Thinking Right

By Mid-South Philosopher

October 5, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim,

I have a suggestion.

Let’s ask Foley!

He has admitted his misconduct. He has admitted being homosexual. He has admitted being an alcoholic.

He has nothing else to lose!

He should know if anyone said anything to him about his conduct. I suspect he would know if the Speaker was aware that he was near the line.

By Realist

October 5, 2006 09:07 AM | Link to this

If the TRUTH comes out after a fair investigation, and the facts show that a person or persons knew of this illegal and disgusting conduct but failed to address it, they should be expelled from Congress at a minimum, and prosecuted if legally possible. The challenge here is finding an unbiased truth in a crowd who wouldnt know the truth if it slapped them.

GOP or Dems be damned. We dont need these kind of people leading this country regardless of political affiliation.

By peter

October 5, 2006 09:08 AM | Link to this

Jim you are funny again today, I guess down playing this is the way to go.

You don’t mention anything about Foley’s place on the committee that was suppose to protect our children, and if the Republican leadership really knew of his actions, then how is that protecting Americans?

You also assume the Democrates will “over play their hand”

Also you don’t ask did Hastert really know, or the White House as well.

I think the real worry is, the Republican leadership are at a place where they can loose allot of the fundamental Christian support, and this is not a good place to be with the election looming so close by.

By Oscar Wilde

October 5, 2006 09:09 AM | Link to this

Dems aren’t worried about being PC and the need to make sure Rednecks don’t confuse homosexuality with pedophilia cause those dumba@@s ain’t voting for dems anyway.

The dems are worried about protecting the children from the current republican-government sanctioned molestation.

This country needs accountability! No more BS. 27 American soldiers dead since Saturday and wacko, nutjobs like Coultier say Irag is going well and fellow Kool-aid drinkers on this blog agree!

I say kick the repubs while their down and don’t stop until after the elections!

By sct

October 5, 2006 09:13 AM | Link to this

Get with the times Jim! This is the swift boat era of political campaigns. Things have changed.

To symbolize the cover-up, pink band-aids have been ordered and should arrive next week.

By getalife

October 5, 2006 09:16 AM | Link to this

Typical wingnut hypocrisy by Jim. Yesterday, he had enough with no accountability. Today, no biggie and the Dems are overplaying their hand.

There is no hand Jim. There is right from wrong. As usual, you chose the wrong path. How do you live with yourself? Where is your conscience? Have you no shame? Tell the children that it is no big deal if a Congreesman talks to them on the internet about sex.

Still no accountability. Make no mistake, with the gop there will be no accountabilty. Iraq and Washington are out of control and it will get much worse.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 5, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this

Hastert, the former high school wrasslin’ coach, is one nervous chimp breakdown and a heart attack from the Presidency. Given the incompetence of this administration, his “leadership” would be a seamless transition, but wouldn’t be much of an improvement. After all, he sees his job as to rubberstamp every sillyass thing Dumbya sends him, which ain’t hard.

But this Foley thing, coupled with the DeLay filth, shows someone with the potential to rival Dumbya as the most incompetent President ever, and that says something. He doesn’t even make a good hall monitor.

If the White House is a whorehouse (and it is), then Denny’s Place is a Florida truckstop complete with lot lizards willing to do anything for a buck, and really weird stuff for free… Look there’s Foley in his cutoff jean shorts with his arm around DeLay and his hand on Boehner’s butt…

By griftdrift

October 5, 2006 09:19 AM | Link to this

“But editors at The Miami Herald and The St. Petersburg Times apparently had the same e-mails others did last year and thought them not worth pursuing”

Jim, this is a gross exaggeration and as a newspaper man, you should know better.

The St. Pete Times has explained that they DID FOLLOW UP on the story, even going so far as to track down the page in question. The page and his parents refused to go on the record. Once they could not get an on the record statement, the St. Pete Times chose to go with their policy of not publishing such a controversial story based solely on unnamed sources. There is little doubt that if the page had been willing to go on the record, they would have published.

Shame on you, Jim.

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 09:20 AM | Link to this

Good morning, Jim, leaving for meetings and just saw the new topic. Great argument, MidSouth. My guess is that anti-Hastert Republicans are pushing harder for Hastert’s resignation (a la Trent Lott) than are the Democrats, and for reasons that have nothing to do with homosexual IMs. But to your argument, a relevant argument I read earlier today:

“No one demanded to know why the Democratic speaker of the House, Thomas “Tip” O’Neill, took one full decade to figure out that Studds was propositioning male pages.

“But now, the same Democrats who are incensed that Bush’s National Security Agency was listening in on al-Qaida phone calls are incensed that Republicans were not reading a gay congressman’s instant messages.

“Let’s run this past the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: The suspect sent an inappropriately friendly e-mail to a teenager — oh also, we think he’s gay. Can we spy on his instant messages? On a scale of 1 to 10, what are the odds that any court in the nation would have said: YOU BET! Put a tail on that guy — and a credit check, too!

“When Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee found unprotected e-mails from the Democrats about their plan to oppose Miguel Estrada’s judicial nomination because he was Hispanic, Democrats erupted in rage that their e-mails were being read. The Republican staffer responsible was forced to resign.

“But Democrats are on their high horses because Republicans in the House did not immediately wiretap Foley’s phones when they found out he was engaging in e-mail chitchat with a former page about what the kid wanted for his birthday.

“The Democrats say the Republicans should have done all the things Democrats won’t let us do to al-Qaida — solely because Foley was rumored to be gay. Maybe we could get Democrats to support the NSA wiretapping program if we tell them the terrorists are gay.

“On Fox News’ “Hannity and Colmes” Monday night, Democrat Bob Beckel said a gay man should be kept away from male pages the same way Willie Sutton should have been kept away from banks. “If Willie Sutton is around some place where a bank is robbed,” Beckel said, “then you’re probably going to say, ‘Willie, stay away from the robbery.’”

…

“This is the very definition of political opportunism. If Republicans had decided to spy on Foley for sending overly friendly e-mails to pages, Democrats would have been screaming about a Republican witch-hunt against gays. But if they don’t, they’re enabling a sexual predator.

“Talk to us Monday. Either we’ll be furious that Republicans violated the man’s civil rights, or we’ll be furious that they didn’t.”

Full essay at http://www.anncoulter.com/cgi-local/welcome.cgi

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 09:22 AM | Link to this

Ah Jim, a most sensible and straightforward commentary on the Foley case. If only this manner of doing things could continue during the day.

The Foley case is a terrible blot on HIM. Nobody that I know condones such behavior. It is foolish to name a political party with any responsibility for such actions. It was Foley’s behavior and HIS alone that were unethical and immoral.

Foley is gone. Let the Justice Department or the Ethics Committee make whatever charges are proper.

I believe that is what you are saying about Hastert who is NOT the offender. Evidence should be presented before charges are made. There seems to be a big hullabaloo before the truth is presented.

By Realist

October 5, 2006 09:23 AM | Link to this

Oscar, I understand your anger. Its the same anger and disgust I had when Clinton embarrassed himself and our nation as he did. I do think this is worse because minors are involved.

But the problem, whether its Dems kicking Republicans when they are down, or Republicans kicking dems when they are down, is that America is suffering as a whole from this partisan fighting and dirty play and lack of decency.

I am growing more disgusted everyday with the GOP and how they are handling this Foley crime, and that its becoming clear that they were aware of it. And Im equally disgusted with the dems and the media for holding this story and trying to manipulate the election with it, which is also becoming more evident each passing day.

If it comes to a point where there is nothign but liars and crooks on both sides, and the so called “middle” or independents are a bunch of kooks like Perot or Nader, what freaking choice do we have?

You chose the one who best benefits your beleifs and lifestyle. The lesser of two evils. For me thats still the GOP, no matter how low they have stooped, because the left is just as low.

By peter

October 5, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this

Yes this is interesting thought ……..

Yesterday it was all about accountability and taking responsibility.

Today it is “down playing” a major even, and it seems no wants to be accountable for the problem, yet it “Appears” that the powers at be “Knew” what was going on, and are not really clear if the actually can “remember”.

Things that make you go Hhhhhhmmmmmmmmm!

By getalife

October 5, 2006 09:31 AM | Link to this

Told ya wingnuts are very bad people. Just look at all the bad things they are teaching the children. Future generations will be worse than them. Talk about terror.

Shees.

Shame.

By Jim's a Cherry Picker

October 5, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this

Democrats are in real danger of overplaying their hand! [It’s the hypocrisy stupid!(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypocricy)]

The GOP spent tens of millions of dollars trying to bring down the Presidency of the United States over something that every man who has ever lived lied about. Yet here we have the GOP backpeddling, as fast as they can, to morally justify their actions.

It doesn’t matter whether one was worse than the other … treat them the same or else your previous actions ring more hollow than they did originally.

But we all know that you won’t. You’re just as baseless as the rest.

And besides, this is just another distraction away from the real matter at hand: the President of the United States of America is engaging in a war that was unjustified and has lied about it for three years. He is completely eliminating the ability of this country to conduct diplomacy on an international scale, and is responsible for thousands of deaths of American soldiers.

That’s the story. That’s what we should be talking about … not one more morally corrupt congressman. They’re a dime a dozen.

By getalife

October 5, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this

It is hypocrisy at its finest peter. Look at crusty cheering Jim on for his shameful comments.

Puke.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 09:38 AM | Link to this

Desperate news for rednekkks getabrain canus harold et al

By Oscar Wilde

October 5, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this

Who swiped realist’s ID and is posting under his name? I almost agree with his entire post.

The thing is once sh@#t gets dirty it’s hard to get back behind that line. Especially when it has proven to be effective.

Actually the truth about this scandal will come to pass - but not through the house ethics - through the criminal investigation. Once the feds start getting subpoenas, people will start talking to save their a@@es.

By Van

October 5, 2006 09:44 AM | Link to this

Typical Democatic hypocrisy.

When it is a Democratic Congressman having a phsical relationship with a Page, he is given a slap on the hand (he might of liked it). No questions about the page being underage, no questions about his sexuality, no questions about who knew and when.

But let a republican send explicit emails to an underage page, wow, do the democrats go nuts.

Yesterday, I asked a few questions. One of them was who was witholding this evidence(up to 3 years old) and why.

By harold

October 5, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this

Hastert wasn’t warned. Condi wasn’t warned. Rumsfeld wasn’t warned.

Hmmmm. Harold believes that is the new Republican mantra: “Nobody warned us!”

Well even if you didn’t notice the warning signs for the red light cameras you still get a ticket in the mail if you run the red light.

By Southern Democrat

October 5, 2006 09:49 AM | Link to this

Good morning, friends. I do think that Mr. Wooten brings up the valid point of rather than confuse the issue with the Hastert witch hunt, let’s figure out what procedures were and were not followed and how we correct the problem. Clearly, though, the e-mails (as peter rightly states) were enough for the House leadership to have asked Foley to step down from the committee (even for undisclosed reasons). As a former teacher, I can tell you that the e-mails alone would have been enough to raise eyebrows and warrant a suspension or other disciplinary action. Last, it’s POLITICS, why not do the smart thing politically and just say, “Listen, Mark, I’m sure there’s nothing to this, but the fact of the matter is that we have parents worried about their children… you need to step down from this committee and have ZERO involvement with the pages.”

Jbmlaw, respectfully, quoting Coulter is akin to a liberal quoting Michael Moore or Al Franken… it’s unhelpful to debate. As an accomplished lawyer, too, I am sure you see the flawed logic in her rantings: Democrats point fingers and circle the wagons, Republicans take responsibility; this situation is the fault of Democratic hypocrisy and finger pointing. ?!?!?!? I wish that Ann Coulter, Sean Hannity and Michael Moore and Belafonte could have a knock down, drag out fight… hopefully each is rendered mute.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

Damn!! these links dont always work

but rednekkks and the other perverted lefties will be supremely disappointed by this news

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3311189,00.html

By Th

October 5, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this

JBM: the Democrats are in favor of the NSA spying on terrorists. They are also in favor of the NSA using the proceedures set down by Congress. Bush says the FISA court doesn’t work. Why not?

The stolen emails re: Estrada pointed out how touchy it would be to oppose the Hispanic, Estrada. They opposed him because of his views, not his ethnicity. But, you already knew that.

The Republicans built their glass house and now they need to clean up the broken glass. The only organization that seems to have acted correctly is CREW who received the email exchange and promptly turned all information they had over to the FBI. Damn those Soros-funded liberals for doing the right thing.

By Van

October 5, 2006 09:53 AM | Link to this

Dusty,

You’re right, 100% right.

But to the lefties, it isn’t the seriousness of the charge, it is the seriousness the allegation.

The lefties what nothing to do with justice, just revenge for trying to make Clinton accountable for his lying under oath.

By harold

October 5, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this

Hastert will not resign if he thinks there is one iota of chance he can distance himself from the issue. You see, Republicans by nature are concerned primarily with their own interests. Hastert’s primary interest is retaining his own power. Only after self interest comes the party interest. This is why the party is now disintegrating. These guys are “all for me” types and a band of them just can’t last very long as their groping for more for themselves starts stepping on the toes of their accomplices. Anyone who has ever seen a movie about bank robbers can figure this one out.

By Fort Pillow Pillowbiters

October 5, 2006 09:56 AM | Link to this

Jim is right, the Dems will try to make something of this, but it will be futile for them.

The GOPers are True Believers, and they are vewwwy vewwwy scared and they stay scared, so they pray Big Daddy Dumbya and the Council of Elders of the GOP will protect them from their many bogeymen.

At night they bury their heads in their pillows and cry - if someone comes in and mounts them from behind, all they do is bite the pillow and cry some more. These cowardly idiots take all the abuse Big Daddy and boys will give them, as long as he says he will protect them from all those bogeymen…

They are vewwwy vewwwy scared! Help us pleeze Big Daddy Dumbya!

Dems, just shake your heads and laugh, you’ll never get these pillowbiters to vote for you - and why would you want them to?

Let’s face it - the red states are really the yellow states.

By getalife

October 5, 2006 09:59 AM | Link to this

I would strongly suggest censoring the children from the news to protect them from the evil example the gop sets.

Yes, these people are evil and you do not want your children to be exposed to these evil doers.

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this

Well, I was going to tell RedNecks just how low I thought he had gotten. But why bother? He has hit bottom. I don’t care to join his squiggle in the muck.

By Icy Stars

October 5, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

Cartoon Idea: Show an underage stand-up comic on stage at school play, and he’s saying, “Last night I saw an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in there I’ll never know.”

By Camus

October 5, 2006 10:04 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw,

I must agree with Southern Democrat that citing Ann Coulter as an authority on anything seriously undermines your creditability. You and I are not often in strict accord, but you typically offer cogent comment, and at least make an attempt to back your statements with fact.

The execrable Coulter offers neither cogency nor fact. In fact, she often simply makes stuff up to support her lunacies. And then appends made up footnotes to mimic serious scholarship. She is a sham.

And I must suggest that Michael Moore, while guilty of overstatement and some pretty terrible cinematic skills, does not deserve comparison to this awful woman. For one thing, he has never called for the assasination of anyone (as Coulter did with Supreme Court justices who disagree with her), nor did he publicly wish for a terrorist attack on a US target (as she did when she lamented that McVeigh should have bombed the NY Times instead).

To carry forward from yesterday, if there is to be any hope of discourse and exchange, we simply must stop giving any credence and attention to the bomb throwers like Coulter (and her like on this board). Her currency is mechanical hatred of anything she does not like, which is then de facto labeled as liberal. She has nothing to add of any value whatsoever.

By peter

October 5, 2006 10:05 AM | Link to this

Hey Van, good question….

“Who was withholding the evidence”

Is it then “Who is in control of the House”, as the answer?

I also don’t think the statement of it being about a Democratic Congressman, or Republican Congressman, a really valid point.

We are talking about a Congressman who was in charge of a child protection agency, yet was a guy who in fact seems to have liked young boys, no different than a gay priest.

Not a good combination, while the powers at be knew this, and allowed him to stay in that position.

