Saturday, December 09, 2006

(Yawn) "Who cares anymore"?...

.


Remember back just before the election when the “Left” discovered the scandal of Representative Mark Foley and his e-mails to Pages? How terrible this was and just another example of the Republican “Culture of Corruption” but yet the Democrats have a long history much worse then Foley’s but that does not matter. Remember how the media was quick to condemn Foley and went after Speaker Dennis Hastert who had to be removed for he “Obviously” knew everything and failed to do anything. All the time almost entirely ignoring the much worse actions by Democrat Gerry Studds in the past…

The report came out on Thursday.

“The House ethics committee concluded Thursday that no House lawmakers or employees violated ethics rules in their handling of information related to the House page sex scandal that led to the resignation of former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) shortly before the election.”


http://thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/120706/foley2.html


The election is over and this scandal served it’s purpose…
It is interesting to see how fast this is no longer an issue and I doubt little coverage by the MainScream media to follow.


I expect “NO” coverage at all from my local newspaper…
“Yawn”

6 comments:

Observer said...

Shame on you, Rightside. You are picking only one quote from a report replete with criticism of the Republican House leadership. For example: "The failure to exhaust all reasonable efforts to call attention to potential misconduct involving a member and House page is not merely the exercise of poor judgment; it is a present danger to House pages and to the integrity of the institution of the House."

That is pretty strong language. I suggest that people read the report itself and draw their own conclusion rather than relying on Republican spin meisters.

RightsideVA said...

Observer,

That is why the link is provided...

The post also pointed out on how this was such a hot topic in the media before the election but since have you heard about it?
Was it not interesting how the Dem's pulled it out just in time for the election when the media knew about it months before?
The Dem\media machine has done well to save things like this to be used as needed...

Besides the blogs did you see much about the conduct of DEMOCRATIC Jerry Studds and his actions which were much more then Foley's?

This post was meant to show how quickly we, the media, and the new congress of "Civility" have forgotten that which has taken us to where we are now.

Foley was trash and needed to go and it is good that he is gone. Will the Dem's do the same and throw out their trash???

What is your prediction of our local media even mentioning it?

Observer said...

You asked: "Besides the blogs did you see much about the conduct of DEMOCRATIC Jerry Studds and his actions which were much more then Foley's?"

Yes, as a matter of fact, until I got tired of hearing about Gerry (not Jerry) Studds and about REPUBLICAN REPUBLICAN REPUBLICAN OH LORDY REPUBLICAN Dan Crane.

But the issue is not Dan Crane or Gerry Studds but Mark Foley. It is not about 1973 (Studds) or 1980 (Crane) but about 2004, 2005, 2006. (Do you know about half the current population wasn't even born in 1973?)

I am glad no one broke the law. But I am not glad the House leadership looked the other way repeatedly when warned about Foley. You should be upset, too, instead of pretending this was all about politics and not about kiddy diddling.

RightsideVA said...

Observer,

Now that the ball is back in my court allow me to answer your questions. Yes Dan Crane was REPUBLICAN and I believe he WAS removed for his actions back in 1980. Studds, Gerry, was also a few years back in 1973 and I believe both incidents were more offensive and damaging then Foley’s actions. The point is that Foley and Crane were removed by their party and by their own actions as compared to GERRY Studds who was re-elected numerous times by his party, the Democratic party who obviously thought his actions were no big deal.

Somehow I also believe you were around in 1973 as I was also and even though half the current population was not around at that time, but do we disregard history? If the MainScream media had brought up and ran with the info on GERRY Studds the half of the population who was not around may have seen the hypocrisy of the Democratic Party in their claims about Foley.

“I am glad no one broke the law. But I am not glad the House leadership looked the other way repeatedly when warned about Foley”

Check the “Timing is Everything” post for info showing that the Democratic Leadership found out about the Foley e-mails the same time as the GOP leadership. Seems they kept a lid on it until just before the elections before they brought it up. Pelosi & friends felt Foley’s actions were so damaging to our “Children” pages that they sat on the info until it was beneficial to their elections.

Still waiting on your prediction if the NewsLeader will even mention the story or findings…

Observer said...

"Dan Crane was REPUBLICAN and I believe he WAS removed for his actions back in 1980. Studds, Gerry, was also a few years back in 1973 and I believe both incidents were more offensive and damaging then Foley’s actions. The point is that Foley and Crane were removed by their party and by their own actions as compared to GERRY Studds who was re-elected numerous times by his party, the Democratic party who obviously thought his actions were no big deal."

You really need to pay more attention to the facts if you are going to recite history.

None of the three was "removed by their party". Crane and Studds were "reprimanded" by the House in 1983. Crane did not win subsequent reelection, Studds did. Foley was not removed by his party but rather resigned.

Studds reportedly claimed (and reportedly the page agreed) that the relationship was consensual. The page was reportedly also "of age" at the time under the law of the District of Columbia.

I do not condone the actions of Crane, Studds, or Foley as I see all three incidents as men in power using their position to establish a sexual relatioship with a much younger and less-powerful person. I think they all three should have retired from public life forthwith.

I have no idea whether The News Leader will report the further on Foley (or the other guys). Nor do I much care -- I've got you to keep track of them for me.

I think there are rather more important issues out there right now.

RightsideVA said...

Thank you but

"None of the three was "removed by their party".

Actually Crane and Foley were removed by their party. Crane was not elected by the "Party", the voters did not re-elect and they are the party. Foley chose to remove himself for the "Party", or voters would not have re-elected him either.

Studds on the other hand was re-elected several times I believe by his "Party", or his voters. Somewhat amazing that the two "Parties" can take basically the same issue, offense, and "endorse" or remove their party member...

We can and probably will beat this one several more times but as long as incidents like this can\will happen and be covered\viewed differently by the press I will be here to point that out...

And yes, if they are Republican Scum I will call for their removal. Probably the next issue\incident will not hit until just before the next election...
See you then...