The Foley Follies

ENOUGH!

Former Congressmen Mark Foley resigned. He's gone. The 2006 elections are not about Foley's foibles and Internet flings.

The IM chats between Foley and underage congressional pages are disgusting. Foley is an idiot.

It's as though he intended to commit professional suicide.

What was he thinking? Did he really believe that he could get away with such behavior and not have it come back to bite him?

It was right for him to resign. The guy needs help. If he's found guilty of criminal activity, then he's got to be punished accordingly, no Kennedy-style special treatment.

Of course, the libs aren't satisfied with Foley's resignation.

Brian Ross and ABC continue to post his IM chats for maximum ick effect. The site is filled with Brit tabloid-type fodder. (I wonder if the ABC News website is in violation of laws for publishing the stuff.)

The big question: Why would these three-year-old IMs and e-mails bubble to the surface now?

Drudge is reporting that The New York Times explains Ross' timing this way:

[Ross] said he learned about the e-mail messages in August, but was too busy with Hurricane Katrina and the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks to pursue them immediately...

What a load!

Did Ross take a two week vacation after the 9/11 anniversary?

This was a Left-wing hit job.

In my view, Foley destroyed himself. Ross and ABC would have nothing on him if he hadn't engaged in such behavior.

I don't object to Foley being outed as a creep. I object to the timing of this whole thing. I object to the Dems and their lib media mouthpieces trying to blame Republican leadership. It's Foley's scandal, not the Republicans' shame.

When Clinton was being "serviced" by Monica Lewinsky and lied to the world about it for eight months, the Dems circled the wagons and supported him. I think that was wrong. It showed how morally bankrupt and power hungry the Dems were then. They haven't changed.

What really bugs me is that some spineless Republicans and a more conservative publication are calling for Hastert's head.

The Washington Times suggests that Hastert should step down in "Resign, Mr. Speaker," its Tuesday editorial.

I like Mark Levin's response:

Sometimes the pressure is too much for some, who can't even wait for additional information to come to light before drawing attention to themselves. And, of course, the Washington Times, which is despised by the rest of the media, will miraculously become an important authoritative source — representative of conservatives and conservative thought. Unfortunatley, I expect there will be more of this, and I consider it utterly irresponsible.

Levin also lends some perspective on how the Republicans deal with scandal versus how the Dems react.

[T]he Democrats hang tough, through thick and thin. They slobber all over Bill Clinton, who actually had sex with a 19-year-old intern and abused his office and women left and right. William Jefferson, a Class-A crook, remains in office with no effort by his party to expel him because in a close election, Nancy Pelosi needs him. West Virginia’s Bob Mulholland has become wealthy in office, apparently helping to funnel money to his favorite causes. Sen. Bob Menendez apparently rented property to a nonprofit agency which he helped to receive federal funds. Cynthia McKinney assaulted a police officer, and she wasn't expelled. (The voters fired her.) John Murtha was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Abscam scandal, yet is now touted as the future House Democrat leader. And the media's favorite Republican, John McCain, was caught up in the Keating Five scandal. We have leakers, womanizers, boozers, and anti-Semites in Congress, not to mention Ted Kennedy.

...I’ve been around Washington too long to know that scandals of this sort don’t just happen. Just ask Karl Rove and Lewis Libby. Three years later, most of us are appalled at the Fitzgerald investigation. But when Libby was indicted, many dismissed questions about the investigation as irrelevant to the charges.

Clearly, the double standard is stunning.

Ross' excuse that he was busy with other things so he held back on the Foley story is stunningly lame.


________________________________

As I write this, I'm listening to Chris Matthews on The Tonight Show Monday. (Why is he is on with Leno SO often? Very annoying.)

Matthews spewed the Left's talking points and Leno egged him on. (Extremely annoying.)

In addition to predicting that the Dems will win the House and saying that 4 out of 5 Iraqis want the U.S. to leave Iraq now, blowhard Matthews equated the Foley scandal with the sexual abuse scandal of the Catholic Church.

Good grief.

Matthews' depth of understanding and knowledge of politics is wading pool shallow. He's a propagandist for the Left.

And Leno is too dim to counter Matthews' inanity.