What seems to be a concern for Republicans, who want to spin the montra…”we will protect Americans, the Democratics are weak”……well with all the problems in the schools with shootings, are American children being protected?

That is a question for Americans who question things in general, and are not really blinded by being a member of one politcal party or the other.

Next question is….. “if the children are not protected, are we really protected here at home?”

Which than brings out another question….Does going out and starting a war, really mean we are protected here at home?

By deegee

October 5, 2006 10:07 AM | Link to this

Van, “who was holding the information and why?” You have to ask that question? In the first place minor victims of adult predators are reticent to come forward out of fear. In the second place the Republican leadership seemed to be holding information back in order to win elections.

By abc

October 5, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

It’s not about homosexuality, it’s about pedophilia. Clouding the issue by claiming a political party is homophobic is just stupid, especially from a bunch of folks who’d deny gays the right to marriage, or even civil union. Puh-leeeeze!

It was Hastert’s job to oversee the page program, and he blew it in a rather big way.

By Groucho

October 5, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this

Getalife, takemywife, please. Why cant you go back to myspace.com and blog with your friends? They miss you, I promise you. Boy, will you find a home!!!

You post as if you’re liberal, yet every single post you make is a pyrrhic victory. The left loses much more than it gains when you comment.

It’s as if you are an alias of the entire right. (I know you’re a troll, everyone does, and everyone talks about it, but nobody does anything. You’re just the road kill littering the traveled avenues in a blog. See if any of us come to any of your tailgate barbeques….is that chickenhawk? …

I SAID ROADKILL!!!

By Brian Curtis

October 5, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

“What’s next” is obvious: a desperate attempt for the right-wing pundits, loaded up with fresh marching orders and sound bites, to try to change the subject.

To ANYTHING else. A similar accusation from over 20 years ago; a fantasy wherein Foley should’ve been a Democrat and how shamefully the Democratic Party would have acted in their imaginations; a cry that it’s STILL all Clinton’s fault. Anything but address the reality that one of their own has been exposed as a twisted hypocrite.

It’s been fun watching them squirm all week… but it’ll be even more fun watching them twist in the wind come Election Day.

By hASSert- LEADER

October 5, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this

Icy stars, believe me, we knew the elephant was there. If the elephant had gone too far we would have stopped it…..If it was after the election……….maybe……..

I DONT REMEMBER

By Groucho

October 5, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this

At least Foley completed his military service. He was in Special Forces. (a real Kung-fu grip)

By getalife

October 5, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this

It does not matter if they are perverts or can’t govern anything.

I have come to a conclusion that the wingnuts will vote gop out of spite, regardless of the massive destruction to our country.

Judging by Jim’s recent evil rhetoric and his evil cheerleaders, these people do not give a damn about anything. They have no shame, morals or souls.

By Foleyosis

October 5, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this

Looks the the GOP caught the “foleyosis”, a debilitating disease of the soul of the party.. The christian right dont believe in no doctahs, so dey be jumping ship into the water to rinse the stain on their republican souls I do declare!!!!! (cartoon idea, rejected by Al Franken, the pope, and every person what reads it)

By b

October 5, 2006 10:29 AM | Link to this

Kung fu grip was developed during Foley’s military service and left an everlasting mark on the evolution of the GI JOE toy. Now, they can call it the Foley Grip.

Once, at band camp, for fun a couple of us put a real GI JOE doll with the Kung Fu grip together with a barbie doll and her pony…. they started emailing each other…. We had to hose them down. …

By harold

October 5, 2006 10:33 AM | Link to this

How much longer until the last 33% of Americans come to realize that America has been hijacked by relgious zealots bent on eradicating competing religions? It seems like 2 out of 3 Americans undertstand this, and the rest of the world understands this, so what’s the holdup with the holdouts? Harold guesses it is just really difficult to admit you were deceieved.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

The blindingly obvious social sickness at issue here is serial LEFTIST HYPOCRISY and ‘retched’ (gedditt??) HOMOSEXUAL predators. Hilariously the wriggling and squirming leftist vipers are indeed now actually showing how they really do hate homosexual predators, BUT ONLY when its NOT one of them. Studds got standing ovations from the slithering liberal vipers and repeatedly re-elected even after he literally turned his back on his formal congressional censure for repeatedly sexually molesting a page boy.

Now the festering leftist puff adders are attempting to stick their hypocritical venomous fangs into as many GOP leaders as they can manage - regardless, nay in spite of actual facts. So once again the crescendo of trademark liberal leftist orchestrated smear tactics screeches like a demented herd of hateful shrill banshee lesbian cats on heat led by the head shrewbitch in charge Pelosi.

The GOP now needs to gleefully hose down this socialistic Bush hating lynch mob of filthy dissembling (mostly yankee)trash rabble with a political sulphuric acid that burns and blinds their blind hatred and shows the typical non cowardly appeasing treasonous cut and run blame America first voter that this is what the future looks like if brainsick hags like Pelosi and lemming like poisonous toads like Schumer are ever allowed any sniff of actual political power!!

By getalife

October 5, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

You can hear good vs evil on this clip

By msteven

October 5, 2006 10:38 AM | Link to this

Did this Foley person ever take in to consideration Once, that nothing is Private on the Internet? How dare he get up there pro the scandal and say we have to protect our children..not to mention his hard stance when clinton got into trouble voting to impeach ole billy. what billy(clinton)did isent half as bad as talking to teenage boys. How strange our world is. One moment your in a six figure paying job. walking with the President of the United States. Now your hated, trashed, no job,(possibly face prison) disgraced, name is mud. All of his schooling, grooming to be a congressman, any Good deeds he did, all down the drain. Even if he dosent go to Jail his face, and name will be forever trashed. And Oh my gosh! he says hes GAY!(because to be Gay to some folks is One of the Seven Deadly Sins! Lawd Gwad! SAVE HIS SOUL! Actually, If he had just came out or admitted being gay, it would have died down. But the emails to the teens is what really the Hipe is all about. Not the fact that he gay. No one gives a rats azz because he is gay. Thats not the issue. The issue is Holding a Top Public Office and not being able to Control your affection for teenage boys. Thats the issue.

By Fruity Pebbles

October 5, 2006 10:39 AM | Link to this

Anyone check out the Neverland Ranch/Congress guest-cartoon that the AJC ran today?

By Fruity Pebbles

October 5, 2006 10:40 AM | Link to this

At least Foley completed his military service. He was in Special Forces. (a real Kung-fu grip)

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

So once again the crescendo of trademark liberal leftist orchestrated smear tactics screeches like a demented herd of hateful shrill banshee lesbian cats on heat led by the head shrewbitch in charge Pelosi.

THAT WAS SO hilariously FUNNY I just HAD TO POST IT AGAIN!! …huge “kick liberals in the nuts” like Cartman always says smirk

By Fruity Pebbles

October 5, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

cartoon idea…… A 12 year old Groucho Marx, holding Clinton’s cigar, testifying before a congressional committee: “Last night I saw an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in there I need to know…”

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 10:42 AM | Link to this

Peter,

A few days ago you said that you wanted a sensible, non-politicized, impartial blog. Then you come up with statements like “if children are not protected, are we really protected here at home?”

Then you asked “Does going out and starting a war, really mean we are protected here at home?”

And what does this have to do with the price of eggs? Every effort is made to protect children but we still have the Amish School Murders, Columbine and creeps like Foley who slip through the cracks. Are you going to imply that this is something politically inspired?

Then you bring in the war as if there is a connection. We fight terrorism to protect EVERYBODY in this country. There is no way to protect 100% for anybody. Don’t you know that?

You are simply trying the old liberal way of hating the present administration. Present your true colors. You don’t want a sensible discussion. You want to sneak in anti-war liberal propaganda.

By carolelynne

October 5, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

That distant rumbling sound you hear is the GOP leadership imploding.

Blaming the Democrats for taking advantage of the situation does not make the GOP any less culpable for the crisis. The GOP’s failures existed before the Democrats could take advantage of it.

By Th

October 5, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

A right wing blog found Foley’s victim and outed him. Pajamas media and instapundit linked to the idiot. The outraged parents will be appearing soon on a tv near you. Goodbye, Denny; hello, Nancy.

By RVV (the aboriginal)

October 5, 2006 10:43 AM | Link to this

At least Foley completed his military service. He was in Special Forces. (a real Kung-fu grip)

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 5, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this

I don’t know, Fort Pillow - one thing the redneck fears even more than death itself is that his/her strange sexual urges might mean that s/he is queer - Foley has put the mirror in front of their faces and made them look again, and they aren’t going to like that…

But, you’re probably right - the GOP will do what they always do - “well yeah, but what about Clinton?”

Except Monica Lewinsky was a consenting adult… so they’ll rattle around in Dem’s closets and try to find a GAP dress with a stain on it… who will do the sniff test this time - Ken/dra Starr? Ken/dra Mehlmann?

By msteven

October 5, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

If it goes before a jury I vote Michael Jackson, R.Kelly and whats that dude’s name that married mia farrow? and was sleeping with her adopted daughter? I cant think of his name. But I think all three should be jurors if Foley is charged. That way he is sure to get an un-bias trial. I wonder if Mark Foley thinks its O.K. to share his bed with a 16yr old boy? A little cookies and Milk seems innoncent enough..heh heh

By JK

October 5, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

Nicely put, Mister Wooten! “That’s right, there’s no scandal here folks, nothing to see, go back to your homes, move along now…”

HAHAHAHA! Way to work for those GOP brownie points. Later, Senator Saxby will take you to the park and buy you some Dippin’ Dots!

By D

October 5, 2006 10:52 AM | Link to this

when you hide behind the flag, children and Jesus to give the impression that you are morally superior to other people, just because you say you are a Republican, a Patriot, a Christian, if you actions don’t parallel your words, sooner or later your humanity will show through and you will look like an even bigger jackass than somebody who never claimed to be perfect. this better-than-thou sense from these people leads them to believe they can do anything because they are the chosen ones. so many awful crimes commited by so called Republicans and Christians since 2000, but if you say anything about it,you’re just playing politics. and all these crimes that we have seen, have all been worse than the oral sex scandal of the previous President. but no one cares, because they are the morally superior people, it’s ok. it’s even worse when people will find ways to support this cult. and believe me on this one, George Bush is no friend of Jesus’, if JC ever showed up at the White House, Ol’ Georgie Boy would be scrambling out some window!

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 10:53 AM | Link to this

How much longer until the last 33% of Americans come to realize that America has been hijacked by relgious zealots bent on eradicating competing religions? It seems like 2 out of 3 Americans undertstand this, and the rest of the world understands this, so what’s the holdup with the holdouts? Harold guesses it is just really difficult to admit you were deceieved.

it seems harold has been at the wacko jacko “jesus juice” a bit early this morning

By getalife

October 5, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

More good vs evil

By Catscan

October 5, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this

Traffic suggestion: the 85/316 intersection is set up wrong. The 316 traffic merging into one lane as it approaches 85 is shuffled incorrectly. A few orange cones should start shuffling the traffic a mile further down where traffic is moving and separated enough to easily become a single lane. The way they have it set up now, it wastes several minutes because people try to get around the slowdown, and rush forward on the right to get in line a few cars ahead of you, like it’s their right to be a moron.

That merging hazard at 85/316 is why our highways are being manned by unqualified traffic enforcement who cant seem to think a mile down the road. They’ve never realized that they have to start shuffling traffic, slowing it down, as it approaches hazards or all the traffic will come to a screeching halt like it always does.

Also, drivers themselves could form a pact to start shuffling into one lane well back from the merge point, but someone always cuts around, like his time is worth so much more than yours.

Funneling traffic into one lane causes accidents because it’s seldom done correctly.

By peter

October 5, 2006 11:01 AM | Link to this

Dusty……..I am an independent, and I am asking questions……

And the questions are valid…….

What I see here on this space is mostly HATE from one side to the other, the blame game is the way here.

Bottom line is the Republican’s allowed a guy who is basically a pretty messed up person, to head an organization, that took responsibility for protecting children.

So if THEY let that happen, why NOT ask the other questions?

As an independent, I don’t believe we are getting the truth from the government, sorry my take.

Seems like the monies supposidly spend on “protecting our country”, seem to be used for what ever purpose the powers at be use them for, be it a Democratic Governor, Mayor, or one that is Republican.

Seems like spending is the norm, no fiscal responsibility either side of the isle….and the funniest thing to me is Yesterday we appropriated… was it 20 million, for a Party to “Celebrate the “Winning” of the war.

We are not winning any war………we as Americans are fundamentally so different from the folks in the mid east we really cannot understand their way.

Heck if the Iraqi Police are indeed allowing the death squads to do their thing, then how do you take these Iraqi Police persons, and “retrain them”?

By getalife

October 5, 2006 11:04 AM | Link to this

Hastert said: “I think the base has to realize after awhile, who knew about it? Who knew what, when? When the base finds out who’s feeding this monster, they’re not going to be happy. The people who want to see this thing blow up are ABC News and a lot of Democratic operatives, people funded by George Soros.”

Sigh.

By Van

October 5, 2006 11:05 AM | Link to this

deegee,

Mike Rogers, a gay activists had these records available and held them since January. Planning to use them prior to the mid-term elections. If these do result in criminal charges will not Mike Rogers be guilty of obstruction of justice? If he had the IM’s who else had them and why were they not being used to defeat Foley during the last elections? Some have said that his “habits” were know as far back as his first term - 95-96.

Just in - According to ABCNEWS, the Page was 18 at the time of the IM’s during the House vote,

The former page, a Californian named Jordan Edmund, 21, on Wednesday hired Enid attorney Stephen Jones(attorney for Timothy McVeigh) to represent him, the attorney confirmed. News Link

By carolelynne

October 5, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

The other rumble you hear is time for the truth imploding. Perhaps time for the truth should consider calming down with a nice cup of coffee.

By getalife

October 5, 2006 11:07 AM | Link to this

w is spewing about no child left behind.

Insert joke here …………….

By D

October 5, 2006 11:09 AM | Link to this

smear tactics or better known as : Invalidation, is the republicans favorite tool, and turning it around and saying the other side is the one doing it, is their best defense, we all see these type of people in our everyday lives, and they identify with the Republican party. and talk about shameful, to discredit John Kerry’s military service, for which he served with honor, that’s just horrible, and even worse when you look at what Georgie did just so he could say he was in the military to help him when he ran for political office one day. and why aren’t Bush’s children in the military? women can serve. if you truly are a Republican and support this crappy war, then you should be doing everything in your power to encourage your own children to enlist, especially with the problems they are having with recruitment. but no, it’s easier to put an American flag bumper sticker on your car and look at me, I’m great American, I’m a Patriot, I’m a Christian, but never really doing anything to serve your country. so let’s all go put on our blue suit, white shirt, red tie and American flag lapel pins, that way we can be heroic Americans without having to do any work or sacrifice. remember Jesus died from government sponsored torture, and he’s waiting to have a long talk with all you false Christians that have done so much to soil his good name.

By Catscan

October 5, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

last nite I saw an elephant in my pajamas. How he got in my pajamas, I dont want to know.

By Van

October 5, 2006 11:16 AM | Link to this

D,

What problem with recruitment? The Military has been meeting its goals for at least the last year or more.

The right have been filling the ranks of the military while the lefties have been whining and crying about how unfair it all is.

More liberal talking points with no substance.

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 11:18 AM | Link to this

Peter,

You are still fooling yourself. You are not independaent. If you were, you would look at both sides of the question. You are not doing that.

The economy of this country is great. The national debt is not. Will one offset the other?

Republicans put a man in charge of a Child Protection Group. Do you think they KNEW about Foley? Do you think Democrats knew also? I don’t think anybody guessed at his twisted personality.

Iraqi Police have been protecting death squads. Did you not notice that the same Police Unit doing that is being investigated, retrained and temporarily out of service? You didn’t mention that.

You see. You are not looking at both sides. If you do, you do it with prejudice. Ask your questions. But be fair about it.

By carolelynne

October 5, 2006 11:19 AM | Link to this

get a life….that’s hilarious.

Shouldn’t W change his slogan to no child from behind?

