Decision ‘08

What’s More Disgusting…

…the obscene behavior of Mark Foley, or the attempted smear by lefty bloggers such as Glenn Greenwald who are trying to link the GOP with the charge of indifference to child abuse?

It’s a trick question, of course; it’s a tie…both are beyond the pale…or you know what, scratch that…the smear is worse, because it’s motivated by pure partisan hatred. Very, very low…

UPDATE 8:43 p.m.: To be clear, it’s obvious that there may be a problem here (see also the MinuteMan). But consider the following statements from Greenwald:

As much as anything else, that is what this scandal is about — GOP House Leaders prancing around as the Protectors of our nation’s children from Internet Predators while, at the same time, apparently knowing that there was such a predator in their midst. And they not only failed to do anything about it, but they actively worked to conceal the behavior…

…Republicans decided in this bill that the “minors” we have to protect from predatory behavior on the Internet means anyone under the age of 18 years. Yet self-evidently lurid and sexually suggestive emails sent by a leading GOP Congressman to a 16-year-old page certainly didn’t seem to move them to do very much — other than work to conceal the behavior so that the predator could remain in Congress, surrounded by other vulnerable American children sent to Washington, D.C. by their parents.

Hey, Glenn, be sure to mention he was a GOP congressman a few more times, because really, that’s what this is all about: stroking the egos of your progressive followers by confirming what a bunch of hypocritical monsters conservatives are…

UPDATE 10:34 p.m.: Greenwald himself graces us with his presence in the comments. Let me take the opportunity to say what I said below here in the main post. I don’t really think Glenn’s behavior is worse than Foley’s; those words were overheated. I am disgusted, however, by his attempt to spin this before the facts are known. Here’s what the GOP leaders saw last year, according to the New York Times‘ account:

…[S]enior staff members in the speaker’s office first learned of the e-mail messages from Mr. Alexander’s office in the fall of 2005 and took steps to investigate.

Aides to the speaker and other Congressional Republican leaders said that the messages brought to their attention, though described as “overfriendly,” were much less explicit than the others that came to light after ABC News first disclosed the e-mail correspondence with Mr. Alexander’s page.

In those messages, sent after Hurricane Katrina, Mr. Foley asked about the well-being of the boy, a Monroe, La., resident, . He wrote: “How are you weathering the hurricane. . .are you safe. . .send me a pic of you as well.” The page sent the note to a former colleague, describing it as “sick.”

In another message Mr. Foley wrote, “What do you want for your birthday coming up. . .what stuff do you like to do.”

The exchanges that came to light after the new reports first appeared were far more graphic. When he was confronted about them on Friday with more graphic e-mail, Mr. Foley resigned. Republican leaders said they had not known about the other e-mail correspondence.

“What do you want for your birthday?…What stuff do you like to do?…Send me a pic”…and from this we have Greenwald saying, “Yet self-evidently lurid and sexually suggestive emails sent by a leading GOP Congressman to a 16-year-old page certainly didn’t seem to move them to do very much — other than work to conceal the behavior so that the predator could remain in Congress, surrounded by other vulnerable American children sent to Washington, D.C. by their parents.” And yes, my friends, that is indeed a smear, and I submit to you, a quite intentional one.

Sorry, Glenn, the facts may prove you right at some point, but they don’t yet. You should apologize for your rush to judgement, but I’m quite certain you won’t…

20 Responses to “What’s More Disgusting…”

1 Glenn Greenwald Says:
September 30th, 2006 at 9:36 pm
Mark - It looks like I’m not the only one who is as bad as Mark Foley. So is Captain Ed:

I cannot tell CQ readers how disgusted I am with Speaker Hastert. Reynolds is no fringe nutcase; he’s the man Hastert trusted to run the midterm re-elections of the Republican caucus. He has no reason to lie, but Hastert apparently did. This also calls into question Boehner’s earlier reversal, when he denied saying that he informed Hastert after Hastert denied knowing of Foley’s activities.

Hastert should have been a man from the beginning and admit that he knew about Foley. Now he has destroyed any credibility left in his Speakership, and he has only compounded the embarrassment for the GOP caucus. Foley’s actions reflect on Foley alone, but thanks to Hastert and perhaps Boehner, the aftermath will reflect on all Republicans in the House.

Republicans have to act swiftly to remove the stench of Foleygate from the party. They need to demand the resignation of Hastert as Speaker, as well as Boehner as Majority Leader if he lied to protect Hastert. Allowing Foley off the hook was a mistake in judgment, but this is a betrayal of those who trusted Hastert to lead the House with dignity, honesty, and integrity.

