Katfish: Nah! You surely remember the tale about the fox in the hen house? That had nuttin’ to do with Marrrrrrrrrvin Zindler and the ladies of the evening!
No Hawaii vacation for us this year. We are going to Rockport, Fulton, Corpus for a few days. It’s bird migration time and we may join the hawk migration counters for a while.
I consider myself of the libertarian conservative camp. You, being a Perry supporter I presume, would suggest to me that you are of the social conservative camp.
There’s a .pdf of the first chapter within the link above. I’d recommend reading it with an open mind.
The pharmacist walks into the store to find a guy leaning heavily against a wall. He asks the blonde clerk, “What’s with that guy over there by the wall?” The blonde clerk responds, “Well, he came in here this morning to get something for his cough. I couldn’t find the cough syrup, so I gave him an entire bottle of laxative.” The pharmacist yells, “You idiot! You can’t treat a cough with a laxative!” The blonde clerk responds, “Of course you can! Look at him, he’s afraid to cough.”
10. Sen. Daniel Inouye. The 82-year-old Hawaii Democrat was accused in the 1990s by numerous women of sexual harassment. Democrats cast doubt on the allegations and the Senate Ethics Committee dropped its investigation.
9. Former Rep. Gus Savage. The Illinois Democrat was accused of fondling a Peace Corps volunteer in 1989 while on a trip to Africa. The House Ethics Committee decided against disciplinary action in 1990.
8. Rep. Barney Frank. The outspoken Massachusetts Democrat hired a male prostitute who ran a prostitution service from Frank’s residence in the 1980s. Only two Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to censure him in 1990.
7. Former Sen. Brock Adams. The late Washington Democrat was forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988.
6. Former Rep. Fred Richmond. This New York Democrat was arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election—before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.
5. Former Rep. John Young. The late Texas Democrat increased the salary of a staffer after she gave in to his sexual advances. The congressman won re-election in 1976 but lost two years later.
4. Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976.
3. Former Rep. Gerry Studds. He was censured for sexual relationship with underage male page in 1983. Massachusetts voters returned him to office for six more terms.
2. Former Rep. Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.
1. Sen. Teddy Kennedy. The liberal Massachusetts senator testified in defense of nephew accused of rape, invoking his family history to win over the jury in 1991.
Democratic Organizer Quits After Calling Allen ‘Macacawitz’
Thursday, October 5, 2006; B02
A field organizer for Democratic congressional candidate Al Weed resigned yesterday after it was discovered that she referred to Sen. George Allen (R-Va.) as “Macacawitz.”
In an e-mail sent last night, Meryl Ibis asked Democratic supporters to protest “George ‘Macacawitz’ Allen” during a Republican rally in Danville.
The term “Macacawitz” is an apparent reference to Allen’s use of the word “macaca” and the recent discovery that he has Jewish heritage.
Weed spokesman Kurt Gleeson said the staffer “made a mistake in her language that was not sanctioned by the campaign.” Weed is challenging Rep. Virgil H. Goode Jr. (R-Va.) in the Southside district.
Dick Wadhams, Allen’s campaign manager, said Ibis’s e-mail “fits a pattern of anti-Semitic behavior” by Democrats. Wadhams said Allen’s opponent, Democrat James Webb, should be held accountable for Ibis’s e-mail because she also was one of his volunteer organizers.
Kristian Denny Todd, a Webb spokeswoman, said Wadhams sounds desperate.
“I’ve never heard her name,” Todd said. “She is a Weed for Congress staffer, and they took care of it right away.”
(snip)
So Illig and his group went hunting for other gaps in history, and found a few… for example, a gap of building in Constantinople (558 AD - 908 AD) and a gap in the doctrine of faith, especially the gap in the evolution of theory and meaning of purgatory (600 AD until ca. 1100). From all of this data, they have become convinced that at some time, the calendar year was increased by 297 years without the corresponding passage of time.