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this

its always very gratifying when someone “new” posts something that aggressively abusive - kind of a heartfelt thank you for a job well done!!

poor wittle diddums … did the plastic surgery go horribly wrong carolelynne? - what kind of pathetic white trash name is that anyway??!! I heard they accidentally shoved the leaking silicon implants where the sun dont shine!! never mind - eh?

forget the coffee bunnykins - go choke on your pinko leftist kool aid!!

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this

yet more demoNcrat hate - but this time very surprisingly the leftist hate pig was forced to resign … unlike demoNcrat child molestors and demoNcrat drunken underwater driving killers - both from the homo paradise Assachussetts.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html

By getalife

October 5, 2006 11:30 AM | Link to this

Told ya they are evil

By Catscan

October 5, 2006 11:31 AM | Link to this

zzzzz

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 11:32 AM | Link to this

Dear Southern Democrat @ 9:49 and Camus @ 10:04, you both make a valid argument on “persuasion.” We have plowed some of this territory here before, but because we hold a different perspective, I think it worth review. Conservative nutballs such as your humble (well, maybe not quite that humble) correspondent look for the argument, without regard to the source. If I disagree with a Michael Moore or Howard Dean position, it is generally not because of the people who articulate the argument, but because of the substance in the argument. When I address the argument, I may sarcastically note the source, but I also address the arguing points.

In contrast, our brothers of the left (and usually the middle, too) focus first on who makes the argument, then secondarily – if at all - review the logic. (Thus, that strange kerfuffle over my personal credentials from a few weeks back; conservatives don’t care WHO says it, but identity of the debater is a critical issue for the left. I suppose that I should have been flattered that the leftist thought my arguments so tough that they attack blindly – and foolishly – on the credentials issue.) To the point, when I quoted the Ann Coulter argument at length earlier today, I erred by proffering the attribution, because you guys (i.e., my intelligent friends from the left) will argue with me, but you automatically dismiss Ann as unworthy.

The Ann arguments I thought worthy:

(1) the leadership hypocrisy, that leftists were not concerned that Tip O’Neal allowed a homosexual rapist to roam free in the House for 10 years, but condemn Hastert for not catching suspicious IMs within 2.

(2) the homosexuality hypocrisy (that the evidence against Foley before this week was nothing more than the fact that he seemed to be a homosexual), thus Democrats will defend alternative lifestyles only when the practitioner is on their side of the aisle.

(3) the duality of the email standard, that when Republicans inadvertently caught and exposed a bad-faith, race-based campaign organized by House leaders at the highest level against a conservative Hispanic, the Democrats raged; but when the Republicans failed to engage illegal wiretaps based on the most specious evidence around, the Democrats roar that the leaders are sexual-predator enablers.

All three of these arguments seem to me to be relevant to Jim’s topic, although I really think the more interesting one is the intra-party sabotage of Hastert, which I believe has no direct relationship to the Foley news. I think the sabotage is an attempt to hide Hastert’s good-faith effort to terminate ear-marks, a true stain on the entire House.

By Flatlined

October 5, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this

zzzzz

By getalife

October 5, 2006 11:35 AM | Link to this

Thanks carolelynne,

It writes itself. Pay no attention to “time for the perverts”, she is the resident evil doer.

By Camus

October 5, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

There’s that annoying mosquito buzz again, laughing at his own jokes so hard that he posts them twice.

Please, Mr Wooten, if this board is intended for serious exchange, the likes of TFTT and his kind undermine your aim. Is there nothing to be done with this incoherent juvenalia?

By interesting maybe only to me

October 5, 2006 11:39 AM | Link to this

Does anyone realize that the “base” Hastert is talking about is about 15% of the population. The GOP’s goal is to convince 15% of the population to vote for them because that’s all it takes for them to maintain their 50%+1 “mandate” that has kept them in power.

15% is controlling the other 85%.

By peter

October 5, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

OK Dusty, let’s go throught this then……..

Yes I do think that the Republicans knew about Foley, and No I don’t think the Democratees did know…….why because the Democrates would have raised the roof on the scandel for Politiacal reasons…….

Why the Republicans didn’t do anything sooner, probably becasue they really believed this guy would stop, and they wanted to control the seat.

Next subject the Iraqi Police……..

How do you retrain a guy who has already allowed death squads to do their thing? You did read they were to be retrained, didn’t you?

With dirty police officers in this country, we typically kick them out of the police don’t we?

Next the economy…….the housing market is in big decline, the national debt is huge, and government is bigger than ever before.

I also believe yes there are jobs to be had, but these are lower payinbg jobs, such as in the fast food market, etc…..

So this brings me to these thoughts…..

For the entire time Bush has been in office, not once has he raised the minimum wage, we do know that individual states have seen the light, and have done so within their own borders.

It is hard to believe Bush and the Republican party really believes in equality of life for ALL citizens of this country, by not helping all citizens.

We see each year the IRS does indeed come out and state, the economical disparity between the poor and the rich is growing with each year Bush has been in office.

While this non uping of the Minimum wage has been going on……..it seems to me that congress has raised there own pay what 5-7 times?

So what are they saying to us with that action?

What is the leadership implying with that action, and lack of action?

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 11:40 AM | Link to this

In my 11:30 post, my last sentence, I used “hide” when I should have used “kill.” Apologies.

By Confused X 10

October 5, 2006 11:43 AM | Link to this

2 words: Swift Boat. They beat kerry to death

This is the morally high standing party bu they continue to get pie in their face from greedy congressmen(Delay, Ney, Cunningham) and double standard moralist who had to resign Livingston, Newtty Boy Gengrich. This needs to stop. They protected someone who was messign with children. Politics be damned, this needs to stop and get power in balance. If Republicans hold the Executive branch, then they should not be able to hold the legislative branch and vice verca….i.e. purpose of 3 co-equal branches. this is a mess and you loyal party members…dems and repubs should be ashamed. do not lose your humanity over politics. your leaders are already doing that. we have kids to raise. lets do our jobs.

By Tspec

October 5, 2006 11:45 AM | Link to this

This isn’t new for the GOP

Republican Congressman Mark Foley abruptly resigned from Congress after “sexually explicit” emails surfaced showing him flirting with a 16-year old boy.

Republican executive Randall Casseday of the conservative Washington Times newspaper was arrested for soliciting sex from a 13-year old girl on the internet.

Republican chairman of the Oregon Christian Coalition Lou Beres confessed to molesting a 13-year old girl.

Republican County Constable Larry Dale Floyd was arrested on suspicion of soliciting sex with an 8-year old girl. Floyd has repeatedly won elections for Denton County, Texas, constable.

Republican judge Mark Pazuhanich pleaded no contest to fondling a 10-year old girl and was sentenced to 10 years probation.

Republican Party leader Bobby Stumbo was arrested for having sex with a 5-year old boy.

Republican petition drive manager Tom Randall pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 14, one of them the daughter of an associate in the petition business.

Republican County Chairman Armando Tebano was arrested for sexually molesting a 14-year-old girl.

Republican teacher and former city councilman John Collins pleaded guilty to sexually molesting 13 and 14 year old girls.

Republican campaign worker Mark Seidensticker is a convicted child molester.

Republican Mayor Philip Giordano is serving a 37-year sentence in federal prison for sexually abusing 8- and 10-year old girls.

Republican Mayor Tom Adams was arrested for distributing child pornography over the internet.

Republican Mayor John Gosek was arrested on charges of soliciting sex from two 15-year old girls.

Republican County Commissioner David Swartz pleaded guilty to molesting two girls under the age of 11 and was sentenced to 8 years in prison.

Republican legislator Edison Misla Aldarondo was sentenced to 10 years in prison for raping his daughter between the ages of 9 and 17.

Republican Committeeman John R. Curtain was charged with molesting a teenage boy and unlawful sexual contact with a minor.

Republican anti-abortion activist Howard Scott Heldreth is a convicted child rapist in Florida.

Republican zoning supervisor, Boy Scout leader and Lutheran church president Dennis L. Rader pleaded guilty to performing a sexual act on an 11-year old girl he murdered.

Republican anti-abortion activist Nicholas Morency pleaded guilty to possessing child pornography on his computer and offering a bounty to anybody who murders an abortion doctor.

Republican campaign consultant Tom Shortridge was sentenced to three years probation for taking nude photographs of a 15-year old girl.

Republican racist pedophile and United States Senator Strom Thurmond had sex with a 15-year old black girl which produced a child.

Republican pastor Mike Hintz, whom George W. Bush commended during the 2004 presidential campaign, surrendered to police after admitting to a sexual affair with a female juvenile.

Republican legislator Peter Dibble pleaded no contest to having an inappropriate relationship with a 13-year-old girl.

http://www.armchairsubversive.com/

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 11:49 AM | Link to this

Peter @ 11:40, just how high do you wish to raise the unemployment rate for our poorest people? (re: minimum wage.)

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this

Dear ConfusedX10, can you say “Kopechne?”

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

Tspec, I infer that you can find only 23 cases of sexual misconduct in the entire Republican party over the past 10 years. Do you not realize we can find that many by Bill Clinton alone?

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 11:57 AM | Link to this

jbm

No matter how reasoned, how factual, how logical and how restrained in tone yours and other conservative posts are, the demoNcrats will NEVER admit to their endemic hypocrisy. They are like rapacious crack pipe addicts - thus their Bush/GOP hate is so frenzied that nothing will stop their relentless lemming like march over the cliff of egregious double standards and compulsive dissembling. They dont read and inwardly digest any of the more measured posts, they clearly cannot and will not - because then their feigned ‘homophobic’ (note my sardonic use of yet another meaningless mick mouse lefty word) outrage and duplicitous hypocrisy will smack them between their very narrow puffy reptilian eyes.

In short although we conservatives have completely outwitted them logically and factually, based entirely upon their own despicable record of sexual child molestors and many other shameful - even fatal to innocent women congressional scandals, its a non-existent victory. Because they are just like the vainglorious deranged Jap emperor at the height of his genocidal enslaving rape of the Pacific rim last century, they have their hate the GOP bloodlust on full bore and sod anybody who gets in their way.

By Camus

October 5, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

jbmlaw,

Yes, I automatically dismiss anything Coulter has to say. Just as you would automatically dismiss if a liberal were to quote Ward Churchill or Bob Avakian to support their position. Because really, once a person tosses all their credibility under a mountain of their own demeneted spew (e.g. TFTT), why on earth should anyone ever give them the time of day again?

Granted, the blonde nutball might occasionally write something worth consideration. Even a blind pig finds a truffle here and there. But until and unless someone else with more credibility says it (and come on, even that sets the bar pretty low…hell, even O’Reilly could clamber over that barrier), it should be regarded as the ranting of a non-corpus mentis feces thrower.

By getalife

October 5, 2006 11:59 AM | Link to this

Macaca,

Is this why you are so angry?

“Do I make you a little horny?”
— Foley the Republican Pervert, to a child

Did it happen to you?

By confused X 10

October 5, 2006 12:01 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw :By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 11:50 AM | Link to this

Dear ConfusedX10, can you say “Kopechne?”

WHAT DOES IT MEAN??? im just saying that this stuff is ludircrous. How can people keep defending party lines if everything is not all about power. it stinks on both sides, but the repubs have got to go for awhile

By interesting maybe only to me

October 5, 2006 12:02 PM | Link to this

Remember anything the GOPer’s say or do it is to appease the 15%…. only 15%. They don’t need or want to address the concerns of the 85% of population who either cannot vote (for them or anyone) or who do not vote for them.

15%…. just 15%, maybe the wackiest 15% of the population or maybe just the wealthiest 15% I dunno….

(approximately 70% of eligible voters register, less than 65% of these folks are motivated enough to vote, ergo only 15% of the total population has elected our GOP leaders)[statistics from the Census Bureau on 2004 election]

By getalife

October 5, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this

“Sex offenders are not petty criminals. They prey on our children like animals
and will continue to do it unless stopped. We have a moral responsibility to do
everything in our power to protect our kids from these animals.”
— Foley the Animal, in 2005, given a green light to prey on kids by the GOP

Evil doers.

By abc

October 5, 2006 12:03 PM | Link to this

Now, yall are really off your rockers if you’re saying that people are sexually depraved to the point of criminality due to their affiliation with a political party, or that such depravity would have any bearing on the party to which they subscribe. Aren’t you straying a bit far from the topic at hand?

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

There’s that annoying mosquito buzz again, laughing at his own jokes so hard that he posts them twice.

poor wittle simpering canus - it’s so brazenly stupid and imbecilic it simply doesn’t realise that its been effortlessly hooked and reeled in yet again!!

time to throw this oily, narcissistic supercilious wanky little tosspot tiddler back into the leftist flotsam that is so repugnantly infesting this board as these witless hypocritical leftist scum rant and rave about the GOP actually cracking down on homosexual predators that aren’t pinko child rapists from Assachussets!

By Th

October 5, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

Tip O’Neill appointed a special prosecutor to investigate the page scandal.

Estrada was opposed for his views, not his ethnicity. His ethnicity was a complicating factor for the Dems as expressed in the stolen emails. Bush has been excellent at appointing judges that no moderate or liberal could vote for in order to drive a wedge between Dems and their voters. We have had Catholics, a Black woman, and Hispanics. No one with any brains misses what this is about. JBM is just repeating a talking point long ago discredited.

By Southern Democrat

October 5, 2006 12:08 PM | Link to this

Jbmlaw, thanks for your thoughtful post. I am guilty as charged when it comes to Coulter. I rarely (if ever) take the time to read her rantings because I find so little value to them… she has quite a reputation for fact-twisting, misquoting, liberally borrowing, and borderline plagiarism (her book Slander has been dissected by both leftists with an agenda and by seemingly non-partisan critics for its woeful inaccuracies).

As to your (and Ann’s) points, however, I think that your arguments play into the far left’s hands all too well. You cannot say that you are the party of accountability w/o exception and then point fingers, it lessens the impact of the message. If you want to fall on your sword, fall on it… I would certainly respect that. As Jesus said, when you are fasting, do not let the outside world know. You lose the moral highground if your argument is “but look what the other guy did” a la the Clinton “right-wing conspiracy” garbage. Simply put, I’m not arguing with you (I don’t think), just stating that I think this is one issue we can all agree on: what should be done to safeguard minors working on the Hill and/or prevent abuses of power? BOTH parties need to figure it out (as the litany of salacious scandals offered on this blog and others demonstrates).

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this

(e.g. TFTT)

Yukkkkk!!! It seems I now have a homosexual stalker stalking me!!

how sick and vile is that!!

By getalife

October 5, 2006 12:10 PM | Link to this

“Subject: Foley scandal helps the GOP?

Many Republicans are worried the congressman Mark Foley’s child sex scandal will hurt
Republicans in this year’s elections. But it may end up helping them because it draws attention
away from all the other scandals that might affect the election even more.

The Foley scandal distracts from Bush’s network of secret torture camps.
The Foley scandal distracts from the fact that the war in Iraq is making terrorism worse.
The Foley scandal distracts from the fact that Osama bin Laden is still free.
The Foley scandal distracts from the fact that Iraq is in a civil war.
The Foley scandal distracts from the fact that 2700+ soldiers died in Iraq for nothing.
The Foley scandal distracts from the fact that we are now losing the war in Afghanistan, too. The Foley scandal distracts from the Jack Abramoff and Tom Delay scandals.
The Foley scandal distracts from the fact that Bush let New Orleans die.
The Foley scandal distracts from the fact that the national debt is about to exceed 10 trillion dollars.
The Foley scandal distracts from the Abu Ghraib scandal. And Haliburton’s no bid contracts, global
warming, the failed war in Lebanon, failed diplomacy with Iran and North Korea, ignoring the Geneva
Conventions, the United Nations, and the Anti-ballistic missle treaty, warrantless wire tapping of our
phone conversations, no weapons of mass destruction, and Bob Woodward’s latest book “State of Denial”.

So although this sex scandal is bad for Republicans, it isn’t nearly as bad as all the other scandals.
Besides Clinton won with a sex scandal. I think Republicans are better off dealing with a sex scandal
than dealing with a record of failure.”

