tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32864421.post116006242767926743..comments2023-09-22T01:48:35.651-06:00Comments on alphabetgame.blogspot.com: Nothing like a miscreant Republican to make you want to vomit....Anonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04461864441036590820noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32864421.post-1160115388126136762006-10-06T00:16:00.000-06:002006-10-06T00:16:00.000-06:00The thing that you don't seem to get, Dr. Whoami, ...The thing that you don't seem to get, Dr. Whoami, is that Congressman Foley's sexually-explicit messages had nothing to do with the Democrats whatsoever, and that any attempt to overlook this matter in favor of finger-pointing in the Democrats' direction is nothing but political horse crap.<BR/><BR/>Read this, Dr. Whoeveryouare: The Democrats didn't make Foley send disgusting correspondences to all of those pages. Stop looking at them and look within.Timhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01868294762435144677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32864421.post-1160091443728430172006-10-05T17:37:00.000-06:002006-10-05T17:37:00.000-06:00At least liberals are finallyexhibiting a moral co...At least liberals are finally<BR/>exhibiting a moral compass<BR/>about something. I am sure<BR/>that they'd be equally outraged<BR/>if Rep. Mark Foley were a<BR/>Democrat.<BR/><BR/>The object lesson of Foley's inappropriate e-mails to male pages is that<BR/>when a Republican congressman is caught in a sex scandal, he immediately<BR/>resigns and crawls off into a hole in abject embarrassment. Democrats get<BR/>snippy.<BR/><BR/>Foley didn't claim he was the victim of a "witch-hunt." He didn't whine that<BR/>he was a put-upon "gay American." He didn't stay in Congress and haughtily<BR/>rebuke his critics. He didn't run for re-election. He certainly didn't claim<BR/>he was "saving the Constitution." (Although his recent discovery that he has<BR/>a drinking problem has a certain Democratic ring to it.)<BR/><BR/><B><BR/>In 1983, Democratic congressman Gerry Studds was found to have sexually<BR/>propositioned House pages and actually buggered a 17-year-old male page whom<BR/>he took on a trip to Portugal. The 46-year-old Studds indignantly attacked<BR/>those who criticized him for what he called a "mutually voluntary, private<BR/>relationship between adults."<BR/><BR/><BR/>When the House censured Studds for his sex romp with a male page, Studds —<BR/>not one to be shy about presenting his backside to a large group of men —<BR/>defiantly turned his back on the House during the vote. He ran for<BR/>re-election and was happily returned to office five more times by liberal<BR/>Democratic voters in his Martha's Vineyard district. (They really liked his<BR/>campaign slogan: "It's the outfit, stupid.") </B><BR/><BR/><BR/>Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy referred to Studds' affair with a<BR/>teenage page as "a brief consenting homosexual relationship" and denounced<BR/>Studds' detractors for engaging in a "witch-hunt" against gays: "New England<BR/>witch trials belong to the past, or so it is thought. This summer on Cape<BR/>Cod, the reputation of Rep. Gerry Studds was burned at the stake by a large<BR/>number of his constituents determined to torch the congressman for his<BR/>private life."<BR/><BR/><BR/>Meanwhile, Foley is hiding in a hole someplace.<BR/><BR/><BR/>No one demanded to know why the Democratic speaker of the House, Thomas<BR/>"Tip" O'Neill, took one full decade to figure out that Studds was<BR/>propositioning male pages.<BR/><BR/><BR/>But now, the same Democrats who are incensed that Bush's National Security<BR/>Agency was listening in on al-Qaida phone calls are incensed that<BR/>Republicans were not reading a gay congressman's instant messages.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Let's run this past the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals: The suspect sent an<BR/>inappropriately friendly e-mail to a teenager — oh also, we think he's gay.<BR/>Can we spy on his instant messages? On a scale of 1 to 10, what are the odds<BR/>that any court in the nation would have said: YOU BET! Put a tail on that<BR/>guy — and a credit check, too!<BR/><BR/><BR/>When Republicans on the Senate Judiciary Committee found unprotected e-mails<BR/>from the Democrats about their plan to oppose Miguel Estrada's judicial<BR/>nomination because he was Hispanic, Democrats erupted in rage that their<BR/>e-mails were being read. The Republican staffer responsible was forced to<BR/>resign.<BR/><BR/><BR/>But Democrats are on their high horses because Republicans in the House did<BR/>not immediately wiretap Foley's phones when they found out he was engaging<BR/>in e-mail chitchat with a former page about what the kid wanted for his<BR/>birthday.<BR/><BR/><BR/>The Democrats say the Republicans should have done all the things Democrats<BR/>won't let us do to al-Qaida — solely because Foley was rumored to be gay.<BR/>Maybe we could get Democrats to support the NSA wiretapping program if we<BR/>tell them the terrorists are gay.<BR/><BR/><BR/>On Fox News' "Hannity and Colmes" Monday night, Democrat Bob Beckel said a<BR/>gay man should be kept away from male pages the same way Willie Sutton<BR/>should have been kept away from banks. "If Willie Sutton is around some<BR/>place where a bank is robbed," Beckel said, "then you're probably going to<BR/>say, 'Willie, stay away from the robbery.'"<BR/><BR/><BR/>Hmmmm, let's search the memory bank. In July 2000, the New York Times<BR/>"ethicist" Randy Cohen advised a reader that pulling her son out of the Cub<BR/>Scouts because they exclude gay scoutmasters was "the ethical thing to do."<BR/>The "ethicist" explained: "Just as one is honor bound to quit an<BR/>organization that excludes African-Americans, so you should withdraw from<BR/>scouting as long as it rejects homosexuals."<BR/><BR/><BR/>We need to get a rulebook from the Democrats:<BR/><BR/>§ Boy Scouts: As gay as you want to be.<BR/>§ Priests: No gays!<BR/>§ Democratic politicians: Proud gay Americans.<BR/>§ Republican politicians: Presumed guilty.<BR/>§ White House press corps: No gays, unless they hate Bush.<BR/>§ Active-duty U.S. military: As gay as possible.<BR/>§ Men who date Liza Minelli: Do I have to draw you a picture, Miss<BR/>Thing?<BR/><BR/><BR/>This is the very definition of political opportunism. If Republicans had<BR/>decided to spy on Foley for sending overly friendly e-mails to pages,<BR/>Democrats would have been screaming about a Republican witch-hunt against<BR/>gays. But if they don't, they're enabling a sexual predator.<BR/><BR/><BR/>Talk to us Monday. Either we'll be furious that Republicans violated the<BR/>man's civil rights, or we'll be furious that they didn'tAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com