Posted on 10/04/2006 6:38:58 AM PDT by pabianice
In a curious way, the former Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) scandal will be to the Republican congressional leadership what the Monica Lewinsky imbroglio was to the Clinton presidency.
After all the boring scandals Whitewater, Hillarys investments, Paula Jones, Travelgate, the FBI files, the Rose Law Firms billing records the Lewinsky scandal seared into everyones consciousness. Those who failed to read the many volumes of Whitewater documents published by The Wall Street Journal or who despaired of following the paper trail that led to the Travel Office firings could easily grasp the simple facts of Clintons dalliance with Monica. Nothing complicated. Nothing subtle. Easy to understand. And so the Clintonian penchant for scandal became universally known and has been an enduring part of his legacy.
Now, after the lobbyist travel scandal and the Abramoff favors for legislators and the growth of earmarking and the financial scandals that have faced Reps. Randy Duke Cunningham (R-Calif.), Alan Mollohan (D-W.Va.), Jerry Lewis (R-Calif.), Bob Ney (R-Ohio) and a host of others, there is finally a simple sex scandal for everyone to focus upon. Nothing complicated about this one either.
It is not that the voters believe that all congressmen are child molesters, nor is it the details of what Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-Ill.) knew, and when he knew it, that makes this scandal so important. Its centrality stems from the sheer arrogance and hypocrisy it demonstrates both on the part of Foley himself and his colleagues who hushed up the affair until it burst onto the public stage.
One more pious member of the Moral Majority, one more legislator who makes a career out of fighting for values and crusading to protect children turns out to be a hypocrite and an abuser himself!
One more congressman, a sponsor of legislation to help children, a member of the caucus on abused and exploited children, has abused and exploited them himself. The gap between what Foley professes and what Foley did is so huge that you can sink the entire Republican majority in both houses into the gap.
And once again, the arrogant leaders of the Congress circled the wagons and looked the other way to avoid investigating or even recognizing the child abuser in their midst.
The details dont matter much. Who really cares if Hastert only knew that Foley had asked a kid for his photograph or if he knew more about the e-mails that were flying around. And who cares if the Democrats had their own part in the scandal by taking no action and protecting a colleague until right before the election?
None of that really matters.
What is important is that all of the venality and hypocrisy, so evident when congressmen hire their wives or freeload on trips paid for by lobbyists or cram the budget with unjustified earmarks or encourage their sons and daughters to become highly paid lobbyists cashing in on their special access all of those misdeeds, have suddenly acquired a poster boy: Rep. Foley!
Rep.Tom Delays (R-Texas) misdeeds are far too boring, in the same way that Whitewater was boring. The paper trail is hard to follow and the accusations murky.
But there is nothing murky about what Foley did and the voters will find the story interesting and easy to follow. Despite this, however, it is not Foley who is sinking his party. Its own misdeeds have already sunk it.
Bill and Monica. Foley and the pages. What we are watching now is the vindication of Karl Marx comment that history repeats itself the first time as tragedy, the second time as farce.
Dick Morris is a fool.
Red, then Haesert better find that reporter, to save his career.
Foley is a pious member of the Moral Majority?
He obtained good voting records from abortion and gay rights groups.
There should be a little truth-in-advertizing here. My question to Mr. Morris is how many RAT candidates is he working for this election cycle?
Gee, not one person, even the most left-wing of the democrat experts, think the democrats have any real decent chances of taking a senate majority in November. And yet you pick just enough seats in your prediction, which is probably based more on your wishful thinking than on any real evidence, that the republicans lose the majority. Yeah right.
um........
Can someone remind me about the last time Dick Morris correctly called anything, before it actually happened??
Didn't think so...
I don't believe DontBelieveAugPolls.
Can't believe you're still here. Republicans are a solid voting block and will NOT stay home because a typical Democrap dirty trick has caused a headline.
What are Democrats voting FOR? What are Republicans voting FOR? I predict the Republicans hold both houses.
LOL-I'd never heard of the guy, but then I'm from NJ-it's really hard to keep up with the corruption at home!
Napkin, he is a seminar democrat, straight from the Howard Dean Classrooms. Just like 2004.
If the Democrats can mutter threats about FCC licenses when ABC broadcasts Path to 911, what about the scandal of actually holding back information putatively bearing on the safety of minors for a year (that we know of) and dumping it in 2006 as an October Surprise!The FCC has some 'splainin' to do! I say they should be sued, and required to explain any rational reason why censorship/licensing of radio transmissions is legitimate under the First Amendment. The First Amendment says that the government can't require The New York Times to be objective - and then the FCC licensees turn around and claim that they are objective because "everyone knows" The New York Times is objective, and they mirror The New York Times.
Yes they do, specially the democrats. One of the main reasons that democrats lose election is that they underestimate the intelligence of the majority of voters. They believe that the majority of voters are very stupid and they will believe all the lies they tell them. In this case they believe that the majority of voters are going to give them control of Congress because in the minds of democrats the majority of voters are going to connect Foley to all the Republicans. As usual they are very wrong and they will pay the price for it come elections day, the real poll.
Yes, I think they do.
NEW DICK MORRIS COLUMN - DOOM!!! (Right before 2002 election--wrong again)
If there were no other issue on the table at all, the mere unacceptability of Pelosi as Speaker would get me out.
Okay, so I'm the fly in the ointment, but perhaps the Republican Party needs to lose control of the House and Senate...maybe it will give the party a real cold dose of reality that people want an Iraq policy of overwhelming force that crushes the insurgency, an immigration policy that says "no way" to any amnesty talk, a reasonable approach to stem cell research, a veto for bills that bust the budget, and a "hell no" attitude to Democratic pressure for more social programs such as No Child Left Behind, free eldercare medicines, and allowing foreign interests control certain homeland security protections.
Really? Name the 6 seats in the Senate that Republicans are going to lose.
Dickie Morris must of had some really good toe jam before he wrote this.
This is the same Dick Morris who said Bush lost on election morning 2004.
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.