Marc Perkel San Bruno, CA.

The evil doers need to go.

By D

October 5, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this

Van keep believing what they tell you to believe, and go ahead and use your ‘liberal’ word to tear another person down instead of building yourself up on your own merits, because you can’t. now go talk to any recruiter and they will tell you, it’s not as easy to recruit as it used to be, and they are having trouble, that’s why they are increasing incentives. and no, I’m not a Democrat or a Republican, I think politicians are liars and crooks, and if you want to support that kind of people, that’s your choice, but do you have to do it in a way that destroys this great country? I served my country with honor, bet you just one of those that are full of talk and absolutely no substance.

By peter

October 5, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw

I honestly believe we should look at what the individual states that have infact rasied their’s, and get in line accordingly. We are talking maybe 50+ cents an hour, but it can be a start.

There are too many folks with family’s trying to make it work that are below the poverty line.

I have folks I do business with that have friends that have lost great corporate jobs, they now work two minimum wage jobs to try and make it all work out.

I am not saying we have to support them, and that we do the wealfare thing for them, to me that has seemingly set up a culture of folks thinking the deserve a hand out, when perhaps they have been too lazy all along to get an education.

I have been self employed for over 22 years, and if I don’t make any money, I look in the mirror!

Unfortunatly, my best buddy who was 20 years military as a retired major, and 13 years Atlanta School system teacher, has told me the horrors of the life of the kids in the hood.

He taught at a west-end middle school.

Generally these kids are being raised by either one parent, or some other relative.

It is actually an epidemic I believe…..

The sad part is these kids have zero guidance at home, thus they do not try at all in school, and are only becoming another generation of uneducated adults….thus supporting one’s self becomes more difficult, and then typically seems to leed to crime.

Gosh I wish I knew the answers…..the million dollar question…..but for America to NOT Implode, these to me are as important as the war, home land security etc.

I am also not fond of the Electorial college.

It seems to be an out dated way to run an election, the reason is, an independent cannot run effectively and win.

A vote should be a vote, and whom ever gets the most should win!

I am actually happy to say, there are a few folks so far that seem to have a way of being honerable on this blog. Conversing, and debating is what this is suppose to be, the name calling seems childish to me, and really only shows one’s personal insecurity!

By Realist

October 5, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

she (Ann Coulter) has quite a reputation for fact-twisting, misquoting, liberally borrowing, and borderline plagiarism

Yes, yes she does. But then she is only a pundit. An entertainer. Nothing more. She and others from the right wing entertainment world are embracing these tactics because it is and has been the SOP for the democratic party for as long as I can remember!! If you want to talk fact twisting and misquoting, holy crap we could all take a lesson from the dems!!!

By peter

October 5, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this

getalife 12:10 That is insiteful……..maybe just what the Republicans needed…..

BUT do they loose the Female vote because of this, and do the Christian Right rebell because of this!

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 12:21 PM | Link to this

I am guilty as charged when it comes to Coulter. I rarely (if ever) take the time to read her rantings because I find so little value to them… she has quite a reputation for fact-twisting, misquoting, liberally borrowing, and borderline plagiarism (her book Slander has been dissected by both leftists with an agenda and by seemingly non-partisan critics for its woeful inaccuracies)

southern dimwits empty assertions are just more envious leftist lies.

Coulter has always been assiduously accurate in her quotes and research. I have seen her on “live” cable news debate programmes with professional leftists who utterly despise her challenging them to point out where she has inaccurately quoted them and their ilk. Needless to say in countless appearances this has never happened. She admitted one very tiny typographical error in one of her books but that’s it so far as I am aware.

The beauty of Coulter’s work is that she doesn’t have to EVER exaggerate any of her quotes - the left simply are that poisonous and vile. Thus all she has to do is faithfully replicate their quotes from mostly lefty papers, tv/radio transcripts, speeches, the congressional record etc and then make millions laughing at and mocking them.

By Tspec

October 5, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

JBMLAW, I stopped at 23 due to system limitations!

Republican advertising consultant Carey Lee Cramer was sentenced to six years in prison for molesting two 8-year old girls, one of whom appeared in an anti-Gore television commercial.

Republican activist Lawrence E. King, Jr. organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.

Republican lobbyist Craig J. Spence organized child sex parties at the White House during the 1980s.

Republican Congressman Donald “Buz” Lukens was found guilty of having sex with a female minor and sentenced to one month in jail.

Republican fundraiser Richard A. Delgaudio was found guilty of child porn charges and paying two teenage girls to pose for sexual photos.

Republican activist Mark A. Grethen convicted on six counts of sex crimes involving children.

Republican campaign chairman Randal David Ankeney pleaded guilty to attempted sexual assault on a child and was arrested again five years later on the same charge.

Republican Congressman Dan Crane had sex with a female minor working as a congressional page.

Republican activist and Christian Coalition leader Beverly Russell admitted to an incestuous relationship with his step daughter.

Republican Judge Ronald C. Kline was placed under house arrest for child molestation and possession of child pornography.

Republican congressman and anti-gay activist Robert Bauman was charged with having sex with a 16-year-old boy he picked up at a gay bar.

Republican Committee Chairman Jeffrey Patti was arrested for distributing a video clip of a 5-year-old girl being raped.

Republican activist Marty Glickman (a.k.a. “Republican Marty”), was taken into custody by Florida police on four counts of unlawful sexual activity with an underage girl and one count of delivering the drug LSD.

Republican legislative aide Howard L. Brooks was charged with molesting a 12-year old boy and possession of child pornography.

Republican Senate candidate John Hathaway was accused of having sex with his 12-year old baby sitter and withdrew his candidacy after the allegations were reported in the media.

Republican preacher Stephen White, who demanded a return to traditional values, was sentenced to jail after offering $20 to a 14-year-old boy for permission to perform oral sex on him.

Republican talk show host Jon Matthews pleaded guilty to exposing his genitals to an 11 year old girl.

Republican anti-gay activist Earl “Butch” Kimmerling was sentenced to 40 years in prison for molesting an 8-year old girl after he attempted to stop a gay couple from adopting her.

Republican Party leader Paul Ingram pleaded guilty to six counts of raping his daughters and served 14 years in federal prison.

Republican election board official Kevin Coan was sentenced to two years probation for soliciting sex over the internet from a 14-year old girl.

Republican politician Andrew Buhr was charged with two counts of first degree sodomy with a 13-year old boy.

Republican legislator Keith Westmoreland was arrested on seven felony counts of lewd and lascivious exhibition to girls under the age of 16 (i.e. exposing himself to children).

Republican anti-abortion activist John Allen Burt was found guilty of molesting a 15-year old girl.

http://www.armchairsubversive.com/

By getalife

October 5, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

Good point peter.

I am stll trying to figure out their base. I think most will vote for the gop just of of spite and pure hatred of the Dems no matter what.

By Southern Democrat

October 5, 2006 12:31 PM | Link to this

I have no idea (seriously) if the St. Petersburg Times is reputable or liberal-leaning or whatever, but here is one example of a reporter’s investigation of Coulter’s inaccuracies:

http://www.sptimes.com/2002/08/26/Floridian/Bestsellertrampledu.shtml

By TSPEC

October 5, 2006 12:33 PM | Link to this

Coulter Lies Part 1

Ann Coulter’s lies about Cleland torn to bits

Ann “Nutcase” Coulter wrote a scathing editorial in which she made up a bunch of unforgivable lies about Max Cleland, a US senator who lost three limbs in Vietnam, by way of rebuttal to his criticism of the Bush administration. The Center for American Progress tears apart her editorial, identifying, lie-by-lie, just how full of it she is.

SAYING CLELAND WAS “LUCKY” TO HAVE LIMBS BLOWN OFF: Coulter said, “Luckily for Cleland?he happened to [lose his limbs] while in Vietnam” and said that had he been injured “at Fort Dix rather than in Vietnam, he would never have been a U.S. Senator.” Of course, Cleland probably would not have been dealing with live grenades and enemy fire in the save haven of Ft. Dix. But, then, many top conservatives might not know this because they do not have firsthand knowledge of a combat zone. President Bush did not go to Vietnam because he was in the Texas National Guard. Vice President Dick Cheney did not serve in the military, saying, “I had other priorities in the ’60s than military service.” According to the Houston Press in 1999, House Majority Leader Tom DeLay (R-TX) “tried to blame minorities for his lack of military experience” saying, “so many minority youths had volunteered for the well-paying military positions to escape poverty and the ghetto that there was literally no room for patriotic folks” like him. And Rush Limbaugh avoided service by apparently claiming his “anal cysts” prevented him from defending the nation. See more conservatives who attack veterans while avoiding military service themselves.

By Chazman

October 5, 2006 12:35 PM | Link to this

Time For The Crap defending Nixon earlier, now Coulter. You’re on a roll. She admitted one very tiny typographical error in one of her books but that’s it so far as I am aware. Was it tiny or very tiny? Sorry, I’m laughing so hard I cannot continue to type.

By Realist

October 5, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

I hear ya Peter. Im not a big fan of the “electorial” college either. In fact, Im not a big fan of voting period. I think whoever has the most guns and money should be the leaders! So lets just scrap this whole democracy bs, whaddaya say? Then all the poor people wouldnt feel so bad, because EVERYONE would be equally poor, except for the wealthy leaders. This sounds like a good solid plan for our future. I think I finally see what you liberals are getting at now…. equal poverty for everyone!!

By TSPEC

October 5, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

Coulter Lies Part 2

The rise of Ann Coulter’s new book, Slander: Liberal Lies About the American Right, to the top of the New York Times bestseller list may be a shock to some, but the controversial pundit’s scathing rhetoric and outspoken conservatism have helped position her as exactly the sort of figure who sells books. More polemic than argument, Slander is riddled with factual errors, egregious misrepresentations and a constant stream of broad, inflammatory claims about liberals, as numerous critics have been quick to point out. Yet despite the limits of her one-sided argument, she actually offers a troubling lament for the state of our political discourse — even as she contributes to its decline.

Coulter began her career as a pundit during the investigation and impeachment of former President Bill Clinton. An attorney, Coulter aided Paula Jones with her legal case and later wrote a book on Clinton titled “High Crimes and Misdemeanors.” Since then, she has written a syndicated column and made frequent television appearances.

Coulter is self-consciously inflammatory. As she told the Sunday Times of London recently, “I am a polemicist. I am perfectly frank about that. I like to stir up the pot. I don’t pretend to be impartial or balanced, as broadcasters do.” It is exactly that kind of invective which has earned her so much publicity.

Slander has already come in for heavy criticism over her factual errors and distortions. Throughout the book, for example, she relies heavily on quantitative searches of the Lexis-Nexis news database to support her assertions about the media’s bias and its unfair treatment of conservatives, making at least 15 such claims. At first blush, these bits of evidence seem to provide strong support to her arguments. Yet very serious questions have been raised about her methodology.

The American Prospect’s weblog, Tapped, noted that Coulter’s claim that “Between 1995 and 2001, the New York Times alone ran more than one hundred articles on ‘Selma’ alone” is demonstrably false. Tapped also reported the inaccuracy of her claim that “In the New York Times archives, ‘moderate Republican’ has been used 168 times,” while “There have been only 11 sightings of a ‘liberal Republican.’” But a search in the New York Times’ own archive found 22 hits for “liberal Republican” since 1996; in a search of the Times archives for “all available dates” in Lexis-Nexis, the weblog found 524 such citations.

Bob Somerby punctured Coulter’s argument that the New York Times reveals a liberal bias by having used the phrases “Christian conservatives” or “religious right” 187 times during, roughly, the 2000 calendar year, while never using the phrases “atheist liberals” or “the atheist left.” Somerby found that the New York Times compared favorably with the conservative Washington Times, which had 151 references to “Christian conservatives” or the “religious right” in 2000 — along with, of course, no references to “atheist liberals” or “the atheist left.”

Coulter also repeats several well-debunked myths in her book. Particularly striking is her relentless repetition of the claim that former Vice President Al Gore falsely suggested that he was the inspiration for the book “Love Story” — a claim Coulter makes four separate times. As Robert Parry noted in an article in the Washington Monthly, author Erich Segal told the New York Times in a Dec. 14, 1997, article that Gore was indeed part of the inspiration for the main character in the novel. Gore did mistakenly say that the character of Jenny had been based on his wife Tipper, but he based this comment on an incorrect report in the Nashville Tennessean.

Another favorite tactics of Coulter’s is the use of deceptive paraphrases to distort others’ viewpoints. Blogger Scoobie Davis has noted that Coulter misrepresents the views of Frank Rich and Bruce Ackerman on the war on terrorism. Early in the book, Coulter writes that “New York Times columnist Frank Rich demanded that [Attorney General John] Ashcroft stop monkeying around with Muslim terrorists and concentrate on anti-abortion extremists.” The column that she cites, however, makes no such argument. Coulter also writes that “Yale law professor Bruce Ackerman recommended dropping the war against global terrorism (‘declare war at the first decent opportunity’!) and instead concentrate on ‘home-grown extremists.’” Yet Ackerman’s column suggests a cautious approach to a global war on terrorism, not “dropping” it, and nowhere does he advocate concentrating on domestic terrorists instead of international terrorists. Coulter’s paraphrases are both wild distortions.

Another problem plaguing Slander is the deceptive way Coulter uses footnotes to lend a false sense of legitimacy to questionable points. To take one example, in her discussion of media treatment of former Sen. Bob Packwood, R-Ore., she provides a list of 10 quotes alternating between positive coverage prior to his political demise following allegations of sexual harassment, and negative coverage afterward. Coulter introduces the list with the claim that “What happened to Packwood is a stunning example of the media’s power both to destroy and protect … In the case of Packwood, the media’s good dog/bad dog descriptions were applied to the exact same human being.”

To the casual reader, the list must seem fairly damning. Yet if one flips to the back of the book and checks her sources, it turns out that her claim about “the media” rests on a very small sample. Rather than the 10 different articles the casual reader would assume Coulter is quoting, she relies on one article for four of the five negative quotes, a second for three of the five positive quotes, and a third for the other two positive quotes. In all, the list comes down to four articles — thin evidence at best for the broad suggestion that coverage of Packwood proves “[t]here is no intellectual honesty whatsoever in media descriptions of politicians,” which she makes two paragraphs later.

Coulter’s use of quotes from liberal commentators as proof of media bias is equally problematic. She disregards the importance of conservative commentators, by writing, for example, “Rush Limbaugh is not the president, the vice president, or a Massachusetts senator. He’s not the New York Times. He’s not ABC, NBC, or CBS.” Coulter also tells us that “What conservatives object to is not liberal opinion commentary, but rather ostensibly objective news coated with smears.” Yet much of her evidence for media bias and unfair attacks on conservatives comes from the opinion columns of liberal pundits. Particularly damaging is the way in which she bases broad comments about “the media” in at least two places exclusively on opinion columns. Writing that “the media quickly sketched out the larger themes” about Bush’s intelligence, she cites the Kansas City Star’s Steve Kraske and the New York Times’ Maureen Dowd and Thomas Friedman to support the contention that the media portrayed George W. Bush as dumb — all of whom are columnists.

In all, Coulter offers more than 40 citations of columnists and pundits to support her assertion that conservatives are treated unfairly by the mainstream media. Though most of these quotes are identified as coming from commentators, and some of her examples are certainly outrageous, the danger is that the casual reader may interpret many of these as evidence of reportorial bias. If read carefully, however, much of her evidence reveals little more than then banal fact that liberal pundits and the New York Times editorial page are critical and often unfairly dismissive of conservatives and their policies. Using Coulter’s methodology, one could easily string together quotes from conservative pundits and Op-Ed pages to make the case that the media treats liberals unfairly, rather than conservatives.

