.

They are even calling for a period of mourning for Studds the molester. Sickening.

So the official Democratic platform is that they will support child molesters? Unless they come out and explicitly say they are against pedophiles, I guess so; based on their past behavior.

"You just really can't make... (Below threshold)

"You just really can't make it on a platform of 'God, mother and apple pie' anymore."

How true. To make it today you need to throw in "Bring 'em on", "This is hard work, heh-heh" (smirk), "I'm the decider", "You're doing a heck of a job!", "You've got to...catapult the propaganda"......

Today, politics=pork, on both sides. I live in an area close to two hotly contested congressional races (one being Tom Reynolds) and ads for both him and his fellow Repub trying to hold on to his seat are constantly hammering on how much they have "done" (read: brought $$) for the district.

I'd like to address this St... (Below threshold)

I'd like to address this Studds and Foley mess, but instead, let me misdirect the conversation by bringing up unrelated Republican misdeeds.....

As I said kids criticize aw... (Below threshold)

As I said kids criticize away. That's your right. God knows we dems criticize the abject failures of this administration and republican controlled congress.

Jay, weren't you the one I challenged about being a Republican shill? And haven't you claimed to be independent? Am I right about that?

Yikes USMC you stated almost the entire republican platform with the apple pie bit. But you left out the "america love it or leave it" plank, and "any dissent equals sedition."

"So the official Democratic... (Below threshold)

"So the official Democratic platform is that they will support child molesters? Unless they come out and explicitly say they are against pedophiles, I guess so; based on their past behavior."

I think most people in all political parties would be sickened by what Studds did, but Republicans apparently didn't make a major effort to expel him (or Dan Crane), they served with him for another 10+ years after the scandal, they didn't really seem to have a problem with him in those years, and when he retired in 1996, a bipartisan majority voted to name a marine sanctuary after him. Republicans controlled Congress by then and they could have understandably refused to go along with this sanctuary idea, given what he did with the page. They didn't. So apparently both parties had a good opinion of him until his retirement.

What puzzles me greatly is ... (Below threshold)

What puzzles me greatly is the incessant fascination by you righties with the Foley issue. Many on your side claim the dems are behind it, or the dems are using it for political gain etc. But most of the noise seems to be coming from you folks.

If you all think whining about dems and sex is going to get you anywhere good luck. Making comparisons to events 13 years ago or 7 years ago is like pissing in the wind. The truth is there are bad people on both sides. The problem for you folks isn't the political fallout from Foley. The problem is you have failed policies together with arrogance, hubris and corruption. It is increasingly clear that the electorate is going to make a welcome change.

Hugh, it's not "fascination... (Below threshold)

Hugh, it's not "fascination" with the whole "Foley thing"...it's the need for Conservatives to once again set records straight after another drive-by smearing from the Left.

The Left throws all it's punches, cheap or otherwise, and then "moves on". They hope to leave the public with an impression that they are above and better than everyone else. That leaves folks like us to come along and remind folks of the past, and set the whole duct-up in perspective for the present and future.

But because the LameStreamMedia won't do ITS job, and actually INVESTIGATE and REPORT, it comes down to those on the Right having to remind THEM too!!

Old "hughie" (linkman) alwa... (Below threshold)

Old "hughie" (linkman) always has the same old excuses for every issue. Why don't you just use one of your post and make it a permanent "link". That way you could just post the "link" and save yourself alot of typing. Then the rest of us would not have to read it as we know what you are going to say by heart. (hmmm now what am I going to link to?)

At least dems don't PRETEND... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

At least dems don't PRETEND to be the holiness party.
Field-negro: thank you for admitting truth even though you try to sugarcoat it. The Dem party has no ethical standard: The Dem party welcome child and women sexual abusers/rapists.

If you all think whining ab... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

If you all think whining about dems and sex is going to get you anywhere good luck. Making comparisons to events 13 years ago or 7 years ago is like pissing in the wind. The truth is there are bad people on both sides.
Just try to point out the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the dems as they tried to talk about Foley for more than 2 weeks.

AGain, cheap moral equivalence is all the left have. America has bad apples and North Korea have bad apples. So there is no difference between America and NOrth Korea. No wonder the dems are not shy to condemn their countries and willing to compare America to the Nazi.

Hugh if anything fascinates... (Below threshold)

Hugh if anything fascinates Republicans about the Foley matter it is the sheer, jaw dropping hypocrisy of Democrats and their media allies.It has long since stopped surprising me but it is still breathtaking.Claiming that Republicans are whining failures in no way offers a defense of the conduct by Gerry Studds or his party.I suspect you have no defense to offer,yet you don't seem bothered by this.It seems to me that this is one of the key differences between the parties-that leftists don't care about the conduct of their officials,and Republicans do.You're just one more example of that.