(snip)
A clue to the real attraction of conspiracy theories, I would suggest, lies in the rhetoric of theorists themselves, which is filled with self-congratulatory descriptions of those who accept such theories as “willing to think,” “educated,” “independent-minded,” and so forth, and with invective against the “uninformed” and “unthinking” “sheeple” who “blindly follow authority.
…..Less dramatic, but in the long run more dangerous, is the relentless tendency of the Western intelligentsia to denigrate the Western past and present, massively exaggerating the vices of their own civilization and the virtues of its competitors, and putting the worst possible spin on the motives and policies of its current leaders while minimizing or excusing the crimes of its enemies.
What really needs explaining, though, is not 9/11, but the existence of such conspiracy theorists themselves, whose by now well-known speculations about what “really happened” that day are - not to put too fine a point on it - so mind-numbingly stupid that it is mystifying how anyone with a functioning cerebrum could take them seriously even for a moment.
After more than 150 years of use, the telegram died a quiet death earlier this year at the hands of its greatest distributor. “Effective January 27, 2006,” read a brief online announcement, “Western Union will discontinue all Telegram and Commercial Messaging services. We regret any inconvenience this may cause you, and we thank you for your loyal patronage.” Although the company would not disclose the contents of it final cable, it did reveal that the last ten dispatches included birthday wishes, condolences, and the notification of an emergency.
I see Liberals are lying again, trying to convince us that after 5 days they still don’t know the difference between Instant Messages that had actual, incntrovertible proof that Foley was victimizing childre and the email he sent to the page in Lousiana that contained notning overty sexual in it’s content, as dertermined by 4 news agencies and the FBI.
They are also trying to say that trying to finjd out who held this evidecne is just bunch of conservatives saying “Foley should go…BUT”. Without adding the key phrase:
“….BUT we should also be looking for the person or persons who did not reveal the incriminating evidence of a man victimizing children so that they can be punished for THIER despicable and immoral crime as well.”
Be careful with what you hear, guys, they are intentionally confusing the issue. It seems a number of people knew about the original email. It DID contain evidecne of a “creepy” nature, and in hindsight, should have raised flags. But the actual evidence that would have left no question in anybody’s mind AT ALL were the ones that contained disgusting phrases and lewd suggestions, and these were the Instant Messages held by persons unknown at this time.
But maybe one of the reasons they are so desperate to get people to think that the email to the Louisiana boy and the disgusting Instant Messages is this:
It may takea bit longer for bloggers to find out who had that information, but we’re getting closer.
Especially since we now also know who the page was who recived those Instant Messages. He’s going to be talking to the FBI soon, and he knows it. He just hired a lawyer.
BTW;
I do find it interesting that in some of the conversations by Liberals I’ve been noting they are mentioning how disgusting it was that Foley appeared to be having Internet Sex with this boy, who may have been 18 at the time.
I whole heartedly agree. It’s immoral and a definite indication that someone is not fit to hold office, and is not a fit Leader as well.
But, both Internet Sex and Phone Sex involve performing an act that we afre told we should not be doing during Ramadan.
Trivia question:
Who was in the news for having phone sex with the fat chick from work who was half his age at the time?
Is he still a Leader in one of the poltical parties?
What we’re being told is that Republicans should be held to a higher standard than Democrats.
Bovine fecal matter. Both parties should be held to the same standard–andthe one that does not meet it should not be rewarded with the reins of power. The Democrats are trying to get away with telling the citizens of this country that the should not be held to the same standards as Republicans.
Which party still has it’s perverts in or near to achieving Leadership Status in their party or the reins of power in this country?
Which party supported and still supports the reelection time after time of perverts and criminals with money from thier coffers?
It’s a valid question, not whining or finger pointing to avoid an issue. Its a qustion worth asking one’s self before one pulls the lver in the voting booth.
Maybe ABC should have followed NBC’s lead and actually lured the Congressman thru NBC’s “To Catch a Predator” series. I’ve seen where NBC has exposed all kinds of professional people from religious leaders to coaches who actually have access to children. The Democrats had better check their own ranks. I’ve seen that list and most of them actually got caught red handed. The liberal media also has to be careful for showing obvious bias which is already reflected in their viewership numbers. The Democrats had better remember they have the liberal media but there are a lot of other sources of information.