In addition to her troubles with facts, Coulter also engages in what my co-editor Brendan Nyhan has called “some of the most consistently emotional, subrational jargon in national politics.” Throughout Slander, she uses what Nyhan identifies as her three favorite tactics: various names and issues used solely to rile her readers’ emotions; vicious, sweeping attacks on “liberals”; and loaded language and nasty insinuations disguised as rational arguments. Former President Bill Clinton comes in for some of the harshest treatment; she refers to the “pizza boxes, women’s panties, and other detritus of the Caligula administration,” describes his “adolescent cramming in all-night slumber parties, leaving the place littered with pizza rinds and women’s panties” and refers to him as “IMPOTUS” and “the felon.” Coulter even uses “clintonized” as an adjective without a capital letter, genericizing the name into an attack as others have done. Nor is she above simple name-calling, referring to Katie Couric as “the affable Eva Braun of morning TV” and referring to Tom Rosenstiel of the Committee of Concerned Journalists as “Concern Propagandist Rosenstiel.”

Coulter also pummels nonsensical straw-man caricatures of political opponents throughout the book. Most obvious and striking is her treatment of “liberals.” Without ever bothering to define exactly who she intends the term to include (at various points it includes Andrew Sullivan and Republican-turned-Independent Sen. Jim Jeffords, R-Vt.), she makes sweeping judgments:

“Even Islamic terrorists don’t hate America like liberals do.” “[T]he left is itching to silence conservatives once and for all.” “[I]f Americans knew what they [liberals] really believed, the public would boil them in oil.” “”Principle is nothing to liberals. Winning is everything.”

Of course, in Coulter’s asymmetrical political world, conservatives are universally good:

“[A]lmost all serious debate takes place exclusively among conservatives.” “[C]onservatives in America are the most tolerant (and long-suffering) people in America.” “[W]hen right-wingers rant, there’s at least a point: There are substantive arguments contained in conservative name-calling.”

Coulter’s style of argument is often based on jargon and invective rather than substance. Consider this dismissal of claims of conservative bias in the media:

“A ‘study’ analyzing the New York Times’s coverage of the 2000 presidential race conclusively proved that ‘this “liberal bastion” published 50 percent more anti-Gore articles than anti-Bush, and nearly twice as many pro-Bush article as pro-Gore.’ Claims of ‘conservative bias’ in the media at large are amusing oddities. But a claim that the New York Times has a conservative bias can be explained only by the sheer joy liberals take in telling lies. This is how liberals flaunt their massive control over news in America. The fact that everyone knows they are lying is part of the fun. They take insolent pleasure in saying absurd things, like college radicals giving revolutionary speeches at their parents’ dinner table: We will raid their wine cellars and have their women!”

Nowhere does Coulter engage the actual substance of the study. Instead, she places key words in quotation marks (“study,” “conservative bias”) to make them appear to be untrue, and makes reference to broad stereotypes of liberals. Finally, she rams home the suggestion that liberals lie by repeating it twice, then coining a jargon phrase (“We will raid their wine cellars …”) which she repeats later in the book. None of this has anything to do with whether or not the New York Times ran more stories that were critical of Bush or critical of Gore; it has everything to do with appealing to preconceived notions about the media — notions Coulter herself has helped to construct.

Yet if readers can leave aside all of these problems (admittedly not an easy task), Coulter is actually driving at something important about the state of political debate in the media. She’s right, for example, that left-leaning politicians and editorial pages sometimes mount sophisticated and unfair rhetorical campaigns against their political enemies. The example she chooses — attacks against former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich and his policies — is exactly on point. She also chooses other examples to good effect, such as Rep. Charlie Rangel’s equation of Gingrich’s policies with those of Nazi Germany. Absurdly, though, she steadfastly refuses to admit that conservatives can be guilty of exactly the same thing — an asymmetry so glaring that only the most partisan readers can accept it at face value.

A surprising amount of what Coulter has to say about the conduct of contemporary political debate rings true. “Instead of actual debate about ideas and issues with real consequences,” Coulter writes, “the country is trapped in a political discourse that increasingly resembles professional wrestling.” Likewise, she derides “arguments by demonization” and argues that “[l]ies and personal attacks are deeply corrosive of public debate and democratic compromises.” She correctly observes that perceptions and falsehoods promulgated in the media have a self-reinforcing quality: “Cliches, biases and outright lies are constantly reinforced through the media echo chamber.” But given how she herself uses these tactics throughout the book, even Coulter’s more astute observations raise obvious charges of hypocrisy.

Yet Slander’s sales, alongside those of Coulter’s political opposite, Michael Moore, reveal something sad and important about the state of the country: Those with a talent for inflammatory rhetoric rather than facts have their fingers on the pulse of contemporary political debate.

By getalife

October 5, 2006 12:43 PM | Link to this

Tommorow is protest day

By peter

October 5, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

HA HA HA Realist…….

forget the equal poverty thing for me, I worked to hard to get my business going……..and it is a never ending process of change, and adaptation.

I feel for the poor, but I am not the reason they are poor……..that is back to the blog from the other day………people taking individual responsibility!

By politics of the 15%?

October 5, 2006 12:47 PM | Link to this

Realist — we have already abandoned the ideals of democracy when one of our political parties willing, admittedly and relentlessly choses to pursue, not the good of the nation, but the mythical 50%+1 “mandate” to stay in power. The GOP and it’s current architect Karl Rove pointedly pursue the interest of ONLY the BASE (15% of the population) and admit they don’t give a d@mn about the other 85% of Americans. GOP = Got Our Piece (so F- off!)

By Zonetha_Regret

October 5, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

What does Alcoholic Anonymous have to do with a cure for favors with teenage boys? Miss Thing has been served with your pearls clutched to your chest. More Weapons Of Mass Destructions for the Republicans.

By R Cagle

October 5, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

For a minute forget Foley. Forget Hastert and the other Republican House leaders. Forget all that and just think about how hypocritical the Democrats are being about this. The same Democrats who unfailing support gays. The same Democrats who unfailing support their own members when they are involved in sex scandals (of any orientation). The Democrats who never require that a Democratic perpetrator resign much less his Democratic bosses. Let’s not forget the Democratic base who re-elects their own who have done worse than Foley. In 2008 the Democrats will probably include the right to have gay sex with minors in its platform, but this year they are outraged. They aren’t outraged about Foley nor do they feel anything for the Pages. They simply see an opportunity to stir up those of us who are justly outraged and who they think are too stupid to see what they are up to. The Democrats have become nothing but the party of two-faced opportunism; willing to say and do anything that furthers its existence and helps it regain power. If they have no scruples in their quest to regain power, good God, what will they do to retain it? I personally won’t vote rather than vote Democratic ever again. Enough is enough.

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this

Dear Th @ 12:06, just for the sake of completeness of the record, how long did Studds molest pages before Tip appointed an investigator? Also, as to Estrada, I think the memos speak for themselves, as a bad-faith rejection, not on the merits, but due to appearances only, at a time when Democrats controlled the Senate. My evidentiary quote:

November 7, 2001/To: Senator Durbin “The groups singled out three—Jeffrey Sutton (6th Circuit); Priscilla Owen (5th Circuit); and Caroline [sic] Kuhl (9th Circuit)—as a potential nominee for a contentious hearing early next year, with a [sic] eye to voting him or her down in Committee. They also identified Miguel Estrada (D.C. Circuit) as especially dangerous, because he has a minimal paper trail, he is Latino, and the White House seems to be grooming him for a Supreme Court appointment. They want to hold Estrada off as long as possible.” http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110004305

Dear Southern Democrat @ 12:08, your core argument is a fair and persuasive analysis (although, to quibble, I think Slander was well-written, well-documented, and persuasive.) I think more of my conservative brothers will subscribe to your arguments than will the leftists on this blog.

Dear Peter @ 12:14, I do not wish to insult you, but I think I disagree with your rationale on the minimum wage. If, in fact, most states are not changing a minimum wage, would that not be a compelling argument, under your theory, to keep the government out of the business of setting the price of employees?

By Camus

October 5, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this

By Realist

October 5, 2006 12:17 PM | Link to this

she (Ann Coulter) has quite a reputation for fact-twisting, misquoting, liberally borrowing, and borderline plagiarism

Yes, yes she does. But then she is only a pundit. An entertainer. Nothing more. She and others from the right wing entertainment world are embracing these tactics because it is and has been the SOP for the democratic party for as long as I can remember!! If you want to talk fact twisting and misquoting, holy crap we could all take a lesson from the dems!!!

+++++

Here, in nutshell, is “personal responsibility” as defined by the hardcore, take no quarter haters of the extreme right wing.

First, hey, we’re only joking, lighten up. Here, you want it both ways…the cover of ‘just joking’ when in fact the wingnut movement uses this medium to communicate exactly how they want people to feel about certain issues. And make no mistake…they are not joking. They hate liberals (meaning: anyone that they disagree with) with a passion bordering on obsession. Like some on this board who muse about bashing skulls with golf clubs, these ‘jokers’ reveal more about their psyche and beliefs than they would wish.

You propose to absolve them of the responsibilty for what they say. Can’t do it…whether you call for the assasination of a Supreme Court justice (coulter) or get a bj from a consenting adult in the Oval Office (you know who), you gotta pick up the tab for your actions.

Next, what we do wrong is not really wrong, because the Dems do it too. This is the handy excuse for Republicans whenever they get caught…trot out some comparable transgression by a Dem, never mind if the event occured 35 years ago, it still makes the current problem “no big deal”.

I bow to no one in my disgust with how Democrats abused their power when they had some. But pay attention folks…the Dems are utterly powerless now, mere eunuchs in the harem.

Everything that is happening now, and for the past five years, is the result of dominant Republican rule. So the doctrine of personal responsibility would suggest that the people in (nomianl) charge must bear the burden of responsibility.

Rather than face the music, Denny Hastert is holed up in his home and sending out minions to test the waters. Rather than face the music, all the Republican reps involved in this sorry episode are pointing fingters and playing CYA. And the reps not directly involved are mostly out saying that pedophilia, committed by a Republican in a Repub controlled Congress — and a story which it turns out was fueled by a Republican former-page supplying the incriminating evidence — is somehow just a political trick by Democrats?!?!

I could go on to relate the hollow cry of ‘personal responsibility’ as it relates to the failure to protect our nation from the horror of 9/11 (desite ample warning that something was coming); with the subsequent failure to find and dispatch bin laden; the next bungle of cutting and running from Afghanistan for a poorly planned venture in Iraq; to the inept bungling of the Iraq campaign; etc. and so on.

But I do not think any amount of factual persuasion will move the kool-aid drinkers of the Extreme Right to reflect upon their mechanical fealty to the Republican Party and this administration. The psychic trauma would be far too great.

By Camus

October 5, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

TFTT asked me to write his response to my last post..

You wanker. nanny nanny boo boo, you big poopyhead. big smirk

By Koz

October 5, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

Like Hannity says we really don’t want to hear the words “Speaker of the House Pelosi”

Don’t let these planned Liberal attacks discourage your vote. Hastert might have known about this but the Dems definitely knew about it and were holding the information til it was too late to change ballots in Florida. Dirty Tricks.

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

TSPEC @ 12:33 and 12:40, do you realize you posted (or cut and pasted) without actually reading what you posted? Nowhere in any of that prose do you disprove anything that Ann wrote; you contradict, but do not argue. How about some substance?

By Realist

October 5, 2006 01:12 PM | Link to this

Camus, What is written between the lines in every single one of your posts is this:

That in every white man in America, just beneath the surface, lies a murderous n**r hating racist that would still be carrying a bullwhip and raping slave women if he could.

Every single word that flows in your posts stinks of this sentiment.

And you know what, you are probably more right than anyone would ever believe. And not just the redneck bubba types either, the suit and tie politicians and executives too! They just dont talk about it or be honest about it anymore because its not socially or politically correct. But in mens hearts, they can be whatever they want to be cant they Camus?

All I can tell you is that it is what it is. Either accept it and find ways to work inside it or organize men and weapons and fight back. I dont know what the answer is for you. I really dont. It should have never happened.

By peter

October 5, 2006 01:14 PM | Link to this

jbmlaw……I appreciate your stand on the minimum wage, but as well all know the govenment has been the party that has rasied the minimum wage.

So now my question which you have never addressed.

Why should congress raise there personal wage 5 plus times then during the same period of time, and NOT raise the Minimum wage?

Are they more deserving of the money, than the poor people of this country?

As we all know it takes a millionare to get to congress, yet it seems they are out for their own sleves, and very reluctant to help this countries most needing citizens.

By D

October 5, 2006 01:15 PM | Link to this

more invalidating comments, remember, a terrible act is not less terrible by putting somebody down for something they did that was wrong or bad. stop trying to defend your actions and the actions of others by putting down another person. defend your self on your own noble actions, or just plain don’t defend it. that is what is so bad about todays politics, is how they have managed to divide this country, to let us argue amongst ourselves and take focus off of the politicians. a person with integrity doesn’t bring up all the bad things another person did to justify their own actions. then attention is further diverted with things like, gay marriage, flag burning, ten commandments in the courthouse, things that aren’t even near the top ten priorities of this country. our country is in serious trouble and the whole time people want to just bicker and name call, the far left and the far right both have it wrong and the answer is somewhere closer to the middle.

By SenateMajorityLeaderStevens

October 5, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this

“Speaker of the House Pelosi” ??????

Now that would be just plain KOOKY.

By JK

October 5, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

For a minute forget Foley. Forget Hastert and the other Republican House leaders. You’d like that, would you?

The same Democrats who unfailing support gays. You mean, the rights of consenting adults to love whom they love? Yes, go on….

The same Democrats who unfailing support their own members when they are involved in sex scandals (of any orientation). You mean, the rights of consenting adults to keep their private lives private? Yes, go on….

Let’s not forget the Democratic base who re-elects their own who have done worse than Foley. Actually, people can only vote for the representatives in their own districts. The entire “base” only votes in Presidential elections, and not for creepy kid-touchers.

In 2008 the Democrats will probably include the right to have gay sex with minors in its platform, Ya think? Got any corroborating statements to this effect, or is it just conjecture? Hmmm. Many Dems have kids, so, I’m not seeing it.

but this year they are outraged. More like sick and disgusted. We passed outrage a couple of years ago.

They aren’t outraged about Foley nor do they feel anything for the Pages. No, FOLEY was trying to feel up the Pages, and we think that’s creepy and sick.

They simply see an opportunity to stir up those of us who are justly outraged Sooo, if you’re outraged it’s just, but if Dems are outraged over the same thing, it’s uh… NOT? What is the source of your magical, mystical knowledge, oh seer of men’s souls?

and who they think are too stupid to see what they are up to. Just in case you are, I’ll spell it for you: a-c-c-o-u-n-t-a-b-i-l-i-t-y.

The Democrats have become nothing but the party of two-faced opportunism; Why so harsh, Dude? Did a Kennedy pee on your cornflakes this morning?

willing to say and do anything Except enable creepy kid-touchers, that is!

If they have no scruples in their quest to regain power, good God, what will they do to retain it? You can’t retain what you don’t have. To regain it, they’ll just say, HEY, we’re not THEM!

I personally won’t vote rather than vote Democratic ever again. Promise?

Enough is enough. AGREED!

By JK

October 5, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this

Realist, does it have to be a bullwhip? Can it be one of those furry little flogger thingies? BTW, nice defense of truth and integrity this morning (9:07). That was hot. {;->

By harold

October 5, 2006 01:20 PM | Link to this

what ever happened to them bush photo ops in the baghdad (quick)sand?

it must be too dangerous there for him now, like alabama during vietnam.

who do they send instead?

well they evidently can’t afford to lose a team of horses!!!!!

By harold

October 5, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this

quicksand

By Watta Load

October 5, 2006 01:22 PM | Link to this

Ok…does anybody on this blog, righty or lefty buy this explanation…

…some conservative commentators joined Gingrich in arguing that gay activists and liberal Democrats have created a climate of “political correctness” that discouraged House GOP leaders from acting more aggressively last September, lest they appear to be attempting to “out” Foley as a closeted gay congressman….

So nothing was done about Uncle Foley because the repubs were themselves being “politically correct”?…hahahahahahahahahaha

By harold

October 5, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

hey, it aint harold. dubya the one who done it!

By Neal Boortz

October 5, 2006 01:28 PM | Link to this

Watta,

Van believes it…right Van? Jesus walked on water too.