The one fact that will neve... (Below threshold)

The one fact that will never change is that Democrats hate Republicans and Republicans hate Democrats (on a political philosophy level, at least). And, they are all just waiting on the other side to screw up so they can use it to get one step higher on the political ladder.

In the end, if anyone is using this story as a basis to judge and vote for a congressman (or woman) in their district it would be a disservice to everyone.

Just as tabloid magazines are a waste of money, tabloid voting based only on what you hear on a thirty second news story, or the latest scandal, is a waste of a vote.

There are good people in both parties and there are bad.

Unfortunately, most Americans simply want to show up, punch a button or pull a lever, and don't give it any serious thought until they are standing in front of the voting machine.

Just as unfortunate, most Americans are going to vote in their area based upon these stories and then wonder what went wrong when their congress-person stinks.

Hugh is either slow to unde... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

Hugh is either slow to understand the point that has been explained to him repeatedly or he is willfully ignorant again.

The issue is how the two parties deal with their bad apples. So far the Reps have got rid of their bad apples when they are known. This is the very least they can do to adhere a common "ethical" norm. The dems lied, made excuse, and even attacked the victims to cover up for their bad apples (eg. Clinton, Berger, Studd, Reid etc ...).

BTW, Bush have been talking... (Below threshold)
LoveAmerica Immigrant:

BTW, Bush have been talking about major issues: Iraq, GWOT, the economy etc... Then we just learned that the Dem operatives had the Foley into a while back and tried to use this as an October surprise. Who is obsessing with Foley scandal here? Again another example of the hypocrisy and dishonesty of the Dems.

The reason for the turn-about face is obvious: Reid 's corruption and the Dems refusal to call for his resignation.

You forgot to add that Stub... (Below threshold)

You forgot to add that Stubbs got the kid drunk before he started in with the sex. So add underage drinking and what is usually called date rape.

Get rid of your bad apples!... (Below threshold)

Get rid of your bad apples!!! The Republicans just push them up to the leadership. No one on your side got rid of Foley, he got rid of himself. You can't take credit for a man walking away in shame, before anyone spoke to him. I don't see you trying to get rid of Hastert or Delay or even Ney. Until a criminal indictment gets handed down, Republicans are more than willing to deal with the unethical conduct of its own.

Hugh posts a Dem. platform ... (Below threshold)

Hugh posts a Dem. platform that failed, Lee's not here-probably attending the Studd's funeral--where is Mantis?

I heard a great quote yesterday by Dennis Miller that immediately brought Lee, Mantis and Hugh to mind:

"You've thrown up so many straw men, Ray Bolger is going to sue for infringement."

Quick, Lee, Google "Ray Bolger" and figure out what's going on, fast!!!

And then, try to explain it to Hugh, but have some patience, since it will take 4-5 attempts before he gets it.

And Mantis, poor wretched man, he'll get the joke, but his warped mind won't be able to form a smile, or a laugh, or anything. Just immense anger that a "Rethuglican" could call him out.

Lees in the shower singing:... (Below threshold)

Lees in the shower singing:

"If I only had a brain..."

Ahhh Monsieur Mitchell is b... (Below threshold)

Ahhh Monsieur Mitchell is back again. His nose proudly in the air. Sniffing the wind: "egad, ewwww, there's a liberal in here (better make sure it's not the only one I know, my law partner)."

Mitchell, I have to hand it to you. Now I think you might actually be a trial lawyer. I'm sure when you were in law school you heard or were told. "First, argue the facts. Then argue the law. If that doesn't work, yell the loudest." Lord have mercy have you got the 3rd part down pat.

Mockery and scorn heaped high upon us little people (though I too am a lawyer) by a man who knows he can't argue the facts because the facts tell the tale of failure.

I will enjoy more back and forth with you Mitchell in just a tad over 3 weeks. Till then may your nose remain high and haughty.