Captain Ed is honest enough to admit that the cover-up perpetrated — whereby they subjecte Congressional pages to a known predator — all in order to keep Mark Foley’s seat safely in the Republican column reflects very poorly on the entire GOP leadership. It’s too bad you’re not.
2 mtl Says:
September 30th, 2006 at 9:46 pm
unless you know what the specific knowledge that the republican leadership held since april and all elements of their decision, I would withhold judgment.
3 Mark Says:
September 30th, 2006 at 10:18 pm
Glenn, I’m not defending Hastert or Foley, or anyone else involved with this. And I don’t really think you’re as bad as Foley, as I’m sure you realize. However, it gets very tiresome to see how you take every incident and concoct a huge smear against conservatives and the right out of it.

As mtl says above, you don’t know all the facts, but you rush to judgment with headlines like ‘Predatorgate’. What, pray tell, is the great significance of this story at a time when we are at war in Iraq, when we face the prospect of a nuclear Iran, when we have an important election approaching?

This is a sad, lurid tale worthy of Nancy Grace, but it has ZERO applicability outside of the small group of people involved…
4 Mark Says:
September 30th, 2006 at 10:24 pm
Of course, mtl’s comment could have been directed at me, but the point is the same…we should all withhold judgement and quite trying to squeeze partisan victories out of personal tragedies. Also, sorry, I linked you with the ‘Predatorgate’ headline, and I noticed that it was actually Crooks and Liars…
5 mtl Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 1:11 am
Still trying to reconcile:

“The page sent the note to a former colleague, describing it as “sick.” ”

with the flirting of two homosexuals that was later released.
This was hardly a case of unrequited love as initally presented, apparently by the boy/or his representatives, the later stuff suggests a sexually confused kid, not someone who was freaking out.

Interesting rxn from the gay community-

gaypatriot- going straight to barney frank. Before Davos, I would have too, but barney has already been judged on the matter, and his later actions suggest a worthy guy.

andrew sullivan- ‘the stress of being in the closet made this man do it’. Sorry, I ‘ve met too many out of the closet homosexuals who want sex with as young as possible, the more innocent the better.

Glenn Greenwald, ‘I don’t know what the republicans leaders actually knew, I don’t know how they found out then, I don’t know if any laws were broken. Therefore the house leadership is responsible, for a deviant homosexual running rampant in DC.’
6 mtl Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 1:21 am
on a philosophical, I slept with a girl who was 16, when I was 16…

If I ever got aroused thinking about it, does it make me a pedophile?

or if the 16 year old had raped a 10 year-old…would he be the little lamb he is now?
7 mtl Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 1:31 am
It’s the whole Debra Lafave thing…

The kid there was 14, and I don’t find any crime with it, except ‘abuse of authority’. Yes, she is a sick girl, I have no pity for the kid, but a lot of envy.

The twist to this one, homosexuality, is just too rich. Good to see the disgust in glenn. my advice would be from the book of rove, ‘why peak too soon?’

if the charges he levels are correct, then he would want to keep it alive and have it peak at the end of october. It fizzles though…
8 HenryH Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 2:46 am
“However, it gets very tiresome to see how you take every incident and concoct a huge smear against conservatives and the right out of it.”

Are you trying to kill me or what? When am I ever going to stop laughing, after reading this? What on earth do conservatives spend all of their waking hours (for the past 14 years, at least) doing?

” I’m not defending Hastert or Foley”

Right. You are just equating someone who criticizes them with a child sex predator.

“What, pray tell, is the great significance of this story at a time when …we have an important election approaching?”

Gee, got me there.
9 too many steves Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 7:43 am
If that’s the game we’re playing then the Dems got there first, see: Rep. Gerry Studds and Rep. Barney Frank, both, sadly, from my home State of Massachusetts. Studds was censored and Frank was reprimanded. Neither admitted any wrongdoing and one, Frank, is still a memeber of the House. One rather significant difference in these cases from that of Foley - both Studds and Frank acted upon their impulses versus sending “overly friendly” emails.