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

Dear Southern, as I read the St. Petersburg Times article, the errors don’t sound like errors but mostly mere differences of opinions. As best as I can tell, the essay cites five errors, and only one – about the timing of Dale Earnhardt’s death notice in the New York Times is incontrovertible fact rather than difference of perspective.

The St. Pete article acknowledges that the NY Times and the LA Times found the 780 footnotes “quite impressive” (how’s that for arguing by magnifying the credentials rather than the logic of the content – little joke there.)

By harold

October 5, 2006 01:30 PM | Link to this

everytime harold sees pelosi on the television he thinks it is a saturday night live skit

By Chazman

October 5, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this

The funds for “commemoration of success” in Iraq and Afghanistan were originally tucked into last year’s defense measure, but they went unspent amid an uptick in violence in both countries that forced the Pentagon to extend tours of duty for thousands of troops.

Let’s hear it from the right. Do you agree with Mitch McConnell, that $20 million should have been put into the defense budget for the big “party”. I have an idea. Let’s divide that $20 million up between all the families that have lost sons, daughters, fathers, mothers, etc. That would be about $7,000 to each family - about the cost of their burial. My My, how you guys in charge can pi^^ away money. Let’s hear it (not the hateful name-calling) but rather, do you agree with that money being put into the budget?

By harold

October 5, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

hastert was supposed to eat the boys alive after foley molestered them, but hastert couldn’t lay off the doughnuts and a few boys got away and lived to tell their story

so anyway dubya’s pointless war on iraq has killed more americans than bin laden’s attack did. but bush is not even close to being done with his killing spree.

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

Dear Peter @ 1:14, I have a better idea; instead of having the government screw up the economy, how about abolishing Congressional pay entirely? That would encourage them to close up shop in late January, so they could go out and earn a living like the rest of us.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

TFTT asked me to write his response to my last post..

You wanker. nanny nanny boo boo, you big poopyhead. big smirk

this sickster is still stalking me … but at least we’re beginning to see the real “it”. doesn’t take long to waterboard it out of them folks!!

funny how these arrogant supercilious leftist pusspools like canus endlessly bleat like eunuch hate pigs about how beastly some conservatives are on here - yet all they do themselves is write liberal hate speech posts. the stench of obsessive liberal homosexual stalker hypocrisy is overpowering!! …huge I hate leftists smirk

By Banner's - R - Us

October 5, 2006 01:40 PM | Link to this

I just got a huge order! A 19.7 million dollar contract to make thousands of “Commeration of Success” banners.

God Bless America

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 01:43 PM | Link to this

Chazman, your heart is in the right place, but military decedent’s survivors already receive $100,000 per soldier. As the purpose of the $20 million was for active soldier morale, I would divide the money per capita/per diem among all members of the military in Afghanistan and Iraq.

By jbmlaw

October 5, 2006 01:46 PM | Link to this

Dear harold @ 1:39, Islamists, mostly funded by Iran now, are the ones who killed our noble soldiers, not George Bush. So long as you are confused on that fact, you may have difficulty analyzing the issue.

By Zonetha_Regret

October 5, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this

QUEENS WHO LIVE IN A GLASS HOUSE SHOULD NOT THROW STONES. WoW! WhatARepublican. More lies…….

Why are just now remembering you lost you cherry to A Senator.

You are saved because you are a homosexual.

By JD

October 5, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this

The Mark Foley situation suggests a few things to me. You may agree, you may disagree, and you may be afraid to let any living human being know you agree, but I guarantee you’ll “get it”.

1 - Let’s have the FBI look into the emails and IMs from every current member of Congress to and from every current and past page. If the primary concern is the safety of the young adults from lecherous members of Congress, then let’s get ‘em all and boot ‘em out. Most of the Congressional offenders in the past have been Democrats, so this is not just a party thing.

2 - There is a Democrat gay activist that is threatening to “report” on other gay Republicans that are in the closet. I say, “Great!” What is wrong with a little honesty? While we are all for honesty, lets be honest that homophilia was and is a mental disorder. It was only taken out of the DSM because of violent threats by gay activists to the APA. It is a fact that a far higher percentage of homosexual men have molested underage boys than heterosexual men have molested underage girls. As one of the few remaining throwbacks that still uses reason, I am all for outing and removing those afflicted with homophilia from the Republican party leadership - not the party, just the leadership. Then get them some help to cope with recovery from homophilia.

3 - Conservatives, please go vote. Liberals, please go vote on Wednesday. :) As a conservative, even if you don’t like the Republican candidate, please go vote. On each line item, vote for what is consistent with your conservative views. If the choice is between a Democrat and a liberal/RINO Republican, just don’t vote for that particlular race. That is the voter’s “none of the above” choice. Would that help elect the Democrat? Probably. But I’d rather have a wolf in wolves’ clothing than a wolf in sheep’s clothing. Either way, we get beset by a wolf, but at least there is no pretending it ain’t a wolf.

4 - Let’s get the pedophile definition right. A pedophile is a person who is attracted (that way) to pre-pubescent children. A hebephile (Foley appears to be afflicted withe homophilia and hebephilia) is a person who is attracted (that way) to post-pubescent minor young adults. And both are wrong, and practitioners of both need to be stopped when discovered. A grown man is perfectly capable and responsible to keep his pants zipped and his hands off any female that is not his wife.

By Zonetha_Regret

October 5, 2006 01:52 PM | Link to this

Foley Born again Teenage Virgin in Prison with 7 cute cheerleader outfits for each day of the week.

By peter

October 5, 2006 01:53 PM | Link to this

OK jbmlaw…….

I do get it, you really don’t want to debate the question, and I am cool with that.

And really now if you don’t think congress and the government screw up the economy, then Ok we shall not discuss this issue!

BUT……..

The deficit alone screws up the economy!

The made up war screws up the economy!

The lack of spending on our country’s infra structure screws up the economy!

The trade deficit screws up the economy!

The lack of spending on renewable energy sources screws up the economy!

As we have seen the dollar contines to fall against the major currancies of the world, and THAT certainly screws up the economy!

So who runs the economy of this country as it is run?

By carolelynne

October 5, 2006 01:55 PM | Link to this

Thanks for the heads up on TFTT, get a life…

Going back to the original point, there already had to be a scandal before the Democrats could take advantage of it.

Blaming Democrats for taking advantage of a scandal is nothing more than denying the reality of the scandal’s existence.

If the Republicans can’t take the heat…perhaps they should not be the majority party in the kitchen.

By harold

October 5, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this

actually if jbmlaw wants to be that way about it, explosives/bullets/beheadings killed the american soldeirs, but the responsibility lies with their commander in cheekf who put them there to be killed

and bind landen didnt kill any americans. a plane crash, fire and building collapse did!

By Chazman

October 5, 2006 01:58 PM | Link to this

Nice response jbmlaw. I take it that you think $20 mil is a little much for active soldier morale (I think it was also planned to boost the GOP which is fine if they want to use their own money, not taxpayers money). And I’m not against spending some money for soldier morale - if the price and time is right. Again, nice response.

By D

October 5, 2006 01:59 PM | Link to this

Ann Coulter and Joseph Goebbels would’ve enjoyed each others company.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 02:08 PM | Link to this

It writes itself. Pay no attention to “time for the perverts”, she is the resident evil doer.

HA HA HA HA … this coming from Louisiana’s most wanted child molestor … priceless!!

By Camus

October 5, 2006 02:12 PM | Link to this

TFTT takes the bait again. Predictable little twit, yes?

Here p*** p*** p***…

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 5, 2006 02:14 PM | Link to this

Man, Camus that was quite the smackdown tftt/tommy the fairy tranny turdburglar just laid on you, dude. tftt’s a chickenhawk bisexual 300 lb. chimpanzee in a wheelchair and she just made you look silly - are you cryin’ yet?

Take that you utterly mendacious you you!

By Van

October 5, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this

D,

Whats wrong with Ann’s rules for gays ?

We need to get a rulebook from the Democrats:

Again, the lefties are going way overboard, and the backlash will cost them seats in Congress - Hooray

By Chazman

October 5, 2006 02:17 PM | Link to this

tftt, you garner sooooo much respect here.

By Camus

October 5, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

Realist writes: “Camus, What is written between the lines in every single one of your posts is this:

That in every white man in America, just beneath the surface, lies a murderous n**r hating racist that would still be carrying a bullwhip and raping slave women if he could.

Every single word that flows in your posts stinks of this sentiment.”

Wow. This is simply stunning. I can’t for the life of me see how you deconstructed that from my arguments about personal responsibility, other than to surmise that these are indeed the wishes and sentiments that beat in your breast. I’d suggest you enlist for military service, but I think they try to week out sociopaths.

I am a white male, and I assure you I have no such secret wish list. I seriously doubt all but the most unhinged harbor these thoughts. Something you have brooded upon for quite some time, no doubt, so clearly recognized and articulated.

Somehow I’m sure that it is all someone else’s fault, though. Probably Ted Kennedy or Michael Moore.

By Van

October 5, 2006 02:23 PM | Link to this

carolelynne,

Typical empty headed democrat -

The real scandal is that the democrats think it is okay of a democrat to do and get away with anything, but not so with a republican.

Representative Studds buggered a 17 year old and the dems reelected him.

Foley emailed an 18 year old and he is the most vile person alive and will bring down the entire reoublican party.

Democrats are trailer park trash, pure and simple - hypocrisy at its worse.

By GodHatesTrash

October 5, 2006 02:25 PM | Link to this

Now the pigman Hastert blames George Soros for Pedo-Foley-a. Of course the redneck trash that pollutes this blog will eat Hastert’s crap up, with a big spoon and marshmallows on top. Bunch of pillowbiting nancybuttboys here.

The GOP - party of cowardly pro-dirt pro-pervert pro-incest pro-child molester anti-education bible thumpin’ trash.

By CJ

October 5, 2006 02:34 PM | Link to this

JD @1:52 “…homophilia was and is a mental disorder. It was only taken out of the DSM because of violent threats by gay activists to the APA. It is a fact that a far higher percentage of homosexual men have molested underage boys than heterosexual men have molested underage girls.”

Hey JD,

I’m calling you out on your “facts”. I don’t believe them.

If you’re uncomfortable with your own sexual identity, then deal with it, but you don’t have to post made-up “facts” online to address your insecurities.

By Brian Curtis

October 5, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this

Van: You’ve convinced me! Mark Foley is the model of righteous, upstanding, honorable behavior… because after all, he resigned after his perversion and abuse of power was exposed.

I only wish we had more courageous moral leaders like Mark Foley to look up to.

You’re really desperate to shift attention away from your fellow Republican’s disgrace, aren’t you? Too bad it’s not working.

By Brian Curtis

October 5, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this

Van: By the way, you still have homosexuality confused with stalking little boys, don’t you?

One is perfectly normal, and the other is a crime. Can you guess which one?

By Realist

October 5, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

I apologize Camus. I really do. I was picking up on the wrong vibe apparently. You are a wannabe then, and not the real thing?

Cool, Im down homey. I gets it.

Fo shizzle my nizzle

By Van

October 5, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

Brian Curtis,

Exactly, Studds went after an undeage boy, Foley just sent mails to an 18 year old - which was the worse pervert and should have been kicked out.

By D

October 5, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this

once again, the only way to defend your position is to bring up the actions of another, it just proves there is no sound foundation to your beliefs. how can anyone say they are always a republican or always a democrat? why put yourself in a box. what’s important is the future of this country. and if anybody of any political affiliation did something wrong, the truth should come out, not put down, and the guilty person should be prosecuted. but some of the most treasonous and shameful things I have ever seen have come from the republican party, valerie plame, pat tillman, etc. and all in the name of Jesus, children and the flag, I don’t think so. and yes, the democrats are a problem too, but they are definitely the lesser of two evils, because they don’t do their misdeeds in the name of Jesus, children and the flag. a republican would say, so what if I murdered that person, that guy over there murdered somebody, and plus I did it for the children and God and to be patriotic, oh well, in that case you’re free to go, sorry we bothered you sir, I guess we should have been looking for some of those awful, demonic, child-eating,Godless liberals, yeah, that’s it, liberals are the root of all evil. just like nazi germany scapegoated and demeaned the jews, and made the word jew a 4 letter word as a way to deflect their own wrong-doing and control the population, is the same way the word liberal has been used to attempt to demean, scapegoat and shame those who don’t agree with republicans. it’s sad, and it’s not about supporting bush or kerry, it’s about supporting this country! stop getting your opinions from some republican press release. of course, the other side is to be free-thinking like me, and run the risk of eventually being burned at the stake in this country for being labeled a heretic, or today’s version ‘liberal’.

By Van

October 5, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this

Brian Curtis,

Being a democrat, I would have guessed that Foley would be a role moddel for you.

Personally, he should have been kicked out years ago, or at the least some semi-intellgent democrat running against him should have used the emails to win.

That kind of conduct is unexcusable for an elected official.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 02:47 PM | Link to this

poor wittle sickster canus

at least now its sick homosexual stalking of its conservative betters is plain for everyone to see!!

crapman … respect from liberal maggots is something no one of sound mind and true politicial vision wants … I dont want the “respect” of cowardly treasonous leftist Bush hating traitors, cut and run nasal whining yankee trash, blame America vermin and tosspot wankers like you and the filthy AIDS infested NAMBLA afficionados husband and husband rednekkks and canus!!

all we need now is goddespisesyankee trash to ooze out from under its lockjaw house (housing project duplex actually) husband rock and rednekkks the sputtering king of the scum sucking yankee lardarse morbidly obese fairy queens will have deployed the current full house of its twisted deranged multi-personalities. Enough for a whole episode of Oprah to “itself” in fact!!

Have you renegotiated your weekly puckering session with Bwarney Fwank yet rednekkks??

By Van

October 5, 2006 02:51 PM | Link to this

Brian Curtis,

BTW Brainless Brian - they both should be, but are not. Any good looking female school teacher can go after any little boy or teenager with immunity. As far as homosexuality, at least the rump ranger should be discreet.

By @@

October 5, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

Sorry Jim, I didn’t really read your column. This topic is already familiar. My thoughts!

I’m glad Foley’s disgusting messages were exposed and made public. We need to know these things. But once he resigned and was out. Politics should have gone with him.

Finger pointing blame should have never begun. It contributes nothing, whatsoever, to the issue.

It’s now in the hands of law enforcement. I’m assuming their efforts will extend to Congress and who knew. If not, an independent counsel (not like the wasteful dollars spent for Fitzmas) The empty box wrapped in Selection (D) off the display wall.

Until then, we should wait to pass judgement on either/or. I like what some poster wrote either here or at ml’s.

Our children shouldn’t be crushed under the weight of politics.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this

That in every white man in America, just beneath the surface, lies a murderous nr hating racist that would still be carrying a bullwhip and raping slave women if he could

WOW … cANUS - aka rednekkks NAMBLA - has finally flipped its race baiting hatefilled turdbrained mind.

now we see rednekkks is very occasionally able to write about something other than its compulsive homosexual obsession which very revealingly is the only verbal “weapon” on here it seems to “respect”.

this is the face of today’s LIBERAL SOCIAL MAGGOTS FOLKS … teasing this kind of natural behaviour out of them is easier than spotting the lies from a true sexual predator like a Clinton or a Studds or a Fwank.

By Typical Georgia Repub

October 5, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

What’s the big deal? I send pervy IMs to teen boys all the time - so what?

By Richard

October 5, 2006 02:58 PM | Link to this

Since tftt used to be an aid for Foley, maybe he should enlighten us on what goes on in one of those behind closed doors meetings.

By Richard

October 5, 2006 02:59 PM | Link to this

Since tftt used to be an aid for Foley, maybe he should enlighten us on what goes on in one of those behind closed doors meetings.

By Camus

October 5, 2006 03:04 PM | Link to this

Sigh, just to clarify for anyone else who lacks basic reading comprehension…

The “murderous n hating racist” remark was by Realist. So, does TFTT wish to amend his comment, or is his disregard for accuracy equal to his lack of language command.

