You are wrong paradox. And of late you have become a real depressing DRAG. Momentum might seem like it's not happening at certain junctures, but nothing is static. It is my belief that though it is taking too long for the big penny to drop for the American people, with each new bit of info about who these people really are, we are moving closer to the big drop.
At the very least the quantity of scandal and stuff coming out just now is a destabalizing influence on the GOP because they are juggling an awful lot. Wait for it. And stop whining..............your forum is too potentially valuable a forum for the creation of real positive change. A famous Zen Master once said: "your mind creates your world." Get creating.
What can I say, paradox? I agree with you completely.
If the Democrats were an opposition party, they could and would take this story to Front Street. All they need to do is bring it up every single time they appear in public or for an interview. For the first few days, they would get pushback from the Republicans and the corporate press/media. But if they stay on the subject, which they never seem to do, the public will eventually pick up on it and start asking for more information.
It doesn't require much, just something like this:
NewsChimp: Democratic Candidate, how can you hope to win this election when your party wants to let all the terrorists go free so that they can kill more Americans?
DC: The Republicans in Congress, and probably Karl Rove and George Bush, knew that they had a pedophile in Congress, but they covered it up and let him continue to prey on young boys for sex.
NC: That's not what I asked you, let's get back to your party's plans to ban Jesus Christ.
DC: Right, NC, I hear you. The Republicans may not all be in favor of homosexual encounters between adults and teenagers, but they are clearly not against. If they'd been against it, they'd have done something about it.
NC: But the Democrats are in disarray and have no plan for Iraq!
DC: The Democrats do have a plan, a plan to protect American teenagers from sexual predators. We'd like it to become law, but we are being opposed by the Republicans, who want to protect the members of their party who are sexual predators, we have no idea how many there are and won't know for certain without a full investigation. I pledge that as soon as a Democratic House/Senate is elected, investigation the Republican teen sex scandal is going to be our first order of business.
And so on.
You think I am kidding? I am not kidding. Just review the corporate press/media during the Lewinsky matter. See how no matter what the Republicans were asked, no matter the subject, they answered with Lewinsky and scandal and constant statements that "this may go even deeper."
It works, but you need to be persistent in the face of determined opposition. This is the Democratic Party's biggest problem. They quit if the tactic doesn't work in 48 hours.
Posted by James E. Powell at September 30, 2006 11:25 AMI don't know, either. Bill O'Reilly is big on this kind of thing....for him to ignore it would be a painful omission to his viewers. Unless, well, as so many loyal Republicans still have their heads up their asses about Hussein being involved in 9/11, they just refuse to believe the reality. What was it Stephen Colbert said about reality having a liberal spin?
Posted by ann at September 30, 2006 11:28 AMMind your own fucking business, Suzanne Smith, and if improving blog writing is so important to you do it yourself, you nauseatingly arrogant twerp.
If I'm down and a drag it's becuase my country is gone and we kill indiscriminately like the felons we are, just like the felons right now in San Quention, that's our George.
It rips my heart out every hour and I do the best I can. If there were better news to report or Truth to reveal I would, but I can only see what my mind can comprehend. I never pretended to be some great writer or political analyst, all I wanted to do was go to bed at night knowing I tried and I did my duty.
So very many of us have given up. How dare you talk to me like after after I still stand here after six years of watching the greatest country the world has ever seen so childishly sefl-destruct and fail.
I also said we were winning, it's happening. Work on your text comprehension too, Einstein.
Posted by paradox at September 30, 2006 11:30 AMHi Paradox,
I am not an arrogant twerp, by the way. I too am VERY down about our country. It's sickeing...on many many levels. I am fighting hard not to give up as I'm sure you are. I obviously got to you and I'm sorry. That really wasn't my goal. So, if my being down attacked you while you were down...my apologies. We need to fight. And it's hard.
Yes, after re-reading my rant it does sound arrogant. Live and learn. I am sorry. Suzanne
Posted by s at September 30, 2006 11:50 AMThis scandal will last a week. You're right. I've been saying the same thing for a couple of days now, ever since this scandal broke. It has all the hallmarks of endless O.J. style publicity:
1. House Member
2. Teenage boy
3. Hot internet porn chat.
4. possible "blow-job"
5. resignation
5. cover-up.