Of course, all of this is disgusting, in various degrees, including, as Mark says, the attempts to paint with an overly broad brush the members of the offenders party.
10 Mark Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 10:28 am
Well, HenryH, I’ve already said that I don’t really equate Glenn with Foley, and that those words were overheated. However, you can take me at my word when I tell you I’m not defending Hastert or Foley; I think Foley needs professional help, and I think that the jury is still out on Hastert (i.e., did what he know in 2005 really call for additional action on his part?)…

In any event, to use this as a broad smear against the GOP is disgusting…
11 Dmac Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 11:00 am
HenryH should ask Glenn about the infamous sock - puppetry incident earlier this year. The guy lost all credibility after that tawdry incident -his observations are not worthy of discussion.
12 peter Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 11:19 am
Using the Foley incident to smear Republicans (of what? pederasty?) is as silly as smearing Democrats as foolish drunks after Wilbur Mills rolled around in the Tidal Basin with Fanne Fox. However, as noted above, the key thing is what the GOP leadership knew (or should have known) last year, and whether they ignored it to keep the seat.

Just when you thought things couldn’t get any more exciting, now this thing comes out of left field. Maybe that’s why it is said that politics ain’t beanbag.
13 Mark Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 11:36 am
Well, Peter, unless there’s a whole lot more to this story than we know already, this one will have a shorter shelf life than Dick Cheney’s hunting accident. It appears to this observer that the House leadership was made aware of some mildly flirtatious e-mails between a GOP congressman and a page, that they made some inquiries, were told by the parents that they wished to keep this private, and told the congressman to cease and desist.

Now, if it is shown that anyone knew of the much, much more salacious material revealed by ABC News, there might be a scandal here. On the face of what we know now, though, that appears not to be the case…
14 peter Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 4:32 pm
This could well be — but I think it hinges on what the House leadership should have known or done when they first learned that Foley had flirtatious emails with a page. Did they act like responsible leaders or did they turn a blind eye in order not to jeopardize a Republican seat? Does the leadership which fought dont-ask-don’t-tell practice that policy when its own are involved?

Maybe they did everything they reasonably should have done, but it’s too early to know –
15 Susan Says:
October 1st, 2006 at 5:21 pm
By all reports the original set of emails had nothhing actionable in them. The fact that anyone even spoke to Foley about them with nothing more than those snippets, shows that attention was paid to the incident. What more could have been done at the time?

Example: Foley writes “did you have fun at your conference…what do you want for your birthday coming up…what stuff do you like to do.”

Or this one: Foley writes, “how are you weathering the hurricane…are you safe…send me an email pic of you as well…”

Exactly how far up any chain can you take those two? How damaging is that? Were the Republican leaders supposed to also be “mind” readers? Is that what the left is suggesting? That those two emails would have caused them{Democrats} to potentially ruin a mans life? Would they ruin a mans life without a little more proof than that? Well, yeah, if it was a Republican, I guess they would.

Lastly, I find it really sad that people are more interested in playing politics than simply being happy that Foley has resigned.
16 fladem Says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 6:42 am
It is a sign of how far gone the right really is that you actually think there is a moral equivilence between what Mark Foley did and what Glen Greenwald wrote.

I guess the fact that what Foley did is a CRIME just completely escapes you…
17 Mark Says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 7:15 am
Jeez, I guess I’ll have to engage in a never-ending apology…I’ve said three times (well, four, including this time) now that I don’t really believe that’s the case, and that the words were overheated…but I guess I shouldn’t assume literacy on the part of everyone who visits here…
18 Decision ‘08 » Blog Archive » Not Playing That Game Says:
October 2nd, 2006 at 9:13 am
[…] See, what Mark Foley did was terrible and inexcusable, and everyone acknowledges that (and no, I’m not fooled by his rehab gambit), but this is what I was talking about when I talked about lefty smear jobs in another post, this time from DarkSyde at Daily Kos (with whom we’ve tangled before): House Republican leaders stand accused of allowing a sexual predator to work directly with adolescent boys and girls and lead a committee on child Internet safety, while those same Republicans knew he was making lewd and unwelcome advances to teenage boys for years. …To make an informed decision in the midterm elections, We the People, all of us, conservative, progressive, or indy, must have all the facts. […]
19 langs Says:
October 3rd, 2006 at 7:07 pm
Smear. Did someone say smear by Liberals.
Please If this was a Democart all we would hear about are the family values of the Republican party.

Rick Santorum would be screaming how Democrats and Boston are the root to all depravity.

You have got to be kidding me.

And far as the facts. I’ve got him.

He’s Gay and he likes boys.

If he wants to be gay thats his choic but as Republicans like to say its a law.
He can not have sexual contact with anyone under the age of 18.
Rather they are gay or not.

If you beleive this man has never slept with a boy you must beleive Bush and his Cabinet of Liars are telling you the truth.
20 Mark Says:
October 3rd, 2006 at 7:11 pm
Let’s see if I follow your logic; you don’t like Rick Santorum or George Bush, so this can’t be a Democratic smear…

Well, that’s bulletproof logic, all right; you got me…