The pic looks like a New Orleans robber getting ready to roll a drunk with his check right after the first of the month.
Sometimes when I think of Hillary, Reno, Helen Thomas, Molly Ivins, and Madeleine Albright, I think to myself, “Can Sharia law and burkhas be all that bad?”.
NBC is ore honorable in that program than the people who held this evidecne were. They have Law Enforcement with them throughout the entire prosess.
Why?
Because it is both Criminal and Immoral to withhold evidence of someone victimizing children.
There’s a cop outside the door of every one of those incidents, and a cop supervising the collection of evidence.
In this case, the evidence was collected, wihtout Law Enfrocement supervision, oversight, or knowledge; and then held for poliitical reasons while the abuse continued.
I don’t want to catch these guys because they are likely to be Democrats—I want to catch them because they are immoral irresponsible creeps who held onto this information while gleefully rubbing thier hands waiting until the moment it would do them the most good.
In that sense, they were ECSTATIC that this abuse was going on and that they could prove it…but that wasn’t enougnh for them. They had to destroy other people along with the guy who was victimizing children.
And their political supporters are hoping they get away with it, and trying to direct your attention away from it by lying and confusing the issue.
Interesting though that post on LGF is, 69.14.20.# represents a range of IP addresses (256 possibilities) and is most likely a proxy server, as noted later in the thread. Therefore, it really doesn’t narrow anything down to usable information. I think everyone (who’s following this) understands the difference between IMs and emails. Your note of caution about information in this matter applies to every source, including those who are telling us what we want to hear.
Queen Elizabeth II announced this week that she was converting a room at Windsor Castle into a Mosque. She took the historic step so Muslim staff have a quiet place to pray during Ramadan, Islam’s holiest month. Now I wonder why Saudi sheiks don’t do that for their Philippine Christian workers. Of course, Christianity is banned in Saudi Arabia………Also on the Royal Soap Opera front, a ‘Multi-Faith’ Coronation is being planned for Charles. The Sunday Telegraph reports that the coronation of the Prince of Wales could be a multi-faith event with prayers and readings from other denominations and religions, including Muslim, Sikh and Jewish faiths. Canon John Hall, the Dean-elect of Westminster Abbey, said that the traditional Church of England coronation service must be revised to reflect society’s changes since the Queen’s coronation in 1953. As dean, he will be on the committee responsible for drawing up the service.
I doubt it was a prank.
I don’t buy any of the excuses Foley has been trying to manufacture.
Foley is a discusting individual who acted inproperly, while claiming to represent us. I am not yet sure if he actually broke any laws, but if he did he needs to be prosecuted.
I offer up the following as a willful effort to mislead the public about the nature of the emails, the Instant Messages, who realesed what and when:
To all of those ( Jim, Rush, Drudge, Hannity, Gibson, Cavuto ….) who “speculated” that this Foley scandel was the result of Dems holding on to and then releasing the information for political reason.
“The source who in July gave news media Rep. Mark Foley’s (R-Fla.) suspect e-mails to a former House page says the documents came to him from a House GOP aide.
That aide has been a registered Republican since becoming eligible to vote, said the source, who showed The Hill public records supporting his claim.
The same source, who acted as an intermediary between the aide-turned-whistleblower and several news outlets, says the person who shared the documents is no longer employed in the House.
But the whistleblower was a paid GOP staffer when the documents were first given to the media.”
I wonder where you all go now. I bet I don’t hear a word of clarification from any of the above named usual suspects.
The article is plainly and cearly talking about the email that was sent to the boy in Louisiana, and not the Instant Messages.
The writer of the above post is, like most of his bretheren, misleading, lying, and trying to confuse matters.
And, if the Drudge stuff is true, we are about to see a shinola-storm like you’ve never seen before.