Hey Derrick did you read th... (Below threshold)

Hey Derrick did you read the post at the top of this thread? Compare and contrast the conduct of the guilty and the response of their party.Perhaps you could also explain Harry Reid and his inability to follow Senate rules.He just "forgot" right? Hastert isn't guilty of any thing than being politically incompetant.The Democratic party sued to keep Delay on the ballot-we tried to get rid of him but you wouldn't let us! Ney wasn't running for re-election or the GOP would have done more to get rid of him.It's hard to throw someone out when they have already announced they will leave-and pointless too.I'd be satisfied if Harry Reid was to resign to face trial-no need for the senate to censure him.I'm glad the Democrats have finally withdrawn their endorsement of William Jefferson-how long did that take? Was it a year after he was caught with 90000 frozen dollars? I'm still waiting for them to do the same to Jay Mollohan of West Va.-when will that happen? As to your last sentence-I'm glad we agree that Republicans are more than willing to deal with unethical behavior of their members.Thanks for admitting it!

Hey, one thing to remember ... (Below threshold)

Hey, one thing to remember here...the platform you have listed here for the Dems has change 15 times in the last year. I guess it may be the wind or something, but one this is clear regardless, the Dems walk in lock step, talking points in hand, and deal out hypocrisy by the bushel. The Republicans are a fragmented group for the most part and live mostly off homestate support, and do not rely on the media to paint them in a good light. The actions are all they have.

A final example....Trent Lott stated at a private bithday party for Strom Thurmen, "You know, if we had elected this man 30 years ago, we wouldn't be in the mess we are today," for this statment he was forced to step down as Senate Leader. While on the other hand, there was Robert Bryd's statment "My old mom told me, 'Robert, you can't go to heaven if you hate anybody.' We practice that. There are white niggers. I've seen a lot of white niggers in my time. I'm going to use that word. We just need to work together to make our country a better country, and I'd just as soon quit talking about it so much." which didn't even mat the front page of newpaper and did not lead to ethics action or even a statement from the floor of the Senate about his comments.

A double standard is in place out there and that fact has to be weighed into account...especial if you ride in a car at night along the waterfront with a Massuachusetts Democratic Senator.

Republicans give no credit ... (Below threshold)

Republicans give no credit at all to the American people. On election day, they decide. So far, they've seen through the deceptive practices of the Republicans, but there is still plenty of time for the lying hypocrites to trot out a few more lies.

Meanwhile: (emphasis added)

Category 5 Hurricane Heads for House GOP

Let's get the disclaimer out of the way: there are 25 days between now and the November 7 election and things could well change, making what follows obsolete.

That said, this is without question the worst political situation for the GOP since the Watergate disaster in 1974. I think a 30-seat gain today for Democrats is more likely to occur than a 15-seat gain, the minimum that would tip the majority. The chances of that number going higher are also strong, unless something occurs that fundamentally changes the dynamic of this election. This is what Republican strategists' nightmares look like.

Whether one looks at national or district-level polling data, or a survey like the new Democracy Corps survey that covered the 49 most vulnerable GOP districts, the conclusion remains the same: it is very ugly for Republicans.

Sorry - but wasn't this 20 ... (Below threshold)

Sorry - but wasn't this 20 years ago? It's a little dated.

Lee's here! Whee! Hey do yo... (Below threshold)

Lee's here! Whee! Hey do you anything to say about the actual topic of this thread? I think everyone has figured out that you don't like Republicans.But thanks for sharing!

How about Harry Reid? Is th... (Below threshold)

How about Harry Reid? Is that recent enough?

What did Harry Reid do? In ... (Below threshold)

What did Harry Reid do? In your own words.

Yes,... (Below threshold)


Whatever Hes agreed to pay ... (Below threshold)

Whatever Hes agreed to pay a fine for. Thats what.

jp2: "What did Harry Rei... (Below threshold)

jp2: "What did Harry Reid do? In your own words."

Concealed $700,000 in profit made in a Real Estate deal with characters consistently linked with organized crime. For starters...

Lee, why can't you admit th... (Below threshold)

Lee, why can't you admit that Democrats are at least as scandalous as Republicans? That corruption is everywhere? Every time I see a comment from you, you dilligently ignore any and all things negative about your party and desperately try to negatively portray the opposition. Even when you're utterly proven wrong (like your wall street journal economic link, or the facts regarding Foley vs. Studds scandals) you blindly yip away. There's no shame in admitting when you're wrong- it's much more respectable than closing your eyes, covering your ears, and shouting nonsense at the top of your luings, as a child might.

Sorry for the typo, meant t... (Below threshold)

Sorry for the typo, meant to write "lungs", not "luings" :)

Hey I never thought of that... (Below threshold)

Hey I never thought of that? Maybe Lee is a child?

"Concealed $700,000 in prof... (Below threshold)

"Concealed $700,000 in profit made in a Real Estate deal"


Thanks for backing your friend up - but are you sure about that?