6. Widening information about other underage victims.
And contrary to your opinion this is a FELONY. A 16 year old boy cannot consent to any form of sexual relations with a 42 year old man. Period. If the federal statutes this perv helped write mean anything at all (debatable) Foley should wind up doing some serious time in club-Fed.
But this is a powerful Republican we're talking about, so all the wider implications will be swept under the rug. Hastert and Co. are already rushing to cover up their knowledge and they'll get away with it due to intense media complicity.
But Democrats don't have to cooperate with this b.s. They can call the media on it simply by bringing it up and demanding an investigation. Referring it to the House Ethics committee isn't sufficient. "We want a fuller investigation and bi-partisan committee formed to do a formal investigation of the wider ramifications of this growing scandal."
In short James E. Powell above is right. No matter how hard the resistance Democrats can force this scandal to have legs just by continuing to talk about it, no matter how often Republicans try to change the subject.
But, expecting the media to do their jobs is just fatally stupid. If Democratic Congressmen sit back and expect that to happen they'll be waiting a long time, just has they have for the media to expose any of the other deceptions of the Bush administration. How long have we waited for the full inside report on Cheney's inviting lobbyists to write the energy bill and that happened 5 years ago!
Posted by Cugel at September 30, 2006 12:08 PMY'all need to look up the definitions of words again. Pedophile, verses the age of consent. DC has the age of consent at 16. Wonder of wonders, Democrats have ruled that cities government for a long time. This jerk of a Congressman should have to go to jail for this. But, no, some Democrat lowered the age of consent to 16. Foley just gets to go home, untried. All he gets is a job change. I'm sure Foley appreciates the "soft on crime" Democrats that lowered the age of consent. You get what you vote for and Foley walks. Goes home to live happier ever after. Thanks Democrats, now you know why we vote Republican. This creep of a Congressman deserves punishment for his conduct.
Posted by peter at September 30, 2006 12:20 PMBut, no, some Democrat lowered the age of consent to 16.
Could we get a name on that one? You know, just because who knows who's responsible for the age of consent in DC. I can guarantee it was a white man, though.
Posted by ann at September 30, 2006 12:28 PMQuote: Glenn Greewald today
"One last point: just this year, Republicans drew the line of age of consent at 18 when, with overwhelming support, they enacted the "Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006," which the President signed into law (with Mark Foley standing behind him). By definition, then, they consider the acts in which Foley apparently engaged to be criminal. They even enhanced the penalties for this conduct. For those purposes, it doesn't really matter what states have designated as the age of consent because House Republicans have declared it to be a federal crime to solicit or discuss sexual
acts with someone under the age of 18."
suzanne smith,
Good for you. I can't argue with paradox that we've had a six year disillusionment with the Press, letting these stories die. But the post is the stuff of guaranteed defeat. It's our job to keep these stories alive, to breathe some life into the din of the Bush years, to remind people how this system works.
I remember the horrible downward drag of the White Citizen'a Council and the KKK here in the South of my own youth. I remember the body counts during Viet Nam and the cry of "commie" if you argued about them. And I recall the drone of "all the president's men." But giving in to the frustration is like turning an infection into cancer.
Good for you...
Posted by Mickey at September 30, 2006 12:41 PMCOVERUP!
Elect Democrats to Congress.
Posted by CLK at September 30, 2006 12:48 PMCheer Up, Paradox, and keep your eye on the prize.
GOOD is always elusive, the fight for GOOD is never won. GOOD is reached for, never achieved.
Only when we humans stop reaching for GOOD have the bad guys won.
So, keep writing.
Keep reaching.
Don't even stop to look to see who you might be influencing.
Never give up.
Keep your eye, and your words, on the prize: a GOOD America, a GREAT America.
I'm with you.
Suzanne Smith, I disagree with your take on the effects of each new bit of information about who the Republicans really are. This information has been in the public domain for years without any significant change in voting behavior.