It may also be a good reason why these folks didn’t want anybody looking for who held onto the evidence.
Lots of people are going to be asking: Which is worse, holding onto evidence of an ongoing crime for poltical advantage, or holding on to something an offering it as evidence of a crime you knew was not committed for poltical advantage?
It would be even worse than this lie told without the benefit of investigation:
BLITZER: He was responding in part to you, because you’ve suggested this week that there in effect was a massacre.
MURTHA: Well there was. [a massacre] There’s no question about it. I know, in talking to a number of people, and the information, I’ve never given you bad information yet. I talked to about it, in the context of the fact that these troops are under such tremendous pressure and that’s what happens when they’re under tremendous pressure.
When this thing’s all over, you’re going to see exactly what I’ve said to be true. That, there was an IED attack, it killed one marine, and then they overreacted and killed a number of civilians without anybody firing at them. That’s what you’re going to find out.
It should have been Foley perversion found out, Foley resigns, end of story.
But instead of getting this done the simple way, some unknown individual or group held on to it and released it for political gain, and to many people have now ran to the microphones to make sure they get their share of fallout. Now it has taken on a life of it’s own and an investigation is required. Unfortunately, I doubt we will ever get the WHOLE TRUTH.
And it wouldn’t be an escuse by Foley in any case. he’s in”rehab” in Florida. The kid in question is going to school in California and is from Oklahoma.
There is absolutely no reason to bring in Louis Freeh or anyone else to set up a 30 million dollar boondoggle for this. There are dozens upon dozens of federal employess at the Justice Dept that could do this if it were important. Bottom line is that it isn’t important. He’s gone. Resigned. Kaput. Outta-there. History.
Just a press story now and a waste of tax dollars.
Drudge has been VERY wrong in the past. It’s hard to imagine though, that he’d put it out there without being somewhat sure that it’s viable…if not absoultely verifiably true.
But why does “common sense” dictate only one outcome?
This kid has just hired a criminal defense attorney–the guy that defended Tim McVeigh—one of the most expensive criminal lawyers in Oklahoma, his home state.
“Common Sense” would therfore dictate that there would be many reasons for doing so…one of them that he thinks he may be held criminally liable for not correcting this sooner.
OR…it could be that he spent the time between realizing it was his IM’s and finding the best lawyer he could before making things public.
If this is a prank, Common Sense would also dictate this to be a prudent move once one considers might be the response from angry Demcrats once they learn they’ve been painting all Republicans with a broad brush, and accusing them of covering up an “obvious” crime that truned out to be not so “obvious.”
Again…we have ALL OF US, MYSELF INCLUDED….made assumptions here based only on limited news reporting…and reporting that is confusing to begin with,. and being made intntionally more so by Democrats
According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded an unwitting Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats.
It’s hard for me to picture a page being able to “goad an unwitting Foley” into doing something without Foley being incredibly inept and/or irresponsible to begin with. Then again, like you say, we’re all working from an incomplete picture here.
Criminal vs. just plain inept is thankfully not for me to decide. What I have decided is that major changes are going to be required in the Republican party for them to retain my support.
Speaking of which, Sarge… read the link in #18 above and give me your opinion if you would.
#58 Everyone that believes that, spit in their hand and slap their face. First it was booze, then being abused by a priest and now a joke. I may have missed a few excuses since I quit paying attention to the story. I was born at night but it wasn’t last night. He’s gone, history and so should any Republican that covered up the story. Denny who?
Wonder why the page hired the same defense lawyer as Timothy McVeigh? And why would anybody hire an attorney whose last client ended up with a needle in his arm?
For the same reason that lady who ran over her cheating husband hired Andrea Yates attorney–notoriety for both the client and the attorney. Unfortunately for the lady who ran over her husband, she had to hire another attorney because Parham was incompetent or so her new attorney alledges.
Ya know how our hearts take pictures? Little clips of time forever captured in memory?
