Rhymes With Right - Washington Times -- Off With His Head
Google
 
Web rhymeswithright.mu.nu

October 03, 2006

Washington Times -- Off With His Head

Proving that the conservative paper is just as capable as the liberal media of entering the Alice in Wonderland world of "First the sentence, then the trial", the Washington Times has called for the resignation of Speaker Dennis Hastert over the Tom Foley case.

The facts of the disgrace of Mark Foley, who was a Republican member of the House from a Florida district until he resigned last week, constitute a disgrace for every Republican member of Congress. Red flags emerged in late 2005, perhaps even earlier, in suggestive and wholly inappropriate e-mail messages to underage congressional pages. His aberrant, predatory -- and possibly criminal -- behavior was an open secret among the pages who were his prey. The evidence was strong enough long enough ago that the speaker should have relieved Mr. Foley of his committee responsibilities contingent on a full investigation to learn what had taken place, whether any laws had been violated and what action, up to and including prosecution, were warranted by the facts. This never happened.

I'm sorry -- the initial emails were not sufficient to take any such actions. Indeed, media outlests that had them found them to be insufficient to even write stories about them. Rather than blame those who found the emails "overly friendly" until the disgusting IMs came out last week, I think it is more important to find out who has had the clearly inappropriate IMs and why they were held back from the authorities untim now. After all, some of them date back a couple of years, which means that they, not the Speaker or any other member of the leadership team, endangered every page.

By the way, what did the initial FBI inquiry into the initial batch of emails conclude last summer?

An FBI official, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the investigation is ongoing, said the field office concluded that the e-mails "did not rise to the level of criminal activity." The bureau announced Sunday that it would begin a preliminary investigation into Foley's more explicit electronic exchanges with teenagers.

In other words, the FBI concurred with the judgement made by Hastert and others (including members of the media who had the emails but chose not to run them) -- there was nothing in the emails that needed to be pursued. So what you had with the original batch of materials was a unanimous conclusion by the House Leadership, the FBI, and the press that there simply was not anything in the emails that rose to the level of misconduct.

The release of the IMs changes that.

Unfortunately, it may be a while before the results of the investigation of this matter come out. Let's behave like rational adults and wait for those results rather than engaging in hysterical recriminations over a couple of emails (absent the IMs) that seem less like a sexual predator seeking a victim and more like a responsible adult expressing concern about a young man whose family had just survived one of our nation's biggest natural disasters.





|| Greg, 04:39 AM || Permalink || Comments (4) || Comments || TrackBacks (0) ||

Trackback Information for Washington Times -- Off With His Head

TrackBack URL for this entry: http://blog2.mu.nu/cgi/trackback.cgi/188452
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference 'Washington Times -- Off With His Head'.

Comments on Washington Times -- Off With His Head

I have been repeatedly perplexed by your logic.  I honestly don't understand your argument that because the FBI didn't do anything about the e-mails, it was understandable that Hastert and the House leadership didn't do anything about them either.  It is as if you are arguing that the right thing for the House leadership to do is predicated upon what the FBI did.  I see no morality in that.


 


It appears that you are defending Hastert's lack of action by saying that the FBI didn't think the e-mails were actionable.  Now that the Justice Department has determined that the FBI *should have* acted on the e-mails alone, does this change your opinion as to whether or not Hastert's decision to take no action on the emails was an appropriate decision?  If the standard of proper behavior is what the FBI thinks, you would now have to say that Hastert was wrong.  If you still think Hastert's inaction was correct, please clarify the standard you are using.


 


FWIW, my standard of behavior is one based on Judeo-Christian morality.  Hastert was wrong to let Foley continue without accountability after the emails became known to the House leadership.  The FBI's position is irrelevant to my moral standard.

|| Posted by Greg in TX22, January 23, 2007 10:15 PM ||

Frankly, I still see the emails, in the absence of the IMs, as something meriting little more than "Back off, Mark" from the House leadership.

Only in the context of the IMs, which Democrats held back for political purposes, do I find them to be truly troubling.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, January 24, 2007 04:31 PM ||

OK. So I understand that you still believe that Hastert's lack of action was appropriate when he was only aware of the e-mails.