What I am seeing, instead, is that each new bit of "information" is either embraced or ignored depending on whether it is consistent with the overarching narrative that each person adopted. And what's more, the "information" doesn't have to be a fact, in the sense of something objectively true and verifiable. It need only be something someone said, like "Clinton had a chance to get bin Laden, but he was too distracted by the Lewinsky scandal." Once embedded in the adopted narrative, these bits of information become almost impossible to replace or dislodge.
I am no social scientist so I have no idea if there is an explanation or a set of explanations for this behavior. But what I have observed is that when confronted with bits of "information" that contradict the adopted narrative, people in general but right wingers in particular become even more attached to the narrative.
So, I disagree with your take but I will acknowledge that you could be right. We shall see.
I also disagree with your choice of personal attack as a response to what you objected to in paradox's post. You have a contrary point of view and you also have the skills to express it without resort to that.
Posted by James E. Powell at September 30, 2006 01:11 PMY'all need to look up the definitions of words again.
You go! Parsing Semantical Peter has shown up! Yeah!
LMAO, I knew someone would come in here with some pretzel logic and turn it into the Dems fault. Why you even try anymore is beyond me. Give it up bro, you've been fed a constant diet of poop snaks for the last 6 years, yet you keep gobblin' them up and say "YUMMY!" Get away from the trough and for god's sake go brush your teeth.
Foley, has consistently been part of the "no non-governmentally approved sexual interactions" group of the GOP for a long time now. The real issue is the nearly year long concerted effort to cover up and ignore a known issue.
Go crawl back into your little room of enablers.
Yes James, I agree that I shouldn't have attacked. I apologized above for that and hope it will be accepted. Paradox is doing a lot for this country. Here is why I think that the growing body of information now coming about about the right will add up (sooner or later) to a strong shift in our favor. Yes, the right has been able to manipulate this info and developed a very good system of damage control - absorbtion.....but there is a fundamental law - all things change. People take in data and are constantly compiling things into folders and larger folders, just like a computer. At some point patterns emerge that change perspective....it is just part of life. The patterns that are now emerging regarding our leadership are becoming more clearly patholoical. The roots are showing... so to speak. What was yesterday an isolated observation is today part of a folder that is full of like observations. That folder will become part of a larger one etc. I wish it didn't take so long sometimes or cause such suffering.....but I really do have hope that there is a shift happening of major proportions. Another reason I think we're on a roll is that the more that comes out and the GOP has to deal with, the greater the chance of them slipping up. (One of the flaws, I believe, in a mindset like Rove's is that he actually comes to believe he can control all things - he loses perspective. That's the fatal flaw. Sort of like the cockky murderer that finally gets caught.) One cannot control others perception of events forever. We just have to keep up the pressure on these guys to make it more likely that they stumble and stumble often.
Posted by s at September 30, 2006 01:33 PMO'Reilly got a nice welcome on the Tonight Show last night, sheeple see applause sign, sheeple respond.
"Interviewing" O'Reilly, Leno came off as stupid as the sidewalk people who look up to the sky in wonder when he asks questions like "who is buried in Grant's Tomb?" At least Letterman tried, but not corporate Jay.
Why would a millionaire helping another millionaire sell a book care about the middle class? It looked like Leno was afraid of O'Reilly. Disgusting.
Posted by TIKI AL at September 30, 2006 01:47 PM"But, no, some Democrat lowered the age of consent to 16."
Peter, I am calling you on this. I want a link and the name of the Democrat that pushed to get the age lowered. Put your money where your fat mouth is or shut the fuck up.
Posted by Judith at September 30, 2006 01:49 PMSeems we are all just emotional fucking wrecks, huh?
I swear, if someone is not emotionally twisted, they do not love this Country. That is the thing about these goddamned-blind-cult-follower-right-winged-freaks...everything is just fine and dandy. To quote the c*** of right wing propaganda transgendered pundits, "it is all going swimingly".
Things are not fine and dandy. Just take a look at all of the books that are written about our slide into Fascism and the pure sociopathic nature of this Preznit. Jeebus. The info is out there. It is all there for anyone who cares to see just how terribly horrible it all is.
Pelosi called for an investigation last night. She called for it on the House floor three times...shot down by Boehner who instead refered the matter to the ethics committee.
