Mini-report

September 29, 2006

Today’s edition of items that definitely deserve attention, but which I just didn’t get to today.

* In Mark Foley’s (R-Fla.) district, the latest news is Republicans cannot replace his name on the ballot.

* The award for the most disturbing response to the Foley controversy comes by way of the fine folks at RedState, who had a post saying, “I will refrain from pointing out that Barney Frank is still in Congress and I will refrain from daring to suggest that this is just another example of why the policy against gay scoutmasters in the Boy Scouts is a good one.” (The post has since been taken down.)

* Meet Tim Mahoney, Foley’s Democratic opponent.

* Tony Snow denies that the White House is in denial.

* Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) delivered an odd speech today about Dem “obstructionism,” which eventually led him to describe himself as an obstructionist. Bizarre.

* For Fox News president Roger Ailes to complain about anyone leveling an “assault on all journalists” is deeply ironic.

* Iraqi oil revenues were supposed to be the key to reconstruction and a strong Iraqi economy. They’re not.

* The WaPo reported, “A federal judge in Idaho has ruled that former attorney general John D. Ashcroft can be held personally responsible for the wrongful detention of a U.S. citizen arrested as a ‘material witness’ in a terrorism case.” This is worth keeping an eye on.

* Have you noticed that Michael Kinsley’s best columns are on stem-cell research?

* George Allen, still a racist — and a schmuck.

* Hillary Clinton, still treated unfairly by the media.

If none of these particular items are of interest, consider this an end-of-the-day open thread.

I don’t understand why the GOP can’t use another name on the ballott? Wasn’t Lautenberg allowed to use his name on the ballot after Sen Torricelli bowed out late in his campaign in ’02 (even after a couple lawsuits were filed by the GOP)?

  • So a typical Republican hypocritical child-molester can’t be replaced? Awwwww… too bad. Particularly since this PoS was one of the leading “moral lights” in the Shiavo trainwreck, and used to be a darling of the Christian Right.

    But then again Publick Moralist always has been a synoym for “do as I say, not as I do.”

    And there is a huuuuuuuge difference between some closeted Republican pervert and a Democrat who has never made any secret of who he is. But then since Red Staters are all home-schooled by illiterate bimbos, what can you expect?

  • Since it looks like the Repubs will have to concede Foley’s seat, was this seat considered in play or was it a safe Repub seat? Anybody know?

  • Re: Allen the schmuck. You need to upgrade your coverage of “spitgate.” Those who don’t click through to the link are really missing something –

  • “The award for the most disturbing response to the Foley controversy…”

    I wonder what that genius had to say after the creep in Colorado took a bunch of school girls hostage, assaulted them and then shot one before making the world a better place by shooting himself.

    It might be disturbing but I’m sure it isn’t unique. That is just one of several thousand fuckwits who are so eager to hate that they refuse to get a clue. By their logic all men should all be locked away from the rest of humanity because they are responsible for most violent crimes.

  • George Allen manages to give a wholly new and original definition to the term “a piece of work” doesn’t he?

    But then again, he doesn’t seem any different than any other Republican pile of dog excrement I’ve ever known.

  • I don’t understand why the GOP can’t use another name on the ballott? Wasn’t Lautenberg allowed to use his name on the ballot after Sen Torricelli bowed out late in his campaign in ’02 (even after a couple lawsuits were filed by the GOP)? JRS, Jr.

    Election laws are state laws. Foley is from Florida and Torricelli is from New Jersey. Without addressing the question of whether you have your facts right about New Jersey, here is the relevant information on Florida election laws (via TPMuckraker)

    In the event that death, resignation, withdrawal, removal, or any other cause or event should cause a party to have a vacancy in nomination which leaves no candidate for an office from such party, the Department of State shall notify the chair of the appropriate state, district, or county political party executive committee of such party; and, within 5 days, the chair shall call a meeting of his or her executive committee to consider designation of a nominee to fill the vacancy…. If the name of the new nominee is submitted after the certification of results of the preceding primary election, however, the ballots shall not be changed and the former party nominee’s name will appear on the ballot. Any ballots cast for the former party nominee will be counted for the person designated by the political party to replace the former party nominee. [my emphasis]

    Now that wasn’t really that hard to understand was it?

