Democrats didn’t force Foley to resign. If he wanted to stand for re-election as a man who asks teenage boys if he is ‘getting them excited’ he was free to.

Evidently, Rep. Studds was well enough regarded by his constituents for them to re-elect him despite his moral failings with hot, young boys.

Left by Preston on October 18th, 2006 at 11:41 am

“Democrats didn’t force Foley to resign. If he wanted to stand for re-election as a man who asks teenage boys if he is ‘getting them excited’ he was free to.”

Foley’s problem with that is that he is from a conservative district. If Foley was to move to Austin, Boston, or San Francisco he’d be elected by acclamation.

Left by Jim Howard on October 18th, 2006 at 1:20 pm

What this whole thing has done is put the pros and cons of homosexual behavior in the spotlight. The attempt, of course, WAS to smear the Republicans, but in effect the Democrats are eating their own gay constituents in the process. I don’t think this whole Foley scandal is really going to affect mid-term voters anywhere but in Florida, well maybe also in California where I bet a lot of gay people are pissed off that homosexual behavior is being drug through the mud for political purposes.

Ahh the law of unintended consequences …

Nice try SOROS..you jerk.

Left by dianne on October 18th, 2006 at 1:54 pm

The way I see the Foley mess? It has been inflated by a vicious 24hr news cycle. I swear that for two weeks straight, every time I went to CNN.com or MSNBC.com, there was a picture and another headline about Foley. With all the other stuff going on in this world, where are the priorities? It’s ridiculous. Why why why does it seem that we have so many news organizations chasing after the same two or three stories every friggin’ day? Every minute of every hour of every day.

I am sorry - but the Foley thing was NOT that big a deal in the grand scheme of things. And I seriously wonder why the republican party loves to fall on it’s sword so much. The problem? They still believe they need the ‘morals’ voters. And they pander to them. And I think they should separate the fact that there are a great many people who don’t care about anyone’s sex life, or whether someone has been married five times, or if someone has ever uttered a politically incorrect word, or whatever. The republicans and the democrats both need to stop pandering to their bases and move a little more towards the middle. This country is almost evenly divided - if you want to win elections, you’re going to have to go after the moderates.

My perfect dem/repub hybrid would be someone who is careful about spending my money and lets me keep more of my earnings; doesn’t demonize any particular group of people based on their ethnicity, religious (or lack of) affiliation, sexual orientation or whether they like cats or dogs better; stands up for this country and doesn’t submit to what all the ‘cool kids’ at the UN think we should do (Better to ask forgiveness than permission, if you know what I mean); someone who doesn’t go to other countries and badmouth our president or our government just because they do not agree with him/her (within our country is another matter. But internal politics aren’t going to be solved by foreigners and we should present a united front to the rest of the world. I really hate the international grandstanding - yeah, Jimmy Carter, I’m looking at YOU); make it a priority to find alternative fuels and improve emissions standards; help every American afford health care without nationalizing it because the last thing I want in charge of my health is a government bureaucracy; improve access to a college education (I’m talking $$$ here) for every kid that wants one…. not just the very poor or the very rich. There are lots of kids who don’t qualify for aid, aren’t eligible for ‘diversity’ scholarships, and aren’t rich. Those are the kids who come out of college with $100k in college loans which take 20 years to pay off.

Those are just a couple of things. Those are most of the important things to me.

I don’t give a rat’s ass about sex scandals….. unless pedophilia or rape is involved. Those people obviously need to go to jail.

When will the news media learn to prioritize….. oh yeah, they are full blown liberals trying to help sway an election. I really didn’t want to believe that - but lately, I’m starting to wonder.

Left by Terr on October 18th, 2006 at 3:40 pm

Wow, Dianne, I don’t know where to begin.

First of all, The attempt, of course, WAS to smear the Republicans,: No Democrat made Mark Foley come on to teenage boys. To act as if this was concocted by the Democrats ignores the 5 years that the Republican leadership has had to quietly encourage Foley to move out of Congress. Instead, they loved his connections to Hollywood celebrities and their cash. George Soros had little to do with Foley’s AOL account.

I don’t think this whole Foley scandal is really going to affect mid-term voters anywhere but in Florida
You may be right but this is belied by recent polls showing the bottom dropping out for Rep. Reynolds and the Republican Congress in general. While polling ties this dissatisfaction to the war in Iraq the tremendous change in polls in the last two weeks leads me to believe that the Foley affair must have some influence.

in effect the Democrats are eating their own gay constituents
That’s not true and I have yet to read anything from gay people suggesting the same. In fact it was conservatives who changed the topic from pedophilia to homosexuality.

Left by Preston on October 18th, 2006 at 3:40 pm

This country is almost evenly divided - if you want to win elections, you’re going to have to go after the moderates.

Terr, unfortunately Karl Rove has proven you can win elections by throwing red meat to the base.

