Comments Posted By Fordson
Displaying 1 To 5 Of 5 Comments
http://www.thehill.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/100506/news2.html
Enjoy - if you can quit cryin' in your beer long enough...
Comment Posted By Fordson On 5.10.2006 @ 11:03
OY WHAT A MESS! FOLEY COVERUP AND THE GAMBIT THAT EXPOSED IT
Drewsmom, do you have ANY reason at all to believe that the Democrats knew about this before the GOP did?
The GOP had ample opportunity to ENSURE that this came out almost a year ago, and was blown over by now. They chose not to do that, because they thought they could bury it until after the election - and they didn't give a damn that this guy was going after kids in the meantime - or rather, they considered those pages collateral damage in the culture wars.
They had to destroy the village to save it...
Comment Posted By Fordson On 3.10.2006 @ 15:21
If you think you're being set up and you are saddled with a guy like Foley, the only way to combat that is to take the initiative and break the story on your own, and frame the dialogue - that way you control the timing - the "management," if you will.
You get to really be the party of family values, too - in more than the bumper-sticker sense. The raw fact is that instead of taking the appropriate action, the GOP thought they could hold this one until after the elections, if not forever - and they lost the ability to frame the issue and the moral high ground.
The Dems had this handed to them because the GOP tried to play the hand they were dealt the best way they could - not by anything else. So, now the Dems are bad and cynical because they supposedly took what they were given and played the hand THEY were dealt to THEIR best advantage?
You have to be a sucker to get sucker-punched, pal.
The fact that the GOP sat on dynamite even knowing the risk they were taking tells me is that they do not think there is ANY margin at all come election day.
Comment Posted By Fordson On 3.10.2006 @ 14:26
Spare ME, guy - this is apparently Abramoff, Part Deux to you - you are furiously spinning this to attempt to involve Democrats in any convoluted way possible, even if only by irresponsible, unsupported assertion.
Hey, when all you have is a hammer...
And don't give me any crap about when CREW first got these, or some such - you were referring to the probable gossipping among the pages themselves and to staffers, which if it occurred (not saying it didn't) OBVIOUSLY predated any third parties/blogs/MSM cluing in.
Pitiful.
This episode was not a put-up, not a set-up, not a sting, not entrapment. This was your basic unforced error.
If you know otherwise, then put up. Otherwise shut up.
Comment Posted By Fordson On 3.10.2006 @ 13:01
OK, I am struggling (and failing) to envision a scenario in which Democratic staffers find out about Foley but keep it quiet.
They were waiting for a more opportune moment, you say? Yeah, right - and risk being accused of complicity in this when it finally came out by keeping quiet about it in the meantime...?
These really salacious IMs were from 2003, right? So, if these had been discovered by Dems in time for the 2004 elections, do you figure they would have kept quiet about it?
Basically, do you really see this as the kind of issue in which the timing of the disclosure makes that big a difference in its effect, or do you figure this would be the kind of bomb the Democrats could drop any old time they found out about it, with similar effect? Yeah - I thought so...
Comment Posted By Fordson On 3.10.2006 @ 10:28
