Posted on 10/02/2006 9:05:50 AM PDT by pickrell
The news abounds with declarations that leaders of the Republican party may have known about Representative Foley's emails to minor interns. The hue and cry is that if the communications were known to these leaders- that it was vile that action was not taken, and the sorry affair merits Congressional inquiry in front of the public.
Many agree.
But let's not take half measures. Let's explore those persons thoroughly, who would allow such a thing to continue unchecked.
What vile occurence would it be... if Democratic operatives discovered the extent of Representative Foley's actions- and allowed them to continue until 30 days before the next election? What contemptible journalists would quietly sit on stories that would expose this man... in order to time their outrage for maximum damage to the President, in a time of war?
As their shocked outrage is parroted by rote, that anyone who knew of such nefariousness and did nothing, due to political considerations is unfit for their careers- ... which Fox reporter will think a little further, hike up their britches, and expose to the public what this timing cost those very interns they profess to guard so intently.
What should be the price for using children for your own amusement? But don't stop with that question. What also should be the price for using children in such a manner... to further the agenda of the party which considers children a mass of tissue/ a matter of choice? What should be the price for using children in such a manner... to provide the newest bludgeon for those journalists who make their living professing to gage everthing... by the effect it has upon children... and yet worships the party that "...are getting alittle tired of hearing about family values", and are sickened that Republicans constantly make such a big deal about differing lifestyle sex?
Will a NAMBLA representative be interviewed now? Should Barney Frank comment?
Will the idea, so ridiculed by the press of late, that having sex with an intern be considered a private matter, suddenly be ignored?
In a conflict such as the war against Islamofascism, that will be defined by the holders of the moral highground, and with stakes so high that the very future of civilization may tilt upon the scales of perceived depravity...
...what kind of reporter would value the timed orchestration of an assault upon the very party which has fought so hard to keep the United States from falling into the cesspit of European sophistication... and value it far more than they value the momentum necessary for us to win this war?
The hypocrisy which will now follow, will stain the very reporters who may have allowed this to go on... while hoding the torches and inciting the crowd that others may have allowed this to go on.
We need to demand without relent, that the Fox News network- the only hope for balance in this sick affair- dig into and expose not only the timing... but the fact that the ones in a position to stop this man earlier- may include more Democrats than Republicans; more reporters than interns.
Disgrace must be cleansed... and a number of news aqencies need now to tremble.
Some claim a double stand is being used, I say not.
The RATS are being held to the standards they espouse, the REPUBS those standards they espouse.
The double-standard being played out is the hypocrisy of someone like Nancy Pelosi's: "it is a nightmare of every child, parent and grandparent to learn that a child is being stalked on the internet by a person in a position of authority...that the Republican leadership knew about it for six months and characterized the inappropriate behavior as overly friendly and "acting as a mentor" and took no action to protect these underage children is abhorrent..."
Monica Lewinsky was not yet 20 when she began a sexual liaison with Bill Clinton...and that fact alone represents the double standard.
HOWEVER, I for one am sick of any excuse tying Foley's despicable behavior to that of the Democrats. I just got finished listening to Rush Limbull trying to deflect the criticism by rationalizing that the Dims would be celebrating Foley's actions. Personally, I believe that whether it is Foley, Livingston, Newt, or whomever... Persons who shatter the public trust like those I have mentioned have no place in politics!
Ka-blam!
So does Rush, what's your point?
I don't know of anyone who is defending the actions of Foley.
Yet, when breach of trust seems to have occurred, one party circles the wagons around the criminals and debates what the meaning of "is" is. Certain people fervently adore that party. They think it is admirable how well their politicians can lie.
The other major party notes a breach of trust, and cashiers even the Speakers of the House who do such things. They carry no water for those who violate the power entrusted to them. They understand the power that a person in power has over a younger, more vulnerable person.
The difference is that, instead of merely using such a concept to beat upon their opponents, and then rushing out the attack dogs to decry the politics of personal destruction that those trailer trash are spewing.... this other party maintains that no one is above the law, whether members of their own party... or even Democrats and journalists.
I suppose the question really becomes...
Which party do you want defending your grandchildren?
His daily rant implies that Foley ought to be held to the same standard of the Democrats...
I guess everyone hears what they want to hear.
However, when I hear Rush specifically say, as he did 27 minutes into the show, that he DOESN'T defend Foleys actions I'm hard pressed to put other words in his mouth.
He did point out, correctly, that these things don't occur in a vacuum. You sound as though that vacuum is sucking you in.
27 minutes exactly... My point is that Republicans have got to be better than Democrats in their private and public lives. It does conservatives no good when Mr. Foley does a Jerry Studds, or Mr. Newt and Mr. Livingston do what Bill Clinton do, or when Mr. Abramhoff corrupts the GOP as he does the Dims. When there is no comparison the distinction between what is good and bad behavior is blurred and the public has no good reason to vote for Republicans when it can vote for Dims and be content to let the government take care of their needs.
I have the advantage of listening on a 2 hour delay, and after reading your objections to what you thought you heard Rush say, I made note of the time he said what he did.
I agree with most of what you say. I also believe, as you might, that the death penalty should always be in the wings when these kinds of crimes against children are committed.
What I objected to was your portrayal of Rush's comments today.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.