it must be time for Sun-Tzu:
… to subjugate the enemy’s army without doing battle is the highest of excellence.
Yes, it’s that time of year again.
History may not repeat itself… but it sure stutters.
I’m not sure I understand the logic. These disgruntled writers are going to express their revulsion with “Republicans in name only” by…
voting for Democrats?
When’d that get smart?
Like supporting Beria because you detest Dzerzhinsky.
I have more sympathy for people who are casting about for a third party. Yet, if Duverger was right — and the evidence strongly suggests he was — that option’s almost as good as actually voting for people who espouse the very things you are objecting to.
There’s a sad irony here. Mr. Foley shamed his constituents, damaged his party, acted reprehensibly… and yet, in his resignation, acted more honorably than has Mr. Hastert, or the political operatives who appear to have sat on this scandal (and damn the harm done to other pages exposed to Foley) until it was ripe for exploitation.
Meanwhile, the party of Kennedy, Studds, and Frank bids fair to capitalize on Republican moral revulsion.
Juvenal couldn’t do justice to this. How can I write further?
-
Yes, I am commenting to one of your political posts.
Don’t faint.
Look, I’d be willing to bet dollars to donuts you’ll find politicians engaging in inappropriate sexual behavior with pages on *both sides of the political fence.*
Foley just happened to get caught at it (and rightfully so, don’t misunderstand me).
Demonizing all of one party for the actions of a few is just as wrong as allowing one’s own party to do the demonizing.
Neither a RNC or a DNC card comes with a free pass to make sexual overtures to somebody in a weaker power position.
-
I have smelling salts handy, thankee. *smiles*
I am perfectly happy to bid Foley goodbye. His resignation was perhaps the only appropriate thing to come out of this, to date.
But the behavior of the people I linked to is still… illogical.
It is a matter of historical fact that neither Kennedy, Studds, nor Frank resigned from their seats after similar scandals. Nor were they pressured to do so by their party’s congressional leaders.
If you’re going to bolt one party because you argue the congressional leadership is somehow responsible, or complicit, in Foley’s behavior, it makes no sense to me to throw your support to a party who lionizes Studds, and retains both Kennedy and Frank in positions of congressional power… with the enthusiastic support of their party leadership.
Sauce for the goose? Sauce for the gander.
If we’re going to have resignations, let’s say goodbye to Jefferson, Kennedy, and Frank, because your fundamental principle is sound: Neither a RNC nor a DNC card comes with a free pass for any manner of egregious misconduct.
-
Did Kennedy, Frank or Studds solicit for sex with a minor?
If so, then yes.
If not, while you may find their actions distasteful, I fail to see where they equate. All comments about navy blue dresses aside, solicitation for sex with a minor does not legally equate to solicitation for sex with an adult.
Regardless of party affiliation.
As for the larger issue of bolting the party (whichever one that may be)…everyone’s got the last straw to go atop the camel’s back. Might not be the same straw, but it is there.
De Doc Supports
De Doc Recommends…
4 comments
Comments feed for this article
Trackback link: http://www.dedoc.net/wp-trackback.php?p=1079