That right there is enough:
"I called for an investigation, House leadership decided to just refer it to the ethics committee."
Next motion needs to be to refer to the ethics committee every single fucking GOP House Leader who knew about this and did nothing - for how long!?!?
Sorry people are so frazzled. We are only frazzled because we love our Country and are trying our best to save it.
We are all working hard. Hats off to every single one of the contributors here at TLC. You are all doing your best to save us. We are grateful.
James - love your sample script. Made me laugh. Thanks.
emotionally twisted
Should be more accurately stated "emotionally turned upside down..." or something like that. Emotionally twisted would be more like the assholes running this Country.
Posted by Anjha at September 30, 2006 02:32 PMI lamented about the passing of the torture amendment to a friend who is a retired general. I told the general that I was downheartened, but I'd eventually pull myself up and get back to work. The general wrote back in 36 pt. font: GET BACK WITH THE PROGRAM!! WE'VE COME TOO FAR TO STOP NOW!!
The general is right.
It has legs if we give it legs. First, it's about sex. The MSM loves that, it sells. Second, and just as important, it's about a cover up. That's where the blogs come in to do the lazy reporters jobs for them and keep this alive. I've been depressed all week about the torture law. Paradox you make me seem like a ray of golden sun by comparison.
Posted by Mister Larry at September 30, 2006 03:18 PMI think this is big, too. It's people's children, not some abstract argument about habeas corpus. It's a middle-aged Republican playing internet tag with a teenager. No way this disappears.
The fact that the Republican leadership covered Foley's tush (so to speak) is incredibly disturbing. And they kept him as co-chairman of the committee to protect kids from predators! No way to spin that.
The media have already done what was necessary - reporting the story. It's table and water cooler talk, now. I've been bummed out by recent polls and Dem pessimism lately, but I have a growing feeling that the tide has already turned. People are disgusted with the Republican Party. Watch out for the wave - it's coming.
Posted by nyc at September 30, 2006 03:18 PMBut, no, some Democrat lowered the age of consent to 16.
Sixteen is the age of consent in the majority of states. The last time I checked, only nine states had the age of consent at eighteen. The statutes often have provisions that increase the severity of the offense with decreasing age under eighteen either by specifying an age or by using the difference in ages between the defendant and the victim.
California, surely among the most Democratic of states, puts the age of consent at eighteen.
Posted by James E. Powell at September 30, 2006 03:53 PMFoley violated a Federal Law that the Republicans enacted which sets the age limit at 18. From Glenn Greenwald http://www.glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/ (Sorry I have forgotten code for this)
As noted in the post below, one of the laws which Mark Foley appears to have violated is the so-called "Adam Walsh Child Protection Act of 2006" which, among other things, increases penalties for adults who use the Internet to discuss or solicit sexual acts with "minors" (defined as an "individual who has not attained the age of 18 years"). GOP leaders hailed this law as a vital tool in protecting our nation's children against Internet predators:Posted by MO Blue at September 30, 2006 04:19 PM
Mr. Larry I do not know if this story will fly for more then a week just because it's about sex. Remember:
Jeff Gannon
Brian J. Doyle
Ralph Hall
Randall ‘Duke’ Cunningham
All of the above, even Dukester, had three things in commen: Republicans, a sex scandle, and no investigation by the so called MSN.
I agree with Mr. LC. Nothing will be done with this by the Mediawhores/Pre$$titues with the possible exception of Olbermann.
Posted by Commander Ogg at September 30, 2006 04:27 PMNot that the "age of comsent" has any real relevance to this distasteful story, but a quick google search reveals that around 28 of the states (plus evil "Democrat" DC) set the age of consent at 16. It's far and away the most common age selected across the country, north or south, and has likely been so for decades.
But posts like peter's aren't meant to make any sense whatever, they're simply willful manipulation ordered to be disseminated by the higher-ups of Team Conservative.
A Republican congressman engages in appalling behavior with a 16 year old congressional page, and somehow, someway, "lib'ruls" MUST be blamed, however ridiculously and preposterously.
peter is just a happy, willing cog on Team Conservative, literally saying anything he is told will help his "team". He is simply a blind follower, like all these authoritarians who support Nero jr.