Never thought of Lee as a c... (Below threshold)

Never thought of Lee as a child? I've never thought of him as anything but, but that's only the times I've bothered thinking of him at all. Liberals don't require much thought, just a good flush.

I've always thought of Lee ... (Below threshold)

I've always thought of Lee as an idiot.

geez, jp2, did you even REA... (Below threshold)

geez, jp2, did you even READ the article? Yes, they try to whitewater, er uh, whitewash it, but the fact remains that good ole Harry "forgot" to mention a teensy-wheensey 700 THOUSAND dollar profit from the deal.

Wouldn't you prefer he HAD just sold it? Instead of starting an LLC with this "alledgedly" shady character...then transfering his share into it so the other guy could sell it and then transfer back to Harry the profit without Harry ever having to "sell" it?

In the Mafia they call that money-laundering.

In Vegas, according to Dingy Harry, they call it "forgetting". Oops.

jp2 I apologize if I sound ... (Below threshold)

jp2 I apologize if I sound snide but if I cared what the MSM thought about Harry Reid I'd probably be a Democrat.I'll bet they think Harry did nothing untoward at all,just maybe forgot to fill out those pesky and complicated forms,and those vile Republicans just can't understand that.And how about that Foley guy anyway? Not that it matters anyway-experience has taught me that nothing comes of Democratic corruption.Democrats don't care if their politicians are corrupt and their media allies don't either.Republicans don't seem to have the guts or the sense to make them care.So I won't worry about Harry Reid at all.

"Lee's here! Whee! Hey d... (Below threshold)

"Lee's here! Whee! Hey do you anything to say about the actual topic of this thread?"

This post, and every post on Wizbang these days, is about the coming elections in one way or another. This post is just a another lame attempt to minimize the damage done by the Foley scandal.

The fact that no one on on Wizang will talk about how poorly the Republicans appear to be doing so far won't stop me from making that observation.

Yes, Lee is an idiot. It's... (Below threshold)

Yes, Lee is an idiot. It's a fact.

Hugh is a lawyer! Oh Lord, I bet your clients want their money back!! Based on your "reasoning" skills here, I'd say you probably work for the state or local government.

That way, you're closer to your lib. brethren, and don't have to answer to your client.

I sure hope they don't let you loose on the populace anytime soon. Alert the malpractice carriers!!

Hugh, the only reasons I'm snide to you is 1) you're wrong, 2)you're not what we call a "deep thinker," 3) your "facts" tend to be non sequiturs, irrelevant, off-topic, 4) you would never concede a clear point, 5) you spend/waste so much time here, trying to be the great Dem. Nanny, that it's hard to see how you have "A Life."

Other than that, you're a swell guy.

Uh, did *you* read it?<br /... (Below threshold)

Uh, did *you* read it?
"His profit, based on his original investment of $400,000 amounted to about $700,000. His 2004 disclosure form doesn't have the precise figure, saying only that it fell within a certain range. The reporting rules permit such ballparking."

So, no, he didn't 'forget' that money -- instead, he listed it in a ballpark, probably a 500k-1mil profit range (possibly more precise, I don't have the report). This is within the rules and did not conceal any profit. He DID list it.

"The men transferred the real estate to a limited liability company, or LLC, they controlled called Patrick Lane LLC.

Such tranfers are very common and exceedingly legal. Indeed, many lawyers recommend the step to investors and small business people as a way to shield their personal wealth from liability, as in the event someone is injured or killed on the real estate."

-- so, no, not laundering, a standard liability-limitation practice that is used often by individuals with hign net worth and significant investments in real estate.

He did not disclose a sale on the 2001 form because that's the founding of the LLC -- NOT the sale of the LLC, which occurred in 2004 - and in 2004, a sale with the profit range mentioned above, is listed. Money did not change hands in 2001, so no accounting took place. Money changed hands in 2004, and that sale was accounted for.

whoops, that comment above ... (Below threshold)

whoops, that comment above responds to
Justrand at October 15, 2006 02:17 PM

Idiot, liar or fool. I don... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

Idiot, liar or fool. I don't know which applies, one or all of them, Lee. Are you making a prediction that democrats win because a Florida Congressman wrote dirty notes to person who had reached the age of consent in Washington DC. Is that you prediction? How do you like your crow? Cold or hot. You are going to be eating November 8, 2006. While you may or may not believe any of the so called polls, Lee, you are forgetting the motivating factor of having Nancy Pelosi the Speaker of the House will have on Republican and independent voters. I suspect it will have a far greater effect than that of the hypocritical criticism by the left of someone who is no longer holding a seat in Congress. Time will tell.