Oh right, poopy poopy Canus liberal smirk. Droll, tftt, very droll.

As to Realist…dude, you have leapt off the deep end. I can’t even figure out what the hell you’re trying to say, but I’m sure the voices in your head make it all clear to you.

Unhinged extremists. It ain’t pretty.

By Realist

October 5, 2006 03:09 PM | Link to this

dont be like dat homes

By Middle America

October 5, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this

The best thing Democrats can do is just call for an investigation and get the heck out of the way. The GOP has been ready to fracture for a while now. Many are upset over the Bush administration’s arrogance and lack of competency. And now the party that had a Contract with America is now in breech of that contract. All the rhetoric they spilled about how corrupt the Congress had become under Democratic control now reeks of hypocrisy. They’ve shown that a one-party controlled Congress coupled with a Whitehouse of the same persuasion is a disaster waiting to happen. We need a Congress that represents ALL Americans, not just the right.

By GodHatesTrash

October 5, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this

Bush is trying to stir up the redneck redstaters with his usual fearmongering bullsheet about the war on tare. But the ongoing story of pillowbiting closeted GOPers threatens to put a big nasty stain on Dumbya’s GAP dress…

What will a Dem house do first - investigate Foley, or impeach Dumbya? Hopefully they can multi-task…

All these GOPers, most of them closeted homosexuals - trash all.

By Realist

October 5, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this

Hey Camus, why dont you buy a “P” and take yo a*ss to college!

By Flatlined

October 5, 2006 03:12 PM | Link to this

Last nite I saw an elephant in my pajamas. How Foley got in there, I’ll never know.

At least Foley completed his military service. He was with Special Forces. (a real Kung-fu grip)

By Van

October 5, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

D,

It is called precedent. The precedent is to excuse it as private sexual behavior. If he had been a democrat Foley would still be in office.

By JD

October 5, 2006 03:22 PM | Link to this

CJ @2:34pm “I’m calling you out on your “facts”. I don’t believe them.”

I cannot help what you believe. Reality is what it is reagrdless of what anyone believes. Here is s small sample of what you can easily find yourself should you wish to:

As to why homophilia was and should be a recognized mental disorder, as it was for many decades: “The Sexual Deviations and the Diagnostic Manual”, by Charles W. Socarides, M.D., in the American Journal of Psychotherapy, Volume XXXII, Number 3, July 1978

As to the higher incidence of child molestation among homosexuals, here is just a sampling: 32 percent of child molestation cases involved homosexuals, yet homosexuals account for only 2-3% of the population.

Dr. Gene Abel of the Behavioral Medicine Institute in Atlanta concluded that homosexuals “sexually molest young boys at an incidence that is occurring from five times greater than the molestation of girls.”

The homosexual community has NAMBLA. There is no such organization for men wanting to molest girls (thank God!).

I understand any homosexual being offended, just as I understand any child molester being offended when the truth of their perversion comes out. It is through dealing with the painful truth that we improve as individuals. Not all homosexuals are child molesters. All men who molest little boys are homosexuals or bisexuals.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this

stupid DICK has slithered back … clearly riven with guilt as one of the pages abused by Studds who never came forward to stop congressional demoNcrat abuse of pages.

cAnus … my astute comments still stand bubbaturd … realist is a vastly better judge of character than you could EVER BE … so if realist asserts this about you and your posts then, undeniably you are exactly what I suggested you are!! its all opinion on here anyway … my well considered opinion of you is that even a low down long dead rattlesnake with maggots eating its carcass out in the wild AZ desert has more credibility, intellectual nous and integrity than you do!!

By R. U. Jackinit

October 5, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this

I’m new to the blog. What’s the big deal with a few IMs.

BTW, my MySpace page is maf54R.U.Jackinit. THIS page IS FOR TEENS ONLY - YOU MUST SEND A PIC. Please shave your chest, and oil up, fellas.

By Michael Silly Savage

October 5, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

The Congress needs much sticter oversight of the page program. It needn’t cost much, though. Go online and get those X/10 cameras and put them in the pages’ bedrooms. Oh, and showers, too. Yes, especially the showers. That way we can see if they are getting enough to eat, too.

Since it is the American people’s Congress, get the Americnan people to monitor the cameras over one of the internets. I’ll get my listeners to monitor 24/7. In fact, I’ll probably do every waking hour myself. It’s the least a great manly American like myself can do to restore faith in our government.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

JD

superb post … well argued and factually it seems irrefutable. I have heard the poofs and butch dutch coastal defences claim a 6% reach - perhaps that is just a deliberately inflated, politically correct claim to give themselves double the self esteem and homosexual “footprint” they’re entitled to if its the 2-3% figure you suggest. Its also I suppose about negotiating better deals with Disney and other poof pandering corps in the USA.

I’m hoping rednekkks and all the other far leftist sick homos on here will be insanely angered by your valiant truth telling.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this

looks like feminazi Pelosi’s new plastic surgery went badly wrong

By Dateline NBC

October 5, 2006 03:43 PM | Link to this

Date-Line Georgia is now recruiting for our next show. We had such a great response last week in Redstate Georgia that for the next show we must go to a lottery.

For those men that want to meet under-aged girls for sex through the internet, then get busted on national television, please go to our website.

Hurry slots will fill quickly. We are putting the cookies in the oven now! Don’t forget the 12 pack!

By Realist

October 5, 2006 03:47 PM | Link to this

JD, Im afraid you are preaching to deaf ears. The radical left will never see that thier doctrine of personal irresponsibilty is leading to the worst moral decay and crimes against humanity than have ever been seen before. To them it is simply, “to each his own”. Nevermind the blindingly obvious consequences!!!!!

By Van

October 5, 2006 03:52 PM | Link to this

Jim Wooten,

How did so many sick liberals and leftist pinkos get into this blog.

That is pinko like a socialist and not pinko like someone light in the loofers.

By Linda

October 5, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

I had a face lift with the money I stole from deaf kids. Lol. To each his own. Lol.

By SickofitAll

October 5, 2006 03:59 PM | Link to this

Jim, To quote a phrase: “You’re either part of the solution or part of the problem.”

Brown or mocha, coffee or java, crossing or intersecting? Doesn’t matter if you’re a republican or democrat! Rotten is rotten!

But that’s where you all try to use the deception of “my political party this and your political party that.” In reality, they are both doing nothing for the American people that elected them.

By JD's girlfriend Miss Information

October 5, 2006 04:00 PM | Link to this

JD’s sources are from the usual right wing Christian Taliban sites…full of the usual distortions…the following sheds some light into the source of JD’s propaganda, Dr. Cameron..he was recently on the daily show talking about how gays like to drink urine…

*In Cameron’s writings on child molestation?the pamphlet Child Molestation and Homosexuality and two published articles, “Homosexual Molestation of Children/Sexual Interaction of Teacher and Pupilî and “Child Molestation and Homosexuality’?he concludes that gays have perpetrated between one-third and one-half of all child molestations; that homosexual teachers have committed between one-quarter and four-fifths of all molestations of pupils; and that gays are ten to twenty times more apt to molest children than are heterosexuals. These figures are said to be based on the content of other child molestation studies, yet Cameron has distorted those studies to get the results he wants. For example, he defines all adult male molestation of male children as molestations committed by homosexuals, a definition rejected by the very experts Cameron cites. Groth, among other experts, has explicitly said that most molesters of boys are in fact men who are heterosexual in their adult relationships. These men are attracted to boys, he says, largely because of the feminine characteristics of prepubescents, such as a lack of body hair.

Cameron also has provided anti-gay organizations with research indicating absurdly high rates of extreme sex practices and venereal diseases among gays and lesbians. In his pamphlets on these subjects, Cameron has claimed, for instance, that 29 percent of gay men practice “urine sexî and that 37 percent of gay men have sadomasochistic sex. Gay men, he says, are fourteen times more apt to have syphilis than heterosexual men and are three times more apt to have had lice. Lesbians are said to be nineteen times more apt to have syphilis than straight women and are four times more apt to have had scabies. Cameron’s findings, however, are based on two sources: his discredited 1983 ISIS survey and other studies that ignore random sampling techniques. Several studies Cameron cites to support his conclusions rely on the responses of gay men who were recruited entirely from V.D. clinics.

A Cameron study that has received perhaps the most attention is “The Lifespan of Homosexuals.î It concludes that less than 2 percent of gay men survive to old age; that lesbians have a median age of death of 45 that gays are 116 times more apt to be murdered than straight men and twenty-four times more apt to commit suicide, etc. The source of this material? A comparison of obituaries from gay newspapers with a sample from regular newspapers?a method that would be laughed at by any reputable scholar. Obituaries in gay papers do not accurately portray deaths in the gay population as a whole. They are not meant to provide a public record of deaths of all gays but to allow members of the urban gay community to express mourning for their peers, particularly those whose lives have been cut short by illness or accident. Gays who die outside these communities or who die of natural causes are much less likely to be written up in a gay paper*

By Real Linda

October 5, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this

What were they going to do, buy CDs? Deaf kids dont need money.

By Watta Load

October 5, 2006 04:02 PM | Link to this

Hey Van,

This isn’t Jim Wooten’s blog…it belongs to ajc.com, so shut your trap about who blogs here.

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

I just came in and what is going on? Is Ann Coulter on trial? Are some wordy posters copying a book on this blog?

The stock market is going up and up but the economy is not? Huh, Peter, the moderate liberal? Just raise minimum wage. Why didn’t someone think of THAT before?

There’s now a Drudge report going out that some of the page boys in congress were playing jokes on the internet and voila!! Liberals thought it was ammunition!!I don’t know if this is a true report or not. Foley is still a creep but the Dems and the media should get their act together. Republicans too. I myself would like to read the unvarnished truth for a change.

By Question for the Blog

October 5, 2006 04:11 PM | Link to this

Would it surprise you if any of the following had been IM’ing teen boys for sex? Give us a list of numbers of those folks that would NOT surprise you to find out they are IMing teenage boys for sex

1) Rush 2) Drudge 3) Sonny 4) Newt 5) Dumbya 6) Cheney 7) Hannity 8) O’Lielly 9) Lieberman 10) 3 Commandments Westmoreland 11) Neal (and Bob) Boortz 12) The Kimmer 13) Laura Bush 14) Babs Bush 15) Jeb Bush 16) Ahnuld 17) Michael Weiner Savage 18) all of the above

more to follow -

By JD

October 5, 2006 04:15 PM | Link to this

JD’s Girlfriend…@4:00PM wrote: “JD’s sources are from the usual right wing Christian Taliban sites…the following sheds some light into the source of JD’s propaganda, Dr. Cameron..” Huh? My post never mentioned anyone named Dr. Cameron, and I have no idea who that is. I suggest that liberals like whoever psoted that should leave “misdirection plays” to athletes. My sources included the NIH, and no Christian sites.

By D

October 5, 2006 04:16 PM | Link to this

oh boy, here we go again, hastert, says ‘we’re taking full responsibility’, in other words just like bush after katrina when he said the same thing, thinking, and this does work sometimes, that by saying that you accept responsility, you can possily appear noble and therefore don’t have to actually be responsible for anything. but the kool-aid drinkers will eat it up, rather than admit that somehow, someway, they may have made a mistake, and that possibly someone may see a flaw in them, and people might be able to see that they are human and are vulnerable and just as mortal as the next person, better, better run and hide behind the flag, or some children or Jesus, yeah, Jesus, they can’t question my righteousness then.

By Another Question for the Blog

October 5, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this

Which of the following regular Wooten bloggers would it NOT suprise you to find out that they were blogging in their dirty diapers?

1) TFTT 2) Realisp 3) jbmlaw 4) Dusty 5) Andy/Andi/Andie 6) Markus 7) All of the above

By Van

October 5, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

Watta Load,

Must have struck a raw nerve there, wonder which one?

By Neal Boortz

October 5, 2006 04:18 PM | Link to this

Ques for the Blog,

What Realist’s son and I chat about is our business!

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 5, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

Finally, someone doing something useful on the blog - a poll!

My response is 18.

By Van

October 5, 2006 04:20 PM | Link to this

Question for the Blog,

How many of the Kennedy clan is too drunk to know if they are IM’ing underage kids for sex?

By Bella

October 5, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this

The heart of the matter is that the Republican party considers itself the party of morality and “family values.” The Democratic party has not adopted such monikers.

Of course, both parties are corrupt and both have a checkered history of scandal. But when Republicans place themselves on a right-side-of-God morality perch, they will and they deserve to fall a lot harder over a sex scandal.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 5, 2006 04:23 PM | Link to this

LOL - good second question blog poller.

Watch tftt/tommy copy you, though.

Anyhow, my answer to the second poll is 7.

By Typical Georgia Repub

October 5, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this

This Foley thing ain’t no big deal. When I was a teen I used to wake up in strange beds all over town with a sore butt but it never worry me none. I ain’t queer if that’s what you mean.

By Neal Boortz

October 5, 2006 04:28 PM | Link to this

1 and 6!!! what I win?

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 04:29 PM | Link to this

Ques.for Blog,

You are one really sick person. I am sorry no one ever treated you with loving kindness when you were growing up. A sad case.

By Th

October 5, 2006 04:30 PM | Link to this

JBM, we will have to agree to disagree on the Estrada nomination. After rereading the emails, it is still clear to me that the reason to vote against him was his judicial views and the reason he was “dangerous” included the fact he was Hispanic. Without a clear paper trail to use to reject him, it would look racist to vote against him. This is exactly the corner Bush wanted to push them into.

The question is not how long Studds was having sex with a page before Tip appointed a special prosecutor, but how long after Tip knew did he bring in the prosecutor. I don’t know. If Hastert or anyone else who knew had referred the Foley matter to the ethics committee last fall, there would be no scandal today.

By JD’s Girlfriend Miss Information

October 5, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

JD you dumba$$, you don’t even know where your getting your information…your 32 percent of child molestation cases involved homosexuals post is based on the “work” of Paul Cameron..who has been discredited and shown to be a fraud…time after time…

Google Paul Cameron and the only sites you will find that give him any credence are fundamentalist, right wing, anti-gay, God whacky sites.

Please post your NIH reference.

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 5, 2006 04:34 PM | Link to this

Now Dusty, somebody’s just funnin’ ya, you old poopy pants you.

By Realist

October 5, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this

Hey Neal, I pick up some coffee every morning at the waffle house at the corner of pleasant hill and shackelford rd. Like clockwork, Im there nearly every morning around 6:45 or so. Will be tomorrow for sure.

Why dont you stop in and lets talk more about my son. Id love that. Ill wear a red hat so you can pick me out. So just come on up and say hello. Itll be good times.

By DemCheck

October 5, 2006 04:41 PM | Link to this

You won’t beleive what the GOP has done now. They have stooped so low as to buy the domain name goggle.com in an effort to catch accidental web hits on thier site. You have to see this…

www.goggle.com

By MrLiberty

October 5, 2006 04:46 PM | Link to this

This is exactly what you get when you allow only two parties to control all political discourse in this country. To think that the Democrats would not have covered up the immoral and illegal behavior of one of their own just to protect their majority seats, etc. is to ignore reality and history. For over 150 years these two parties have been destroying the constitution, violating civil and constitutional rights, and breaking hundreds of laws in the process.

Face it folks, this is only the tip of the iceberg and this country is the Titanic.

Hopefully enough Libertarians will be elected in this round to finally show americans what principled politicians are like. So long as the take home message is that government is the enemy and not worthy of any trust whatsoever, this nation will forever be safe.

By Van

October 5, 2006 04:51 PM | Link to this

DemCheck,

Nice try, your wrong, butt breath -

Spy Bouncer, not the GOP - what an idiot, can’t even get something that simple.

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 04:54 PM | Link to this

Dear Poopy Rednecks,

I aint funnin’ with you creeps, ‘cause you aint funny. Now go home and help with your house. Habitat has almost finished it, built-in spittoons and all.

By JK

October 5, 2006 04:57 PM | Link to this

STAY AWAY FROM THE KIDS you perverts! Creepy sickos, all of you. There are PLACES and appropriate outlets for your adult perversions — with other adults!