Posted by euzoius at September 30, 2006 04:31 PMYou are right, Paradox. About the corporate media's agenda, of course, but also about those democratic/apologist bloggers who are attempting to change the subject of that party's Big Dive on the torture legislation. Too many of them seemingly hope to fire up their non-blogging peers with this perverted sideshow, as if the disgust with that party's most recent abdication of duty can wishfully be swept away.
Time will tell. I have a sneaking suspicion, though, that Paradox will be pleasantly surprised.
Oh, and Peter, what to say? Why are wingnuts so determined to defend Congressmen who break the law and prey on minors, and those who enable them by sweeping it under the rug for political purposes?
I mean, I know that things kinda suck for those of the Rightward persuasion these days, but you kinda hope that there are some lines even you guys don't cross.
Alas, not to be.
Posted by Jonathan at September 30, 2006 05:15 PMFoley is the second story on CBS news this evening.
Posted by dj moonbat at September 30, 2006 05:33 PM
"A famous Zen Master once said: "your mind creates your world.'"
Tell it to the 6 million dead Jews.
Honey, you need help.
Posted by o at September 30, 2006 05:47 PMAnd the main story on MSNBC.com just now is "Foley e-mails an open secret in D.C.?
N.Y. lawmaker says he told House Speaker of lurid messages sent to page."
CNN has been reporting on it all day long.
I don't think this one will die too soon.
Posted by Anjha at September 30, 2006 07:36 PMWere the parents of the victim\pages offered anything to keep silent, or were they just being good republicans? Whose word are we taking here that they "didn't want to pursue this"?
Posted by TIKI AL at September 30, 2006 08:04 PMBe on the lookout for 16 year old ambassadors.
Posted by TIKI AL at September 30, 2006 08:08 PMPage A01, Sunday Washington Post:
"GOP Leaders Knew Of Foley's Messages"
I'm thinking this does, indeed, have legs.
Posted by Jonathan at September 30, 2006 08:08 PMAlso, Pelosi got a Congressional investigation resolution passed yesterday. There is preliminary report due in ten days. So around mid-October this will come up again and may be really juicy, who knows.
Ah, the other someone might check out is if there are mandatory reporting requirements in the child protection law. Failing to report can be a crime as well.
Posted by j swift at September 30, 2006 09:07 PMSex sells. Sex + cover-up: Big seller. IMHO
Well, in a week we'll know who was right.
Posted by truth at September 30, 2006 09:36 PMTiming of this story is suspect.
Let's see what the discussion is on the Sunday talk fest. Torture? Sex?
Posted by Judith at October 1, 2006 03:18 AMBy-the-way, I read where this is not the first incident by Foley. My understanding is that the Capitol Hill Police Department is now investigating.
Posted by Judith at October 1, 2006 04:04 AMThe fact of Foley's position makes not reporting it that more criminal, in my book.
Posted by Judith at October 1, 2006 04:15 AMI see you guys don't remember the House Page Sex Scandal from the early 1980's (83 to be more exact). Lot's of young Pages getting fucked vaginally and anally by our representatives. Have a dear friend who had been a Page in 1976. She immediately got a big ass high-paying job in John Danforth's office in 83. Amazing!
With power comes control. And these people not only fuck the hell out of all of us, they literally fuck the hell out of the children on the Hill. Will this scandal die? Sure as shit. They don't want this investigated too deeply. Too many members practice the exact same standards as Foley. It's a good old boys club. They high five and slap each other on the back when they make another conquest.
Posted by phidpides at October 1, 2006 08:39 AMParadox,
Google News has 1798 stories from all over the world about Foley/Boy Sex/Republican cover-up.
That would be since Friday.
That would mean this story has 1798 LEGS, so far.
Republican House leaders are squirming.
Foley's PAC gave $100,000 to one of his protectors, Rep. Tom Reynolds of NY, who is up for reelection.
I would say 1798 legs, and counting.
2460 STORIES ON GOOGLE NEWS.
Posted by CLK at October 2, 2006 03:45 PM