But to the heart of your post, I think you pretty much described a Democrat. The Clinton Administration’s US foreign policy advanced the interest of the United States not Kofi Annan.

When will the news media learn to prioritize….. oh yeah, they are full blown liberals trying to help sway an election
Well, if I hadn’t lived through 8 years of Whitewater investigations and 2 years of Monicagate I might consider agreeing with you on that one.

Left by Preston on October 18th, 2006 at 3:53 pm

Terr makes some excellent points…

Preston…I really have no axe to grind with gay people. I don’t agree with gay marriage but it’s only because I don’t believe they should be privileged because of their sexual lifestyle. In my mind, two maiden aunts, one with insurance and ther other without, should get the same insurance benefits, etc. Sex should have nothing to do with it. As you know, I believe in national health insurance although after listening to C-span this morning, I sure don’t want to have to wait for 2 years for cancer treatmetn as was the case in England. We need to be really smart about our choices…

Other than that, live and let live. I really don’t care and this Foley thing is so far down on the list of my priorities, I could care less. He’s a despicable person. There are a lot of despicable people in this world and in our own congress, both sides of the aisle.

We have much bigger fish to fry.

Left by dianne on October 18th, 2006 at 8:02 pm

stands up for this country and doesn’t submit to what all the ‘cool kids’ at the UN think we should do
Terr-
Yeah, most Democrats thought that going to the UN was the best way to deal with Saddam but when you look at the results of the path that we took does it look so wrong? George Bush’s father knew that you don’t attempt to fight a country without a coalition of allies (but he also knew that you don’t try to occupy Baghdad).
It’s true that Democrats felt that the UN was necessary when fighting a war of choice but no President Republican or Democratic does not have to and won’t ask for permission to defend this country.

Left by Preston on October 18th, 2006 at 9:55 pm

I really have no axe to grind with gay people. I don’t agree with gay marriage but it’s only because I don’t believe they should be privileged because of their sexual lifestyle.

Dianne- I was not implying that you had said anything against homosexuals but I think this quote is off base. Yes, we could abolish the privileges of marriage but we’re not going to so the simple and just solution is to allow all Americans have access to having their relationships sactioned by the government.

Left by Preston on October 18th, 2006 at 10:11 pm

Yeah, most Democrats thought that going to the UN was the best way to deal with Saddam but when you look at the results of the path that we took does it look so wrong?

Well, I’ll let you know how well the UN has done trying to curtail the madmen in N Korea and Iran. If we’re still around when they are done ignoring the ’sanctions’ and all that hard talk and diplomatic talk and stuff ….. I just know that the UN is going to be able to reign them in. /sarcasm

As far as the heart of my post describing a Democrat, well that’s not exactly true. It sickens me that we have former Presidents of the Democratic persuasion who will go to other countries and badmouth the current President of the US. That is just plain WRONG…. and that totally turns my stomach.

And I really want to see a change in power, to a degree, but dammit, I just want to hear the Democrats make a speech without using the phrase “this administration…….” Really. I know all about “this administration”, tell me how you are going to enforce immigration laws and secure our border, how are you going to protect this country from terrorism, and how are you going to reign in the “blame America first” people in your own party?

In the meantime, I’m voting for Kinky because I’m sick of politicians of all persuasions. Give me a strong independent candidate for any office and I’ll vote for them just because I can. Or better yet, give me a “None of the Above” choice on the ballot. That would work too.

Left by Terr on October 18th, 2006 at 11:50 pm

Well, I’ll let you know how well the UN has done trying to curtail the madmen in N Korea and Iran.
How well has the Bush Administration done with North Korea and Iran? Surely you can see that you are imposing a double standard on admittedly difficult problems. The UN is a tool- not the answer to all of the world’s problems. But our government has be foolish not to use this tool as much as possible.

I can understand how many patriotic Americans cringe at a forum that gives an equal stage for some of the world’s most vile dictators. Yet I believe that allowing Iraq’s diplomats call the US names even as UN inspectors were verifying the lack of WMD’s was a fair trade to save the lives of 3000 American soldiers and countless Iraqi civilians.

After a generation of conservatives attacking the culture of if it feels good, do it it turns out that they have simply applied the maxim to our foreign policy with disastrous consequences.

Left by Preston on October 19th, 2006 at 9:52 am

It will be interesting to see how the new Secretary General of the UN “Ban” handles N. Korea.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2006/10/19/world/main2104621.shtml

Left by dianne on October 19th, 2006 at 10:40 am

Good question, Dianne.

I am pretty amazed at the lengths that South Koreans are willing to go to ignore the human rights abuses in the North simply to maintain the facade of a peaceful relationship. Openness and dialog are a means to an end- not then end in itself. Unfortunately, it seems that many South Koreans don’t believe that.

Allowing your people to starve as you spend money on nuclear research is the trait of a monster and a small number of family reunifications does not excuse it.

Left by Preston on October 19th, 2006 at 11:22 am