Democrats play these games largely because they know sex scandals sell with the media. Just look at all the other scandals that got scant attention or are brushed aside by the M$M as 'liberal conspiracies'. When liberals get something that stick they really have to drive the nail home and unfortunately, you get cir stances like gay-bashing.And as a liberal that has had to deal with the fall out of that idiocy for the last 10 years, I'm sorry but I wish our side of the aisle would leave these types of politics alone. Ultimately I dont think it is really democrats in DC that are going haywire with this , it's more the media (which I never really believed was liberal, and I still don't, i think sex sells, and the media is eating up this because it's a product they can move.)
Misplaced investigative priorities by Congress and the M$M? You tell me
Republicans spent 140 hours investigating Clinton's Christmas list and only 12 hours on investigating the abuses of Abu Ghraib.
Republicans spent $40 million investigating Clinton's involvement with Whitewater and only $12 million investigating the crime of 9/11.
And I'll bet that they haven't even investigated the Anthrax Attacks at all.
I'm glad the thugs in charge and the their M$M lapdogs got their priorities straight.
Dammit, Dan, you keep quoting/posting these devastating anti-Repug articles.
You're gonna make us anti-Repugs look bad. you're so annoying!
Well then, what the is the point Dan? Aren't we just like them?
Wow! That's some admission. I'm speechless...
Unfortunately for the Democrats, the Conservatives aren't buying their brand of crazy this week. Don't expect the Foley scandal to change the election any.
It ain't going to change my vote.
"Don't expect the Foley scandal to change the election any."
Yoni hasn't been talking to the Repug leadership who thinks Foley will hurt them bad on election day. But how dare the Repug leadership doubt shill Yoni!
Yoni not speaking the truth? Holy ! When did this start?
================
"it's over."
Even the severely Repug-compromised "ethics" committe doesn't think it's over:
Hastert Aides Interest Ethics Panel
Staff Members' Knowledge of Foley's Actions With Former Pages in Question
By Jonathan Weisman
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 12, 2006; A06
With House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert denying personal knowledge of former representative Mark Foley's activities, investigators for the House ethics committee are bearing down on three senior members of Hastert's staff to determine when they learned of Foley's actions and whether they passed on their knowledge to the speaker.
The three -- chief of staff Scott Palmer, deputy chief of staff Mike Stokke and counsel Ted Van Der Meid -- have formed a palace guard around Hastert (R-Ill.) for years, attaining great degrees of power and unusual autonomy to deal with matters of politics, policy and House operations. They are also remarkably close. Palmer and Stokke have been with Hastert for decades. They live together in a Capitol Hill townhouse and commute back to Illinois on weekends.
( oops! Sounds pretty gay!
It is that relationship that has made investigators so interested in their knowledge of Foley's contacts with teenage male congressional pages, especially allegations that his chief of staff personally appealed to Palmer in 2003 to confront the Florida Republican. Foley resigned Sept. 29 when news reports indicated he had sent electronic messages to a former page.
"It would be very hard to believe if Palmer knew that kind of detail, he wouldn't have acted upon it, and it's hard to imagine Scott Palmer would have spared the speaker that knowledge," said one former Republican leadership aide, who spoke on the condition of anonymity for fear of jeopardizing his lobbying contacts.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101639_pf.html
================
Scandal Sidelines Hastert, Reynolds
GOP Leaders Cut Campaign Appearances
By Juliet Eilperin
Washington Post Staff Writer
Thursday, October 12, 2006; Page A06
Weeks before the Nov. 7 elections, the Mark Foley scandal and its aftermath have already had a visible effect on Republican prospects: Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) and Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.), the two men leading the GOP efforts to keep power in the House, have both been largely sidelined from the public campaign.
( Hastert is too ing, embrarrassingly fat already. No campaign grub for him!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...101101672.html
===========
Always amusing to show Yoni shilling 180 degrees from the truth.
Last edited by boutons_; 10-12-2006 at 06:17 AM.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/...8KML9DG2.shtml
Poll: Most Say Politics Beat Page Safety
Polls: Most say politics trumped concerns about pages in Mark Foley scandal
Oct. 11, 2006
By The Associated Press
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
(AP) Most Americans say the House Republican leadership worried more about politics than the safety of congressional pages in the case of disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley, according to polls. Most also say Democrats would not have handled the situation better.
Republicans have come under criticism for their response to Foley, who sent sexually explicit messages to teenage male pages. GOP House leaders have faced questions whether they acted promptly to deal with the Florida congressman.
People were split on whether House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., should step down, with just under half saying he should, according to several polls.
Among the other findings:
_More than half in several polls said Hastert tried to cover up what he knew about Foley.
_Almost half in an Associated Press-Ipsos poll said recent reports of scandal and corruption would be very important in their vote.
_Two-thirds said the GOP leadership did not take the e-mails seriously enough when they first learned of them, according to a CBS-New York Times poll.
_Six in 10 in an ABC News-Washington Post poll said the Democrats are pursuing the case for political advantage, not to raise concerns about the page program.
The results come from AP-Ipsos, ABC-Washington Post, CBS-Times and Newsweek polling done in the last week. The polls questioned from 1,000 to 1,500 adults and had margins of error of plus or minus 2.5 percentage points to 3 percentage points.
No surprises here. Though I seriously doubt point number 2 means what it implies. I'm guessing most of the "half" that said the scandal would be very important to their vote weren't planning to vote Republican anyway.
A better question would be "Will this change your vote?"
Anyone who insults Abe Lincoln should not have the Dignity to call themselves an american. Perhaps you never learned that he was your general in your civil war? That WASN'T for the confederacy. Of course, he even resembles a repub so therefore he is evil..... .
( oops! Sounds pretty gay!
Honest Abe.
Ouch!
The Republicans are weak on terror.
Another FAUX News Poll...
10/12/06 FOX News Poll: Few Would Change Vote Due to Foley Scandal
NEW YORK — There has been little change in the past two weeks regarding intentions for the upcoming congressional election; by a 9-point margin, voters say they would vote for the Democratic candidate for Congress over the Republican if the election were held today, compared with an 11-point margin two weeks ago. Only 11 percent of voters say the congressional page scandal will be extremely important to their vote, although nearly half see the scandal as part of a larger pattern of Washington abuse of power rather than an isolated incident.
These are just some of the findings from the latest FOX News Poll.
The job approval rating of President Bush is down slightly compared with the previous poll. Currently, 40 percent of voters approve of his job performance and 56 percent disapprove. Two weeks ago, 42 percent approved of his performance.
About three in 10 voters approve of the job Congress is doing, while 63 percent disapprove. A majority of Republicans (54 percent) approve of the job Congress is doing, while the same is true of only 24 percent of independents and 14 percent of Democrats.
If the election were held today, 50 percent of voters would vote for the Democratic candidate in their congressional district, while 41 percent would vote for the Republican. Most Democrats and Republicans would support their party’s candidates. Independents are more likely to vote for the Democratic candidate by a 48 to 33 marginPartisans will be partisans to the bitter end I guess, but the wide-margin independent preference for Democrats could be enough to tip the house over to the Demos, that is, unless enough independent-minded voters are black-listed by a future Kathrine Harris or Ken Blackwell, and Diebold, ES&S and Sequoia run a semi-clean election (Yes, thats asking a lot I know)..
The key phrase this November will be "likely voters", as in who actually shows up to vote.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