By Mallory

October 5, 2006 05:03 PM | Link to this

J.Wooten, I was looking for a place to jump in with my comment. Are you renting space for a liberal lecture on homosexuality & pedophilia? They’re very knowledgeable on the subject aren’t they?

Foley’s gone, I’m glad and I’m glad to be gone from here too.

Sooooooo Loooooong!

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this

NAMBLA rednekkks and all its pathetic moronic dumbarse ids would make a superb study for an aggressive research project for a smart Ivy League psychiatrist willing to slum it for a few months who specialises in very difficult cases with a long history of familial abuse compounded by long years of lonely paddded cell self abuse.

Indeed NAMBLA would also make THE perfect target for a study in the effects on quivering Bush hating leftist blubber of hollow point bullets and dum dum bullets. Clearly dum dum bullets would naturally be appropriate for rednekkks as its the dumb, dumber and dumbest sack of liberal filth on this forum.

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 05:15 PM | Link to this

Mr. Liberty,

Since you think Libertarians are the only “party” around to save your sinking ship (mine’s not sinking), please tell us more about Libertarians.

The only thing that I’ve ever heard was they wanted to be free to smoke marijuana any time they felt like it without going to jail. Is there more?

By Van

October 5, 2006 05:17 PM | Link to this

JK,

You’re right, Studds should have stayed away from the underage page, at least Foley’s was 18.

His behavior is still bad and he should have resigned or kicked out of the House years ago. just like Newt wanted with Studds.

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 05:22 PM | Link to this

STOP PRESS

NAMBLA’s soul mate the twisted sickster JM Carr has had all charges dropped against him by the lefties in Kalifornia … listen out real soon for the sound of Queer wedding bells in Assachussetts for NAMBLA and Karr.

By gnat

October 5, 2006 05:22 PM | Link to this

just look and you can see, how they divide us against each other, how Rove, Bush and Cheney laugh at how easy it is to make anyone who disagrees with them look like cry-babies or wimps, and they laugh at how easy it is to lead the others, who are too afraid that anyone may see them as wimps or cry-babies so they fall in line and are lead more easily than an oxen by his nose ring, while they smoke a cigar, have a sip of brandy, check to see how much money their money made today and then throw another blue collar American worker on the fire.

By Markus

October 5, 2006 05:28 PM | Link to this

How liberals like peterhead argue “facts”-

“Home sales declining.”

“Record deficit.”

“Job growth only at minimum wage level.”

Of course, what these fallacies of fact forget to tell you is:

Home sales are falling because they’ve been at RECORD HIGHS. The same thing happened to Clintoon’s .com bust.

Two quarters this year the federal government has teken in record high tax revenues which has chipped away at the deficit. Tax cuts work.

If any ignoramus out there REALLY believes that all these jobs we’ve been creating are at McDs and Best Western and Wal Mart, I’d say look in the damned NEWSPAPER for God’s sake, never mind freaking MONSTER.

Liberalism - rots the soul from the head down, like a dead fish

By Dusty

October 5, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this

Gnat,

You kidding, aren’t you? You couldn’t possibly believe that fairy tale you just posted. You better call on Spin to make a better spiel than that.

By JK

October 5, 2006 05:31 PM | Link to this

Van, again you dredge up the old sins of Democrats to fling at ME, as if the sins are mine. I can only vote in my district, Dude. I never voted for a Kennedy or a Studds or a Frank, etc. Never had big bucks to send to their campaigns either. Yet, you cant-live-in-the-present Repub defenders keep flinging that stuff up as if it means something to me, or to the here and now. WHY? You accuse us of being selective; look in the mirror Van.

My comment was directed to the perverts on this blog, including but not limited to the smart alec making references to Realist’s son. Are you a father, Van? It’s not amusing. People over 35 getting freaky on each other: Now THAT’s amusing! Haha!

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 05:33 PM | Link to this

So another day of the sick liberal freakshow on here is over and the gloating and sneering about Foley and the GOP has persisted as I assumed it would all day.

NO attempt to debate - just robotic abuse, often disgusting, from the cowardly homo loving left - countered with some sharp responses from us on the right.

But this “debate” really now has no point to it. Foley is reviled by both sides, but the leftist scum on here simply will not address the disgusting hypocrisy of their shameful history of dealing with congressional child molestors and other national political demoNcrat sex predators.

That’s it - other than largely endless repetition of the same old ground there’s been nothing much worth debating on here, except the late in the day valiant exposure by JD of proven homosexual perversion.

Doubtless the leftist scum will be back tomorrow for another day of child abuse centred posts.

well done rednekkks and maggot brain …

By Markus

October 5, 2006 05:34 PM | Link to this

No, you can’t dress up the same hog in a different dress and call it more beautiful. I just can’t figure out why so many liberal women are ugly. Shaaadaaaappp and sing already, Babs.

By D

October 5, 2006 05:37 PM | Link to this

republicans remind me of the part kevin bacon played in animal house during the parade turned riot, he yelled as he was trampled, “all is well, all is well…” it’s that kind of apathy and denial that is heading this country down the tracks towards derailment. you don’t wait ‘til there’s big trouble and it’s too late to do something. things are unraveling now, as with katrina, it’s time to shore up the levees, before, not later.

By Markus

October 5, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

Yes, we should be more like France like the good little Stalinist liberals tell us all the time. Gee, I can’t wait for a bunch of unemployed north African muslims to start beating the hell out of our cops over here too. (I can’t wait for that 25% unemployment rate for those under age 21 as well).

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/05/wmuslims05.xml

By John Mark Karr

October 5, 2006 05:39 PM | Link to this

Now that my tribulations and trails are over, I’m heading back to Georgia - should I become a Fundamentalist youth minister or run for Congress as a Republican?

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this

Now that my tribulations and trails are over, I’m heading back to Georgia - should I become a Fundamentalist youth minister or run for Congress as a Republican?

you should marry rednekkks NAMBLA in Boston and hope you dont get stalked by a wildly jealous unhinged canus!!

By MinneapolisMike

October 5, 2006 05:43 PM | Link to this

No Republican in government should every have to resign for anything - as long as the act was done in the name of Freedom.

So Speaker of the House Hastert knew of the alleged improprieties of Mark Foley long ago. Big deal! Mr. Hastert knows of far greater crimes than that! But since these crimes were commited in the name of Freedom or were commited by an honest Republican who only acts in the name of Freedom, these crimes mean nothing.

Seriously, Mr. Hastert has seen evidence of acts so foul they make Iraq and Gitmo seem like a picnic. Mr. Hastert literally has skeletons in his closet. Who cares? As long as these “crimes” were done in the name of Freedom, the American public could care less.

Let’s face facts - all right-thinking Americans would happily hand over every cute boy in their family to raving pedophile government official as long as they were promised their safety. This is the cost of Freedom we must all pay. They would give up all current and future earnings, all supposed civil liberties, and even the lives of those members of their families they don’t care too much about - all for protection. This is the American way.

God bless America and God bless Dennis Hastert.

By: MinneapolisMike

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 05:44 PM | Link to this

I sincerely hope we have a very different topic tomorrow - this pathetic liberal homo stuff all the time is getting pretty tedious!!

By gnat

October 5, 2006 05:45 PM | Link to this

yes, I believe. and to believe and the support the ones that are currently running our government is like shooting yourself in the foot. they have hurt this country more than the boogeymen they create to scare us with, the war on drugs, the war on terror, when none of these things come close to the slowly building threat of China and Latin/South America.

By Dateline NBC

October 5, 2006 05:47 PM | Link to this

John Mark, you are more than welcome to participate in the next Date-Line Georgia underage internet sting.

E-Mail us.

By Van

October 5, 2006 05:51 PM | Link to this

JK,

As I said earlier

It is called precedent. The precedent is to excuse it as private sexual behavior. If he had been a democrat Foley would still be in office.

As to being a person over 35, Yes, I have raised two great kids. One’s a RN and another is fixing your car, if it is a Nissan.

Gee, I haven’t been 35 in over 20 years. And, yes, we older folks getting “freaky” is a lot of fun, my wife of 37 years agrees whole heartedly. I guess family values do work.

By Van

October 5, 2006 05:53 PM | Link to this

time for the truth,.

Yeah, the democrats actually gay bashing is a breath of fresh air.

By CJ

October 5, 2006 05:56 PM | Link to this

Hey JD,

Sorry for the slow response, but I had a little work to do.

There seems to be a little misunderstanding between the two of us, so let’s take our time and see if we can clear it up.

First, I disputed the following “facts” you made in your post @1:52 “…homophilia was and is a mental disorder. It was only taken out of the DSM because of * violent* threats by gay activists to the APA. It is a fact that a far higher percentage of homosexual men have molested underage boys than heterosexual men have molested underage girls.”

You may recall that I bolded the word “violent” in my post @2:34. I suspect you know that I wasn’t questioning whether homophilia was considered to be a mental disorder, but thank you for proving that that was the case 28 years ago (I did notice that you added that homophilia is a mental disorder despite the fact that it is no longer classified as such by the American Psychiatric Association, publisher of the DSM).

No JD, I was questioning your false assertion that homophilia was taken out of the DSM because of violent threats by gay activists. I’m happy to wait patiently for the false proof while you go to the archives of your gay-bashing “Christian” websites.

Your second “irrefutable” fact, as my man TFTT refers to them, was that a “far higher percentage of homosexual men have molested underage boys than heterosexual men have molested underage girls.*” But, in your response to my skepticism you wrote about the greater “incidences” of child molestation among homosexuals.

My friend, there’s a sizeable difference between saying that a higher percentage of homosexual men molest boys and saying that there’s a greater incidence of homosexual molestations. Allow me to illustrate. Let’s say that Father Realist, a former Lutheran, is a practicing Priest in Alabama for 30 years and fondles alter boys every Sunday while preparing for Mass. Over the course of 30 years, I imagine Father Realist could have had hundreds of such encounters or “incidents”. Despicable acts, to say the least. But he was just one man and a higher number of incidences among gay men does not mean that a higher percentage of gay men molest boys. So, the second half of your post does not support your “irrefutable” facts either.

However, since you’re struggling, maybe I can help you out a little bit. You might actually be right when you say that a higher percentage of homosexual men have molested underage boys than heterosexual men have molested underage girls. You see JD, it turns out that the reason that heterosexual men might molest fewer girls is because they’re too busy molesting underage boys. Your buddy, Dr. Gene Abel, actually informs us that 70 percent of men who molest boys are heterosexual. Dr. Gene also found that men who molest boys follow the general pattern of the U.S. male population in regard to their adult sexual preferences. Here’s the link to the appropriate page from the “Stop Child Molestation” website (fringe left-wingers, I’m sure) if you want to check it out for yourself (http://www.stopchildmolestation.org/pages/study4.html).

By the way, Dr. Gene also contradicts you 2-3% “fact”. It looks like your “Christian” websites are letting you down.

As you said, “Reality is what it is regardless of what anyone believes”. Alright JD, good luck finding yourself.

By Markus

October 5, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this

Thank you sir Bozell, for pointing out what I pointed out yesterday that the bucketlip liberals didn’t have the nips to address:

“Did Democrats – who must have chortled at the 1996 GOP convention when NBC anchor Tom Brokaw suggested the Republicans don’t think much about “women’s issues” like rape – demand answers from President Clinton when Juanita Broaddrick tearfully recounted to NBC in 1999 how Bill Clinton raped and brutalized her in a Little Rock hotel in the late 1970s?”

http://www.mrc.org/BozellColumns/newscolumn/2006/col20061003.asp

By Markus

October 5, 2006 06:03 PM | Link to this

Thank you sir Bozell, for pointing out what I pointed out yesterday that the bucketlip liberals didn’t have the nips to address:

“Did Democrats – who must have chortled at the 1996 GOP convention when NBC anchor Tom Brokaw suggested the Republicans don’t think much about “women’s issues” like rape – demand answers from President Clinton when Juanita Broaddrick tearfully recounted to NBC in 1999 how Bill Clinton raped and brutalized her in a Little Rock hotel in the late 1970s?”

http://www.mrc.org/BozellColumns/newscolumn/2006/col20061003.asp

By Pope rednecks - Amerikkka's Al Qaeda I

October 5, 2006 06:54 PM | Link to this

On your feet (GOPers - on your knees) for the Pope’s benediction this evening…

But first -

If this indeed the real Minneapolis Mike that has blessed our board, Mr. Wooten has scored a major coup. Mr. Mike, although he resides in one of the bluest cities in one of the bluest states, is a true conservative mind, one of the sharpest on the right since the untimely demise of Sonny Bono. Massuh Jim must have tremendous pull, how quickly he was able to replace Captain Freedom when his utterly mendacious fraud was so artfully exposed by tftt/tommy turdburglar and Poopy Pants Dusty. We liberals will have to regroup now, no more gloating about Pedo-Foley-a and the like, no, not with Mr. Mike around. Wooten knows my utter contempt for the regular conjobs that post here, but Mr. Mike? Well, I’m impressed.

Another thought for cons to ponder before I officially close the board today - would you let tftt babysit your teenage son for the weekend?

Now the prayer:

Lord, we know that Jesus loved the little children, but that He never loved them so much that He felt compelled to send them sexually suggestive messages over His holy computer or cellphone. Help the conservatives among us resist their many unnatural sexual urges, in Your Son’s Holy Name we pray.

Conservatives, I said to kneel - not kneel and bob! Get out of my church!

The rest of you, too, go in Peace.

The blog is officially closed for today…

By time for the truth

October 5, 2006 09:33 PM | Link to this

unsurprisingly rednekkks NAMBLA spews forth yet more of its unhinged child molesting filth. NAMBLA is easily the sickest of the very sick leftists on here.

I imagine most conservatives on here would very willingly let NAMBLA babysit a very large, ravenously hungry anaconda or python this weekend.

rednekkks has been featured several times on America’s Most Wanted as the typical perverted social inadequate NOT to let anywhere near your kids - of any age. (just mirroring back your twisted rhetoric NAMBLA).

now the secular conservative prayer

please Allah send lots and lots more fear and loathing into the homo loving, baby killing, child molesting, Bush hating, pinko leftist cowardly cut and run hearts’ and then mercilessly smite them down where ever they may be - in which ever perverted bath house, palestinian terrorist solidarity campaign meeting or NAMBLA/ACLU Nazi gathering they are infesting. Then show the footage of the smiting on Fox News.

cheers Allah

now the blog is officially closed for the night …

By Willx

October 8, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this

The Republican Smear Party has slammed every Democrat who has run for public office, including decorated war veterans. They will do ANYTHING to hold on to power. Now listen to all their whining about how the Democrats are using the Foley disgrace to political advantage. Even in this shame, their hypocrisy is disgusting.

By Fox News Alert

October 8, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

But the problem with claiming to have cornered the market on virtue is that people will get snippy when they spot vice in your ranks.

Thank you George Will, another intelligent conservative who knows neocon GOP hypocrisy when he sees it.

By John

October 9, 2006 04:42 PM | Link to this

Since we’re online now, with web-archives and instant retrieval processes, may we start a process— like saving this column along with all your other whitewash columns of Republican scandals— in case the Democrats do take over either or both houses of Congress? That way, when inevitable scandals crop up under Democratic leadership, we could pull them out and you could hold yourself to the same standards your applying here with Hastert and the GOP congressional leadership over the Foley issue. Republicans are well-known as world-class hypocrites and undefeated champions of the double-standard. This is one of the more disgusting aspects of any scandal— if it’s a Democrat involved, having to listen to right-wing howls of righteous indignation, sanctimonious diatribes, moral pontificating, and virtual burnings at the stake— Republican scandals get ignored, soft-pedaled, whitewashed, rationalized… When some Democrat gets caught doing something similar— and they will, let Mr. Wooten save time in his column writing— as well as maintain a consistent standard— by digging this out of the archives and pasting it in— “It seems obvious now, but had I been the senior member of 435 independent contractors, I don’t know that I would have done more than warn (fill in the blank) that his actions were (whatever) and to stop, with some monitoring to see that he had…”