    We really have to get ourselves some smarter trolls.

  • A new candidate can run in his place, just with Foley’s name on the ballot. All votes for Foley will be counted for the new candidate.

  • JRS Jr,

    Lautenberg and Torricelli were in NJ. This is in Florida. The laws concerning ballot deadlines and provisions for House and Senate races are set by the states per the U.S. Constitution. See also the restrictions around removing Tom DeLay’s name from the ballot in Texas.

  • He is not a child molestor based on what we know. Age of consent in DC is 16. !6 year olds are not children in any event. Congressmen shouldn’t seduce them but neither is it child molestation.

  • goofy,

    In Florida, where the e-mails were sent from, the age of consent is 18. The real question is what is in the other e-mails that apparently haven’t been released. The ones that I’ve read are creepy but seem to fall short of any criminal intent.

    But none of that really matters. A conservative Republican active in campaigns against child exploitation sending these kinds of e-mails to a young boy? Remember, Foley didn’t withdraw based on criminal charges, he just withdrew. I’m guessing 1) he just knew the writing was on the wall because of how this would look to his constituents and 2) there’s more than just the creepy but relatively innocuous e-mails currently released.

  • He withdrew because a conservative district will not reelect a gay man attempting to seduce a congressional page. Massachusetts liberals will and have.

    Reps. Dan Crane (R-Ill.) and Gerry Studds (D-Mass.)
    The House ethics committee on July 14, 1983, announced that Crane and Studds had sexual relationships with teenage congressional pages – Crane with a 17-year-old female in 1980, Studds with a 17-year-old male in 1973. Both admitted the charges that same day, and Studds acknowledged he was gay. The committee voted to reprimand the two, but a back-bench Georgia Republican named Newt Gingrich argued that they should be expelled. The full House voted on July 20 instead to censure the two, the first time that ever happened for sexual misconduct. Crane, married and the father of six, was tearful in his apology to the House, while Studds refused to apologize. Crane’s conservative district voted him out in 1984, while the voters in Studds’s more liberal district were more forgiving. Studds won reelection in 1984 with 56 percent of the vote, and continued to win until he retired in 1996.

    The reference to Barney Frank that everyone is freaking about refers to this scandal:

    Rep. Barney Frank (D-Mass.)
    In response to a story in the Aug. 25, 1989, Washington Times, Frank confirmed that he hired Steve Gobie, a male prostitute, in 1985 to live with and work for him in his D.C. apartment. But Frank, who is gay, said he fired Gobie in 1987 when he learned he was using the apartment to run a prostitution service. The Boston Globe, among others, called on Frank to resign, but he refused. On July 19, 1990, the ethics committee recommended Frank be reprimanded because he “reflected discredit upon the House” by using his congressional office to fix 33 of Gobie’s parking tickets. Attempts to expel or censure Frank failed; instead the House voted 408-18 to reprimand him. The fury in Washington was not shared in Frank’s district, where he won reelection in 1990 with 66 percent of the vote, and has won by larger margins ever since.

    http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/congress.htm

  • Goofy,

    I simply do not get your point. Are you saying that Foley shouldn’t have resigned? Do you think what you’ve read of his emails is inappropriate? My guess is the story will only get worse from here and that he’s trying to end it here and now so as to avoid further embarrassment. The main outrage from my perspective is the hypocrisy of the whole thing. I don’t know Foley from Adam, but my guess is that he’s been in lock step with the Republican Party for the last 14 years on issues around homosexuality. I also would guess that if you’d asked him 3 weeks ago he’d have said sex between a 50 year old man and a 16 year old boy/man would be inappropriate. If that 16 year old worked for the 50 year old… well I’m sure you can guess his answer.

