Quote:
Originally posted by Spanky
1) Foley, as far as we know, only posted emails with a sixteen year old male page.
2) Studds actually had sex with a sixteen year old page.
3) The Republicans forced Foley out. They did that because they knew that Foley could be used as a propaganda tool against them. The more they defended him the worse it would be for the party. So no one is defending Foley.
4) The Democrats protected and defended Studds and Frank.
5) Studds and Franks have been very helpful to the Republicans. They have helped paint the Democrats as extremists and morally challenged. Both of their scandals have been used in millions of hit pieces and have helped raise millions of dollars.
6) If the Democrats were smart they would have expelled both of them from the party. But in their idiocy they did not and thereby they helped the Republicans.
7) Any attacks made by the Democrats now just bring up the memory of Studds and Franks. Since they didn't expel those two guys they now can't fully take advantage of the gift that Foley just presented to them.
|
You have a few facts wrong here. By the way, Studds and Crane (the republican who broke the law sleeping with a younger page) were both censored by the House, and Studds was disavowed by many Democrats, though not his district.
So, 23 year old scandals involving former Congressmen somehow justify the leadership keeping their mouths shut on Foley? Come on Spanky, you're better than this. I'm Catholic, but spoke out against the scandal in the Church and demanded accountability. This is not, of course, the same scope as that scandal, but it is the same type. We are once again dealing with the very guy who is responsible for the rules breaking them, something which could undermine the credibility of our system. And the very guys who are responsible for policing the system protecting him.
