Friday, November 03, 2006

House Ethics Committee Won't Release Report On Foley Before Election Day

The House Ethics Committee is not planning to issue a report on former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) before Election Day.

The lack of a report leaves voters to sort through conflicting Republican accounts -- House Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) vs. most other top House Republicans -- in deciding whether GOP leaders failed to protect teenage pages in their care.

Still, the damage from the scandal -- which briefly dominated headlines in September -- may have been the final nail in the coffin for GOP hopes of retaining control of the House.

"It demoralized Republicans and threw them off message," said John Pitney, Jr., a professor of politics at Claremont McKenna College in California. "They wanted desperately to talk about Osama Bin Laden and had to talk about Mark Foley. It may add to the sense that Republicans aren't managing the House very well."

Recent polls suggest that voters consider the Foley issue important. In a CNN poll last month, 55 percent said the Foley scandal would be very or extremely important in their vote. The same poll found that 57 percent thought Republican leaders covered up Foley's behavior.

12 Comments:

Blogger thewaronterrible said...

The masses will be thinking when they go to the polls on Tuesday: "if the Republicans have nothing to hide, than why are they suppressing the release of the report."
But this scenario is reliant upon the masses even knowing of the suppression story as referenced by JABBS.
The main stream media likely will opt not to give this story much coverage in the next few days, nor can we expect Republican blowhards like Limbaugh or Levin to make any noise, because all have decided a dumb joke from Kerry should be a more influential issue for the voters.

11:17 AM  
Anonymous helderheid said...

Well hell, let's scream about that. WHAT ARE THEY HIDING? Scream it!

6:31 PM  
Anonymous redqueen said...

They are such scum... accountability huh? Shyeah, right!
If you lurking freeps believe your party is the 'party of accountability' after all the crap these jerks have pulled, you really deserve to be thought of as 'useful idiots'... or no wait, what's the proper term? The one Strauss used? Sheep?

The left didn't start calling you lot sheep... it was your own leaders, the ones you blindly follow.

6:31 PM  
Anonymous jwirr said...

They have forgotten a small detail. People always thing the worst when they do not know the truth. Either way it works for us.

6:31 PM  
Anonymous zbdent said...

Hmm, unable to find any evidence of a Democrat being in on their secrets? big surprise there ... SARCASM

6:32 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Yes redqueen, Republicans do believe in accountability. That is why Foley is gone. Thrown out of office in disgrace and his political career is over. Can you say the same thing about people in your party who were actually caught having sex with interns and pages? I dont think so. In fact your demronrats were given standing ovations and re-elected numerous times. That is why the Demwits are the party of perverts. Evertime Clinton was caught being more of a pervert his poll numbers went up.

8:47 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Anonymous, why was Clinton a pervert?
Because he received BJs?
Because of other unsubstantiated claims of extramarital affairs?

Can you honestly say that you or people you know and love are so morally perfect that they would also not match the above descriptions and thus would also not be "perverts."

You can say it might be morally wrong not to be held accountable for such behavior, but "pervert"?

Did these "perverted Demonrats" you speak of have or pursue sex with underage pages and interns? Or was it merely consensual sex between two adults?
Are you sure you are making appropriate analogies to Foley?

Typical Republican. Nothing in context.

10:06 AM  
Anonymous trinity said...

Anonymous (the lib one) very stupidly asked...
"Did these "perverted Demonrats" you speak of have or pursue sex with underage pages and interns?"


Uh, the correct answer to your stupid, uninformed question, Anonymous, is a resounding YES!!! That was precisely Anonymous' (the conservative one) point. Cretin! :rolleyes:

11:41 AM  
Anonymous whoop4467 said...

To Trinity and Anonymous( the perverted conservative one). When any person or group of persons try to make everyone believe they are a high and mighty Christian, claim to live by high moral values much greater than other people and want to live up on a high pedestal, then when they fall (like Foley and the Ted Haggart of the evangelical group)they fall hard and far. If conservatives do not want to be judged by a different standard, then don't go through live claiming they are the only moral ones and everyone else is perverted or GODless. Please do not try to tell me that there are no gay republicans, that no republicans ever have an abortion, no republican never commits a crime, that no republican never has an extramarital affair, that conservatives never cheat on their taxes or that conservatives(republicans) are they only ones going to heaven.

3:41 PM  
Blogger thewaronterrible said...

Trinity, you are the one who is misinformed.
Sounds to me like you need to catch up on your reading.

Why don't you compare the list of Republican sex scandals:
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Republican_Sex_Scandals

With the "Top 10 Democratic Sex Scandals"
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1713550/posts

Here's another article that may interest you:
http://politics.netscape.com/story/2006/10/27/-republicans-involved-in-sex-scandals-as-much-as-democrats
WHAT DO WE FIND?!
THERE'S APPARANTELY MORE SCANDALS INVOLVING REPUBLICANS HAVING SEX WITH MINORS THAN DEMOCRATS HAVING SEX WITH MINORS.

What was that I heard from the conservative anonymous above. That Democrats are "perverts."
If that is true, it appears Republicans are even Bigger Perverts.
Like anonymous stated above: Nothing in context.

Trinity, if you're talking about Studds, like most of the Republican drones, the relationship was indeed consensual with a 17-year of legal age.
I lifted this from Wikipedia
"Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal, when he and
Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors – in Studds' case, a 1973 sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional page who was of the age of legal consent. The relationship was consensual (which made it legal, in accordance with state law) but presented ethical concerns relating to working relationships with subordinates."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds
Crane, by the way, was a REPUBLICAN accused of having illicut relations with a 17-year old girl.
For Democrats: that leaves Rep. Mel Reynolds convicted of having sex with a 16-year old campaign volunteer.
But in proper context, again compare the list of Republican sex scandals.

So Repukes, as Whoop pointed out, try to impose their moral values on everyone.
But they are only HYPOCRITES.

10:29 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

This is a non issue considering the fact that he is not in office anymore. You see when Republicans do wrong they do the right thing an get out of office. Cant be said for Demwits. Please move on.

5:12 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...

Ah, but it is the conservative bloggers who made this an issue on this blog, anonymous. And your comment about Republicans "doing the right thing" in these kinds of situations verses Democrats is fallacious.

9:09 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Listed on BlogShares