And to my original point about Foley’e “outing” to the public and how that in particular hurts the Rep base.

Either you’re denser than I thought, or spinning like a top, or simply disingenuous.

For starters:
the Dems previous scandals aren’t the issue to STs post here, “so enough with the they do it too” arguments.

No one here is making the “they do it too” argument. If we were, we’d be saying Foley should keep his seat, since that’s what you guys did when Studds was caught with his hoo-hoo where it didn’t belong. So go put your straw man away, OK?

Next:
You’re trying to tell me that Republican voters in that district would rather send a Democrat to congress than simply replace CRANE with another Republican during a Primary challenge? Are you serious here?
What, you’re now challenging the election returns? The scandal broke post-primary, as I recall, and the voters turned their back on Crane. Again, you seem incapable of grasping the point: GOP voters will reject pedophiles and perverts. Democrat voters embrace them. That’s central point I made in the original post. It’s the history and the track record, and no matter how you try to spin it, you have shown nothing in any of your posts to disprove it.

Then we have this:
The Republicans run on being the party of morality, so when immorral acts are uncovered, they can and should be tagged as hypocrites. For the Repubs, this includes not only innappropriate sexual conduct but the perps sexual preferece as well. So this scandal is kind of a double-whammy, you might say.
Basically, this is a backhanded way of saying that the Dems are notmoral creatures, so in your view anything they do is OK – child molesting, rape, perjury, and maybe even murder. You wanted to know how I sleep knowing Tom Delay is a Republican. Maybe you can tell us how you sleep knowing your team finds nothing wrong with those.

Oh yes, and I notice you tried again to slip in the gay-bashing…aren’t you guys supposed to be the tolerant ones?

Further:
Since Hastert has admitted he knew about problematic IMs at least a year ago,
No, he knew about the Emails a year ago. The Emails that the FBI did not find actionable. So, no, given current evidence, I’ll make no such call.

Regarding Jefferson:
the Dems do what the legally/procedurally can. As I understand it, the whole Rep controlled House can vote for censure or for Jefferson’s removal. Why aren’t the Repubs calling a vote? Instead they come to his defense when the FBI searches his office.

What, all the Dems in Congress came down with broken arms at the same time? Why didn’t YOUR guys call for censure or removal – unless they approve? I’ll grant you that Hastert should not have defended Jefferson from the FBI searches – that was plain dumb.

Finally:
It seems to me much more egregious for an elected official, who’s job it is to oversee the conduct of HR reps (Hastert), to cover-up or ignore these warnings than it is for some politically motivated group (or newspaper) to hold on to information for a story. Do you at least agree with this?
There’s no evidence of a cover-up on Hastert’s part, so your question is hypothetical. FBI checked the Emails and did nothing.

If it turns out that Hastert did know about the IMs and did nothing, then he should go.

But also, if a Democrat group knew about them, and endangered other pages by sitting on them, they’re just as negligent.

So let’s sum up the thread, because I’m done with you here.

- You have defended Barney Frank allowing a prostitution ring to be run out of his basement.

- You have defended Studds’, the admitted child molester.

- I’ve invited you to tell us whether there is ANY crime a Democrat might commit that would cause you to call for him to resign. You haven’t been able to specify even one.

In short, you’ve given a marvelous testament to my original point: we want our wrongdoers out of Congress; you want yours to stay. Or maybe go to the White House.

You are shameless and in top spin form. Yes, the people who held the story for maximum political gain need to be prosecuted, convicted, and sent to prison for aiding and abetting this. You see a crime, you report it or be an accessory. It is that simple, except to a partisan, moral relativist like you.

Now, this is a manufactured scandal where the media and the Democraps like you are telling half-truths and only looking for Democrats to gain power.

I think everyone who applauded Gerry Studds molesting of Pages should be removed from Congress immediately, don’t you, tom??? Disagreeing proves without a doubt that you are a hypocrite, first class, tom.

And when forced to, they’ll stage half-hearted faux ‘punishments’ (example: changing Jefferson’s committee assignments – at least until they’re sure no one’s watching).

My point here is that the Dems do what the legally/procedurally can. As I understand it, the whole Rep controlled House can vote for censure or for Jefferson’s removal. Why aren’t the Repubs calling a vote? Instead they come to his defense when the FBI searches his office.

This should be clear, even to you: anyone, from either party, who sat on Foley’s IMs instead of contacting the proper authorities should be out of a job. You can let us know when you’re willing to say the same thing about a Democrat in analogous cases. Till then, we have every reason to treat you as just another partisan troll here.

I agree here, and am willing to say that if a Democrat in congress knew about the IMs/emails/problems here than they should receive just punishment. But I think investigations that no Dems knew because the Repubs tried to sweep it under the Rug. The only only Dem on the Staff Page Committee (or whatever its called) has already said that he was never briefed on these problems. Look at your posts, the knee-jerk reaction here is to blame everything on the Dems. It’s the timing, they (political group and newspaper) waited to hold this info, etc. So what? They are not elected officials. They have a political agenda. It seems to me much more egregious for an elected official, who’s job it is to oversee the conduct of HR reps (Hastert), to cover-up or ignore these warnings than it is for some politically motivated group (or newspaper) to hold on to information for a story. Do you at least agree with this?