  • He should resign because his conduct is wrong for a Congressman. I am pointing out the hypocracy of Democrats who are calling him a child molestor when one of their own served for 12 more years after his similar and maybe worse scandal. There is no indication Foley was succesful in his advances. I also do not like calling men pediophiles for advances on 16 or 17 year olds. A big difference in younger children and 16 or 17 year olds.

  • I know it’s Friday, but I think the Ailes mess is going to gain some traction—not because he’s standing up for all journalists9he’s not), but because it exposed the “chink in the armor” at FOX. As with any bully, push back hard enough, and they’ll play the victim card.

    “MY PRESIDENT” has shown the world how to bring FOX to its knees—and Roger Ailes damned well knows it….

  • We’re just getting the tip of the iceberg on that pedophile, Foley. These guys don’t resign for nothing.

    Democrats can’t be hypocrites for 6 more years. That’s because Repubs are that far ahead in hypocrisy.

    I always picture trolls with a Chris Wallace smirk.

  • With respect to Studds:

    As the House read their censure of him, Studds turned his back and ignored them. Later, at a press conference with the former page standing beside him, the two stated that what had happened between them was nobody’s business but their own.

    Another reference is here.
    Sounds like goofy is comparing apples to oranges.

  • Foley’s conduct was inappropriate no matter what. When the person receiving pressure is so young and there’s such a disparity in age, that detracts from consent; and when the person putting forth the pressure is the other’s superior– someone you ordinarily owe deference to and who can affect your future– that takes away from consent; and when the person who is putting forth the pressure keeps up with it even after getting some no signals, that magnifies the degradation to consent that the factors besides may have created. But even if this person welcomed the advances it would have been inappropriate, and even if Foley thought he had reason to think the guy would have been alright with it, the congressman shouldn’t have done it.

  • From:

    George Allen, still a racist — and a schmuck.

    This cut and paste:

    “He looked so tall as he came out of the house-on-wheels. He was wearing a nice suit and his hair was neatly combed. He smiled and worked his way into the platoon of defense workers, who seemed to be all men.”

    Emphasis added to the above…

    Why?

    To distinguish “platoon” from “spittoon.”

    Ya’all know they have dif’front genders…. dontcha ya’all?

  • In regards to goofy’s comments about the 1984 page scandals involving Studds and Crane, Crane’s district did not vote him out simply because he had been involved with an underage page. I know because I lived in the district at that time. He was attacked in the closing weeks of the campaign because he lost his committee assignments as a result of his official House censure that he received as a result of his offense. Losing a seat on the Agriculture Committee when you represent a heavily rural district is very bad form.

    To be very honest, having grown up in rural downstate Illinois, there used to be an ambiguous morality regarding relationships between relationships between those under the age of consent and those over the age of consent. It was always legally statutory rape if sex actually happened, it often happened, and it was sometimes objected to and sometimes not. Also, as I remember, by the early 80s the age of consent was 16.

    I think many were scandalized by his TEARS of apology as by the reason for the censure. No one would have said that he didn’t accept responsibility and show repentance for his actions. But it was duly noted that he (as well as the other Crane brothers including Phil) had always portrayed himself as a very morally righteous man, a portrayal that henceforth seemed pretentious and hypocritical. But it was considered very bad form and very objectionable negative campaigning to attack him on that. Instead in the last two to three weeks, the attack message focused solely on his failure to represent the district by losing his clout and committee assignments. The “sex scandal” itself was NOT discussed.

  • Well, until now I had not realized just what a sorry excuse for a man George Felix Allen Junior was.

    And now I understand why some many Republican’ts imagine him to be the perfect successor to Boy George II.

    I may have to start referring to him as Boy George III.

    • Comments are closed.