I am piling on in the Mark Foley matter.
Where the fuck were the victims five years ago when this started?
Why didn't they come forward then so Foley could be diselected by his constitutents?
That is the crux of the matter to me. I've already commented over at Hoosier Illuminati why I don't think the leadership should be pilloried for this, other than the fact that Hastert really needs to go just on general principles. Blaming the leadership is convenient. The fact that Foley lied to the leadership, who in the final analysis aren't Foley's mom and dad, let alone his boss with the power to fire him, doesn't seem to mean anything to the other side.
No, to the contrary, this little episode was cherished and allowed to flourish by the other side, so it could be used as an October Surprise. Otherwise it seems like the victims would have come forward much sooner.
That's what I think. But I put very little past the Dems in their current incarnation. They have no ideas, so they resort to the politics of personal destruction so they can get back into power and continue to lead us nowhere.
Note the quote I've just put into my blog heading. "Elphaba -- Where I'm from, we believe all sorts of things that aren't true. We call it history." The Wizard of Oz as portrayed in Wicked is the quintessential liberal Democrat. He wants everyone to have everything he never had, regardless of the cost or who might suffer in the process.
When I saw the play, I thought, Bill Clinton could play this role without makeup.
The Democrats want the Emerald City. The Republicans want the Shining City on a Hill.
That's why I still hold my nose and vote Republican.
MORE: Just read Andy McCarthy on Hastert, on the Corner.
Oddly, under circumstances where Foley is now gone because he could not last 30 seconds as an elected Republican once his conduct was revealed, we are now observing a frenzied call for Hastert's head for not doing enough to investigate behavior that actually pales in comparison to Clinton's. That frenzy, without a hint of irony or embarrassment, is being stoked by some of the very same people who affirmatively minimized conduct that was orders of magnitude worse than Foley's in order to close ranks around a much more consequential public official who, far from being gone in 30 seconds, was enabled by this support to cling to office for years, finish his term, and remain the Democratic Party's top star.Indeed, the Foley scandal is now said to be a rationale for shifting power from those who avoided learning tawdry facts to those who well knew tawdrier facts and said they were private matters that, in any event, were no big deal.
What's wrong with this picture?
Precisely. Although I still think Hastert needs to go -- but after the election, one way or the other.