That doesn't explain why you supported your statement by saying the FBI "concurred" with Hastert's judgement. Do you now believe that the FBI's concurrence is irrelevant? If so, why did you bring it up at all? Is the FBI wrong to admit it should have followed up on the emails alone?

Don't get me wrong. If your position is that it doesn't matter what the FBI did or did not do, I agree wholeheartedly. But in your original post, it seems you were arguing that Hastert's lack of action was the right thing to do because the FBI didn't act, either. Only now, the FBI admits it was wrong. Hastert has yet to do that. I honestly believe I'm giving your post a fair interpretation, and you have yet to address it. I'm trying to find a logical set of principles in what you wrote.

FWIW, I think Foley's pursuit of pages was reprehensible. The e-mails were textbook cases of predatory behavior. Hastert should have acted on the emails alone.

|| Posted by Greg in TX22, February 28, 2007 09:36 PM ||

And ultimately, I stand by my original statement. The emails, absent the IMs, simply were not enough to act.

Now the question is, who held back the IMs until it was politically advantageous to release them -- thereby endangering kids for almost a year.

|| Posted by Rhymes With Right, March 1, 2007 04:56 AM ||
Post a comment

Remember personal info?


 

 





AnotherMunublogSmall.jpg





Winner - 2010 Fabulous 50 Blog Awards

Posts by Category

Announcements (posts: 13)
Blogging (posts: 154)
Border Issues & Immigration (posts: 370)
deferred (posts: 4)
Education (posts: 583)
Entertainment & Sports (posts: 406)
History (posts: 301)
Humor (posts: 71)
Israel/Middle East (posts: 13)
Medical News (posts: 51)
Military (posts: 254)
News (posts: 1413)
Paid Advertising (posts: 138)
Personal (posts: 88)
Politics (posts: 3944)
Race & Racism (posts: 189)
Religion (posts: 702)
Terrorism (posts: 793)
The Courts (posts: 278)
Watcher's Council (posts: 320)
World Affairs (posts: 308)

Archives

December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007
December 2006
November 2006
October 2006
September 2006
August 2006
July 2006
June 2006
May 2006
April 2006
March 2006
February 2006
January 2006
December 2005
November 2005
October 2005
September 2005
August 2005
July 2005
June 2005
May 2005
April 2005
March 2005
February 2005
January 2005
December 2004
November 2004
October 2004
September 2004
August 2004
July 2004
June 2004
December 0000



MuNuviana



Licensing

Creative Commons License
This weblog is licensed under a Creative Commons License.

Powered By

Powered by
Movable Type 2.64
AnotherMunublogSmall.jpg

Administrative Stuff

Email Me
Syndicate this site (XML)

Advertising Disclosure

adpolicy.gif

About Me

NAME: Greg
AGE: 40-Something
SEX: Male
MARITAL STATUS: Married
OCCUPATION: Social Studies Teacher
LOCATION: Seabrook, TX
DISCLAIMER: All posts reflect my views alone, and not the view of my wife, my dogs, my employer, or anyone else. All comments reflect the view of the commenter, and permitting a comment to remain on this site in no way indicates my support for the ideas expressed in the comment.

Search This Site


Support This Site



Recent Entries

Proof That Rep. Barbara Lee Is Either An Idiot Or A Liar When She Plays The Race Card
Newt Says One Of The Few Things That Could Gain My Support
Stupid Headline Alert – Lost In Space Edition
Do They Really Understand What They Called For?
NEWSFLASH – Administration Confirms That Obama Is Full Of $h!t
The Four Criteria We Need To Consider
Okay -- I'll Concede It Is Cold This Morning
Remember When Comparing Political Opponents To Nazis Was Deemed Uncivil
December 7, 1941 -- America Learns Of The Pearl Harbor Attack
The Change At The Post Office -- Pay More, Get Less

Blogroll


Watchers Council
  • Bookroom Room
  • The Colossus of Rhodey
  • The Glittering Eye
  • GrEaT sAtAn"S gIrLfRiEnD
  • JoshuaPundit
  • The Mellow Jihadi
  • New Zeal
  • The Noisy Room
  • The Political Commentator
  • The Razor
  • Rhymes With Right
  • The Right Planet
  • Right Truth
  • Simply Jews
  • Virginia Right!
  • Watcher Of Weasels

  • Political & Religious Blogs