[ModelBreaker]

How odd, this controversy: traditional moralists like some of the Republicans are defending a predatory pederast who seems to be infatuated with teen-age Congressional pages who are entrusted as near children to his care, . . .

Huh? I haven't heard one R defending Foley.

[vbmoneyspender]

Oh the irony. Hanson writes this:

It would be as if I wrote a history of the Peloponnesian War and, to support my most controversial points, added footnotes that stated “A manuscript in the Vatican,” or “Private letter to author from anonymous Greek shepherd attesting a stone altar in his field”

And then he follows up his complaints about Woodward making unsupported allegations against Rumsfeld with his own unsupported allegations against Republicans.

[Sans-Culotte]

Huh? I haven't heard one R defending Foley.

I think Hanson must have skimmed the news. I believe he has confused "defending Foley" with "defending Hastert".

This column was far from a home run. It was a long fly ball that went foul at the last moment.