"The fact that no one on... (Below threshold)

"The fact that no one on on Wizang will talk about how poorly the republicans appear to be doing so far wont stop me from making that observation."

Duh..o'tay your so right I might as well not even vote with intellectual genuises like you already saying my vote is useless..

Do You already got the dead vote counter going or what?

Lee-So I guess your answer ... (Below threshold)

Lee-So I guess your answer is no you don't have anything to say about the topic of this thread.I obviuosly disagree with your assessment of what every post here is about.I sympathize with your desire to express yourself as I share a similar desire-but this is not my website and I try to stay on topic.Your opinions-and mine-about what will happen on November 7th aren't specifically relevant on this particular thread.

LEE - I am lost on your arg... (Below threshold)

LEE - I am lost on your argument that Republicans, like myself, would not vote for Republicans because of the actions of former Florida Congressman. If something like this changes the minds of Republicans, they would be white washing the whole party and that is not going to happen on a large scale. "Oh, Tom Foley is a rat....I guess I won't vote...or I'll pick a Democrat here in CA...that'll show 'em!" Right! Nothing like an October surprise to fire up the base, remember the CBS National Guard surprise...that worked out will for the Democratic last time.

But, to the point of the thread, Foley vs. Stubbs.....there was clear action taken by each party. Foley was forced out by GOP leaders for poor behavior and growing indiscretions. Stubbs, who engaged in sexual activities with a 17 year boy under his charge, was defended and even heralded by Democrat leaders and members, later "censured", but remained a Congressman.

In 1982, Dan Crane, a Republican, was "censured" for having a sexual relationship in 1980 with an underage female congressional page. No GOP cover up, no GOP support either...the voters put him in the following election. Republicans urged Crane to resign, but in the aftermath of Stubbs....it was hard to oust him without public pressure.

It's clear the comparison between Foley and Stubbs in the article was lacking fact and thoughtful analysis.

I think most people in a... (Below threshold)

I think most people in all political parties would be sickened by what Studds did, but Republicans apparently didn't make a major effort to expel him (or Dan Crane), they served with him for another 10+ years after the scandal, they didn't really seem to have a problem with him in those years, and when he retired in 1996, a bipartisan majority voted to name a marine sanctuary after him.

The GOP was a minority until 1994. In 1994, it'd be hard to justify booting out a guy for crimes committed nearly ten years earlier. Especially since his party would go to the mat for him. As for the marine sanctuary, there are certain fights really not worth the fight. That was one of them.

The GOP distanced themselves from Crane and, most importantly, CONSERVATIVES VOTED HIM OUT OF OFFICE.

It's the whole "having SOME principles" thing in full effect.

Heck, ironically, the one guy the Dems decided to vote out of office over "ethical" concerns (Condit) was likely the least guilty of all of them. He was accused, almost undeniably falsely, of being linked to murder of somebody.

No one on your side got rid of Foley, he got rid of himself.

If you REALLY think the Republicans didn't advise him, heavily, to go away, you're delusional.

I don't see you trying to get rid of Hastert or Delay or even Ney. Until a criminal indictment gets handed down, Republicans are more than willing to deal with the unethical conduct of its own.

Accusations are enough to punish people?


I could mention how quickly the Dems got away from their OLD canard of punishing people for the pure "appearance of impropriety" the moment they won the WH.

A taste of the WITHERING cr... (Below threshold)

A taste of the WITHERING criticism of Dems in regards to Studds:

"Gerry's leadership changed Massachusetts forever and we'll never forget him. His work on behalf of our fishing industry and the protection of our waters has guided the fishing industry into the future and ensured that generations to come will have the opportunity to love and learn from the sea. He was a steward of the oceans."

- U.S. Sen. Edward Kennedy, D-Mass.


"No one fought harder for human rights, particularly in Latin America; for our environment; and for the fishermen of New England and the entire nation. He was a true pioneer."

- U.S. Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., whose wife, Lisa, once worked as an aide to Studds.


"Gerry often said that it was the fight for gay and lesbian equality that was the last great civil rights chapter in modern American history. He did not live to see its final sentences written, but all of us will forever be indebted to him for leading the way with compassion and wisdom. He gave people of his generation, of my generation, and of future generations the courage to be who they are."

- Dean Hara, who married Studds in 2004.


"Gerry was a stalwart champion of New England's fishing families as well as a committed environmentalist who worked hard to demonstrate that the cause of working people and the cause of the environment go hand in hand with the right leadership. When he retired from Congress, he did not retire from the cause, continuing to fight for the fishing industry and New England's environmental causes.