But back to the point of my original post: The fact that Foley is gay is as much an issue as his conduct. It’s these supposed “values” issues that are important to the Republican base. Sanity referenced an interesting article upstream in this thread. An excerpt was:

“The reality is that Democrats seem to get away with more” says Chuck Todd, editor in chief of the Hotline, a daily political journal. “They can have an affair and bail [themselves] out. There’s a lower threshold for Republicans. I guess it’s more of a hypocrisy thing” he adds, because such scandals put Republicans at odds with the party’s socially conservative image.

The Republicans run on being the party of morality, so when immorral acts are uncovered, they can and should be tagged as hypocrites. For the Repubs, this includes not only innappropriate sexual conduct but the perps sexual preferece as well. So this scandal is kind of a double-whammy, you might say.

Since Hastert has admitted he knew about problematic IMs at least a year ago, shouldn’t you be calling for Hasterts resignation like Tony Blankley is?

“One of his staff”? LOL! Try a male prostitute he hired, who turned around and ran a prostitute ring from Franks’ basement? Franks denied knowing about it, of course, was reprimanded by Congress, and has gone on to get re-elected several times. Don’t lecture about facts unless you actually KNOW them.

“Second, being gay does not mean someone is a child molester. They are two seperate things.”

Wow. What a revelation!

“Thirdly, alcohol has nothing to do with Foley being a molester. Stop giving alcohol a bad name.”

As far as I can tell, Foley seems to be the only one implying this. Pass your message along to him.

“Sister T, I’m telling you this will only be over when Hastert, Reynolds, Boehner, and Shimkus have all resigned their positions of power. But you guys keep trying to defend them. It makes the Democratic Party look really good.”

Don’t need your permission to defend people who at this point I feel are getting too much of the ‘blame’ for this. And as far as making the Dem party “look good” about the only way that would happen is if 98% of Dems resigned from Congress.

Second, being gay does not mean someone is a child molester. They are two seperate things.

Thirdly, alcohol has nothing to do with Foley being a molester. Stop giving alcohol a bad name. I have had many a drink and I never wanted any young teenagers after imbibing (nor before).

Finally, this WILL bring down the Republican control of Congress. As it should. And the longer the House Leadership stays the worse it will be. They cannot get over on this one. No matter how hard you try and spin it your stuck because the whole spectrum of the American public understands this issue. As Mr Carvelle might say – Its the cover-up stupid.

Sister T, I’m telling you this will only be over when Hastert, Reynolds, Boehner, and Shimkus have all resigned their positions of power. But you guys keep trying to defend them. It makes the Democratic Party look really good.

Sorry, pal, you did switch topics. My point was that perverts of all stripes and all parties deserve condemnation. All you’ve offered in response is a steady stream of selective indignation – if a Republican does something wrong, hang him, but if it’s a Dem, well, you’re happy to look the other way.

Regarding the Crane vs. Studds comparison, you lost sight of the main point: voters in a heavily GOP district sent Crane packing, but voters in a heavily donk district sent Studds back for another 6 terms and a hefty pension.

You still justify child abuse, as long as it’s done by a Democrat.

Interestingly, you couldn’t come up with one crime that would justify removing a Dem from office. Seems like it’s a fair statement that Dems think any act is acceptable if done by one of the party faithful.

And that’s the bottom line, which goes right back to my original post. Republicans want anyone who has the taint of scandal, even if only suspected (Delay, for example). Dems, on the other hand, will give standing ovations to child molesters (Studds). And when forced to, they’ll stage half-hearted faux ‘punishments’ (example: changing Jefferson’s committee assignments – at least until they’re sure no one’s watching).

This should be clear, even to you: anyone, from either party, who sat on Foley’s IMs instead of contacting the proper authorities should be out of a job. You can let us know when you’re willing to say the same thing about a Democrat in analogous cases. Till then, we have every reason to treat you as just another partisan troll here.

And no, you probably should *not* mention Dan Crane because it does *not* prove your point. He was *narrowly* defeated by his Democrat opponent in 1984. This leads me to beleive that he still retained most of his support from “rank and file” Republicans.

Duke plead guilty to taking millions in bribes! Who, in any party, would stand up for someone like that? He was hardly forced out by his own party. His home was raided in July 2005 by Federal agents. Over 5 months later (still in office) he plead guilty on Nov 28th and finally resigned a week after that.

Regarding Jefferson, soon after this scandal broke, the House Democratic Caucus voted to present a proposal for Jefferson’s removal from the Ways and Means Committee and he was removed from it. He hasn’t plead guilty, however, and won’t step down from his House seat. I don’t think that’s a reflection of any party’s support of illegal and illicit activity. As you say, like Delay, “he’s been convicted of nothing”.

As far as Delay goes- if you can honestly convince yourself that this guy is not corrupt, then good for you. Sleep well.

We have no problem with homosexuals, in or out of the party and if you cared to read even a small portion of the responses and ST’s comemnts before you got diareah of the mouth, you would recognize that it is not about homosexuality in Foley, but his inappropriate actions concerning a 16 year old page, the timing of it all, who “released” the 3 year old IMs after the emails were not enough, the call for Hasterts resigning from his post, plus more.

Where in all that, and all that we discussed, have you gotten any kind of response about homosexuals in the republican party and we were getting our “knickers in a bunch”?

As I said, your comments were to try and stir up trouble, and cause the discussion to veer off into some kind of bashing of homosexuals.

Well bud, ain’t gonna happen, cause that is not what we are about and it has not been any part of this discussion.

Can’t even say “Nice Try”, cause it was a poor attempt to change the discussion.