- U.S. Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass.


"I am very saddened by the death of Gerry Studds. From his days in the early 1970s as an articulate and effective opponent of the Vietnam war, through his consistent leadership on environmental issues, to his insistence that the U.S. government stop ignoring the AIDS crisis, Gerry was a forceful advocate for causes that were not always popular and that were consequently shunned by many politicians."

- U.S. Rep. Barney Frank, D-Mass.

And Kerry's comments about Foley?

"That was Denny Hastert's instinctive response to questions about why the Republican leadership hadn't done more to protect young congressional pages in the Mark Foley scandal."

Yeah, I can see how flirting with boys is SO much worse than actually penetrating them.

So, please, Dems --- tell us how the DNC really takes these issues seriously.

I especially like the Ke... (Below threshold)

I especially like the Kennedy quote: He was a steward of the oceans."

Coming from the steward of CHAPPAQUIDDICK thats quite a compliment.

I recall Cong .Studds-was t... (Below threshold)

I recall Cong .Studds-was that his birth name or was it changed for wishful thinking-got one of his pages "lickered up" and while he was passed out "lickered him".Obviously a clasy individual.
Now a little commentary,then it's off to a Bo-tox partyIn Zelazny's "Lord of Light" Siddhartha,aka Sam,is quoted as saying the individual flaws of a leader are not a renunciation of his ideals.Thus ,sexual trangressions of someone do not besmirch the paarty ideals.
My feeling is the Democrats willingness to try anything to regain some political power is so many of them have an economic need for certain political favors,whether it's Davis Bacon,affirmative actions,shooting down Charter schools etc.If they don't win,they don't eat-at least very well.Hence,ballot stuffing,etc can be a way of job hunting.just a thought.Now,off with the wrinkles!

Lee said:... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

Lee said:

This post, and every post on Wizbang these days, is about the coming elections in one way or another. This post is just a another lame attempt to minimize the damage done by the Foley scandal.

Note that Lee said that two HOURS after he tried to inject Harry Reid into my following posting about the New Hampshire blogging gathering -- which had not a damned thing to do with elections. The dipshit can't even keep his delusions consistent.

And back on May 12, 2006, Lee said the following after I busted a sock puppet:

Re: "sockpuppets", I hope you will provide the same openness and transparency with those sockpuppets who agree with you and wizbang -- it might go along way towards lessening the vitriol, me thinks... We all know they exist, calling them on it publicly would help.

I responded:

Lee, I don't go looking for them. This idiot made himself TOO obvious -- three comments in minutes, all with the same tone. If you have someone you suspect of being a sock, e-mail me their name and one of their suspected comments, and I'll look into it. I will answer you, and if it's true, I'll say so publicly as well.

Lee answered:

Thanks J. I'll drop you an email sometime this weekend.

That's 5 months, Lee. The time is long, long past for you to put up or shut up. I have had far too much of you spewing your crap, your unfounded allegations, your random idiocies.

You are skirting right on the edge of banning. Go ahead, Lee, push me just that much farther. It'll take very little effort.


"If something like this ... (Below threshold)

"If something like this [Foley scandal] changes the minds of Republicans, they would be white washing the whole party and that is not going to happen on a large scale."

Let me guess, Tim. You're a white male over 25. You're less likely to abandon your Republican ways at the polls these day than any other piece of the Republican constituency's demographic.

Meanwhile, males under 25 and women are leaving the party in droves -- at least in terms of how they plan to vote this November. They're not card-carrying Democrats, and there's even time to win them back before the election - but they're stepping away from the Republican party today.

Jay said: "Note that Lee... (Below threshold)

Jay said: "Note that Lee said that two HOURS after he tried to inject Harry Reid into my following posting about the New Hampshire blogging gathering -- which had not a damned thing to do with elections. The dipshit can't even keep his delusions consistent."

I didn't comment on your blogging gathering thread, Jay. That was jp2.

Still haven't seen you correct your lie on Harry Reid the other Jay.

Posted by: jp2 at October 15, 2006 12:49 PM

That comment was made 2 hours before mine, but I didn't make it.

Party? Wheres the party? No... (Below threshold)

Party? Wheres the party? No one invited Me!

And you came by this knowle... (Below threshold)
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III:

And you came by this knowledge how Lee? Some psychic powers or are you believing a poll taken by the DMC. The only poll that counts is the one taken on November 7th. How would you like your crow prepared?

Lee: My apologies. I... (Below threshold)
Jay Tea:

My apologies. I'm no proctologist; sometimes I can't tell one asshole from another.

STILL waiting for that accusation of sock-puppetry, but I'm not holding my breath. You found one thing in my piece that you could nit-pick; that gives you an excuse to skip the rest of it.


What is DMC pray tell? Demo... (Below threshold)

What is DMC pray tell? Democratic Moron Committee?

"There are good people in b... (Below threshold)

"There are good people in both parties and there are bad."

Sorry Rodney, I don't know any good republicans. Although I suppose Abe Lincoln was OK, and Arlen Specter, isn't a bad guy.-plays a hell of a game of squash for an old man-,and then there is Jack Kemp,and Michael Steele.... You know what Rodney, maybe I COULD find a couple of good repubs if I looked hard enough. Is Colin Powell still a repub? Oh that's right, he is considered a traitor now. All because he turned his back on frat boy when he realized they used him like an old vacuum cleaner.

Oh well, I will keep looking for some good repubs Rodney. I am sure there are some more out there. Like the people that post on this site for instance, these are some really good people these Wizbang republicans.

Jay, while you're at it, ca... (Below threshold)

Jay, while you're at it, can we agree that field african american rates up there with Lee on the Irrelevant Meter?

He's actually gotten worse. I think he's been egged on with Lee's scintillating commentaries.

I know plenty of nice Dems, too bad, Field Nonsequitur, you have such a difficult time meeting nice Reps. Maybe it's not the Reps., but your sorry ass attitude. Ever considered that, Amigo Negro?

uhh f-n name us one "good" ... (Below threshold)

uhh f-n name us one "good" democrap er crat.

jhow: he'll tell you Maxin... (Below threshold)

jhow: he'll tell you Maxine Waters, Je$$e Jack$on, Charlie Rangel, William Jefferson, you know, all those charismatic, yet empty, "leaders" he emulates on this Blog.

The 4 You mentioned all hav... (Below threshold)

The 4 You mentioned all have a unique ability to cash in on their heritage..They also each operate on cold hard cash..bluestate bullshitters

"How would you like your... (Below threshold)

"How would you like your crow prepared?"

I'll pass on the crow.

On election night everyone in America will be treated to a nice, hearty Red Whine.

Mitchell, I don't speak Spa... (Below threshold)

Mitchell, I don't speak Spanish, so you might want to save your amigo reference for someone who does.

Also, your ignorance is diminished only by your parochial way of thinking. For you to even imply that I support the black leaders you mentioned, just because they are black, shows just how low you will go to imoress your white masters on this site. No one is tougher on the clowns you mentioned than I am.

But hey, keep playing the Wizbang house negro and buffoon; the role fits you well.

BTW counselor,-and I use that word loosely- if amigo means friend, you might want to rephrase that comment. I eat Oreos, I don't befriend them :)

love how field negro calls ... (Below threshold)

love how field negro calls Mitchell low for his comments, then goes on to make his own comments about oreos. Same old story, its ok for the dems to do it, but the republicans are evil if they do. So f'ing sick of the transparent hypocrisy.

Huey Long said "in politics... (Below threshold)

Huey Long said "in politics you cannot be caught in bed with either a live boy or a dead girl." Foley did neither--how about Studds?

Uhhh--still waiting f-n.</p... (Below threshold)

Uhhh--still waiting f-n.

jhow66, you'll be waiting a... (Below threshold)

jhow66, you'll be waiting a long time for Theo Huxtable. Likes to pretend he is all hood, but growing up the only hood the boy knew was on the back of his sweater. Remember, this is the same guy that bragged about his family rubbing shoulders with bannana republic thugs and praised Castro for sending doctors around the world, all the while ignoring what he has done to the Cuban people.
Likes to pretend that blacks can't get a leg up, while ignoring his own family's sucesses (mummy and daddy are doctors, Theo is a lawyer, sis a Fullbright Scholar).
As usual, for thee, but not me, is the rule for progressives.

yep..it is all the Dems...a... (Below threshold)
nogo postal:

yep..it is all the Dems...any problem we have now it is Clinton or the Dems from a decade ago...
Was the avalanche of Dem crap so deep..and the Republican Party so weak...that 5 years of Republican control has been unable to overcome it?

As an Independent the Dems disgust me...but I am sick and tired of cry baby Republicans who can seldom accept the proven faults of their party...

I was a Republican until the invasion of Iraq..
Until you folks can admit to the failures of your party you truly are no better than the whinning Dems...

SCIwuzzy, personal attacks ... (Below threshold)

SCIwuzzy, personal attacks on me and my family aside. I still take great comfort in knowing that you are a loser, and I am not.

That much is obvious from your puerile and empty posts about yours truly. But hey, knock yourself out, it must be hard being you, so I understand the frustration.

Tell you what I will do for you, shoot me an e-mail and I will send you a self help book, and some tips from the field on building self esteem, and becoming a better more well rounded person.

I can't imagine how hard it must be for you trolling nursing homes and the public library all day :)

I love it, re Theo, "growin... (Below threshold)

I love it, re Theo, "growing up the only hood the boy knew was on the back of his sweater." Touche.

Field Negro calls me a "House Negro." Does that mean he thinks I'm black? What is that, exactly. Is this what passes for "discourse" on the Left? Appears to be about all we get from the Great Theo Huxtable.

Maybe his "acting white [i.e. successful]" has him overcompensating with the Field Negro schtick he has going? That way he might get a little "street cred," or whatever.

He can't take the rough stuff, but he can sure dish it, can't he. F'n Hyposcrite.

Maybe he's just upset that his BMW had to go in the shop for the 35,000 mile service.

Oh, SCSIwuzzy, are you hurt? He called you a "loser" because, I guess, you don't have a Fulbright and haven't posted that on your own "'blog" like he has. Ohhhh he's soooo sophisticated, but he's still a schmuck.

Oh, and I forgot something-... (Below threshold)

Oh, and I forgot something--

Field Negro, you can kiss my hairy white ass!

Hey f-n you are sounding ju... (Below threshold)

Hey f-n you are sounding just like a holier then tho liberal that says I am more "schooled than you". Hilarious.We just "love" the big words you use. It makes us feel so fulfilled to know that someone from the "south" has made it bigtime. Please feel free to recommend books for us so that we may somehow come up to your level of intellect. Better yet buy them for us as you are in the bigtime. This way you can fullfill your liberal agenda of handouts for everyone so no one has to work.I just cannot wait to see what books you are going to send us. My favorite is "See Jane Run". Hint hint.

Mitchell,Nope. Don'... (Below threshold)

Nope. Don't feel hurt at all. Still trying to figure out how pointing out his parents are doctors is a personal attack... guess I just don't have enough schooling to keep up with that. "Theo", however, is a personal attack, but one on his level.
I always love that, when someone that tosses around terms like oreo and house negro gets offended when called Theo Huxtable. ;)
Oh well. That's what recon by fire does... tells you when the opposition has been hit.

"you can kiss my hairy whit... (Below threshold)

"you can kiss my hairy white ass!" Well Mitchell, that explains alot. Sorry for implying that you were black, I know that's tantamount to blasphemny for you. BTW, you might try waxing my man, a hairy anything is very unpleasant.

"...but he's still a schmuck"

So which is it Mitchell, are you white or are you Yiddish?

"Please feel free to recommend books for us so that we may somehow come up to your level of intellect."

It would help if you could read. But I guess "See Jane Run" is a start ;)

FN, why must you know the e... (Below threshold)

FN, why must you know the ethnic background of everyone? Why must everyone be tagged? Maybe if you didn't apply your prejudices first when interacting with people, you'd have a happier life. I certainly hope this isn't how you behave in the courtroom. Lord knows Philly has enough judges that already do that...

F-N when can I expect my re... (Below threshold)

F-N when can I expect my reader?






Follow Wizbang

Follow Wizbang on FacebookFollow Wizbang on TwitterSubscribe to Wizbang feedWizbang Mobile


Send e-mail tips to us:

[email protected]

Fresh Links


Section Editor: Maggie Whitton

Editors: Jay Tea, Lorie Byrd, Kim Priestap, DJ Drummond, Michael Laprarie, Baron Von Ottomatic, Shawn Mallow, Rick, Dan Karipides, Michael Avitablile, Charlie Quidnunc, Steve Schippert

Emeritus: Paul, Mary Katherine Ham, Jim Addison, Alexander K. McClure, Cassy Fiano, Bill Jempty, John Stansbury, Rob Port

In Memorium: HughS

All original content copyright © 2003-2010 by Wizbang®, LLC. All rights reserved. Wizbang® is a registered service mark.

Powered by Movable Type Pro 4.361

Hosting by ServInt

Ratings on this site are powered by the Ajax Ratings Pro plugin for Movable Type.

Search on this site is powered by the FastSearch plugin for Movable Type.

Blogrolls on this site are powered by the MT-Blogroll.

Temporary site design is based on Cutline and Cutline for MT. Graphics by Apothegm Designs.

Author Login

Terms Of Service

DCMA Compliance Notice

Privacy Policy