Your comment reminded me of when Sugar, Sarge’s dog was stolen from his yard shortly before we were to be married - and Sugar had 8 - 3 day old puppies! So, Sarge brings over the puppies and a plastic kiddie pool to my house and we set up a neo-natal triage puppy ward in my living room. (Which of course meshed PERFECTLY with a dad with Alzheimers, a teenage boy in that awful angry stage and my work and school schedule…)
The puppies needed to be bottle fed every two hours, and afterwards we needed to recreate the action their momma would do to stimulate….um….puppy poopy. We accomplished this by crawling around behind these teeny tiny little things and dabbing their teeny tiny little bottoms with warm, wet paper towels.
I had my reservations about marrying Sarge, until I saw him standing on his head while trying to find a puppy’s teeny tiny butthole…
And oh yea….. Foley is gonna fry and he pulled the plug on The Republican party.
#83 SM that’s simply PRICELESS! We want a photo of that!!
Foley…………..I dunno what to say about such a PUTZ………….electioneering sure seems to get uglier every cycle when we thought we’d ’seen it all’ before huh………..
Those who discount the “prank” angle here, are completely forgetting the capacity for cruelty that young teenaged boys have–especially towards gay people. If all pf us are being honet with ourselves (men only), you know exactly what I’m talking about.
Here are a couple very plausible scenarios that make perfect common sense. None of them exonerate Foley, they merely are presented as examples that this is not as far fetched as one may think at first blush:
1. They knew he was gay (just about everybody did) and baited him into this exchange to be mean to a gay person. Then they could pass the messages around the Page Dorm or next reunion and laugh about it. There is at least one story out there that supports this scenario. It doesn’t let Foley off the hok, as he was a willing participant, unless, of course, he knew the kid was 18,,as has been reported, which means Foley did the saem thing Bill Clinton did when he had phone sex with Monica Lewinsky, he just did it with a legal aged young man.
The difference between REpublicans and Democrats: Republicans condemn the immoral actions of both men.
2. They knew he was gay AND that he was trolling for sex partners, thought it was funny, and pulled the prank on him so they could laugh about something that was embarrasing to them otherwise. This is the most plausible as it explains both why they did it, and why the young man has hired a criminal defense attorney as he had evidecne of an ongoing crime against children and did not report it properly or in a timely manner.
Now, because the scenarios are plausible, this would tend to lend beleiveability to the real bomb in the Drudge story—the one that is very, very, very bad for Democrats.
The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats.
This means that the Democrats who have been screaming to punish the Republicans for covering up eidence of a member of congress sexually prey on children, will now have to do two things:
1. Apologize for making accusations without proof.
2. Scream for the heads of the “political operatives” and everybody associated with them
This coulod be the Democrat Watergate. I say that because they “dirty poltical tricks” that brought down Nixon began coming to lightjust before an election, one that Republicans rejoiced in a victory some said they would not beable to achieve; but did not see the full light day until a year later. And when it all came out, it put the Republicans out of Congress for the next 20 years.
If the claim made in the Drudge Report is true, then it is Democrats who concealed and condoned the ongoing commission of child abuse to further thier own political ends…not the Republicans as they are claiming now. Leaders of that party will be forced to publicly admit it, or start defending the despicable, illegal, and immoral acts of their cohorts as they are claiming Republicans are doing now.
Americans don’t like hypocrites. They don’t like dirty tricks. They don’t like it when someone commits a crime, then tries to blame the other guy.
Hold onto you seats…it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Prank or not why did the guy resign and later admit all kind of stuff?
The pubbies are in deep trouble with this. Instead of standing their ground and demanding all the facts come out they have explained their way right into a corner.
I didn’t say any of it lets him off the hook. He’s a scumbag who did some scummy things and probably won’t get all of what he deserves..or at least what he’sd get if I was in charge of meting out punishment.
If this kid comes forward, says that they did this to foley for one of the reasons I said above or another, and did not reveal the results of the “prank” to law enforcement, he is guilty of Obstruction of Justice.
Same thing fro the “Democrat poltical operatives” who eventually got the mail.
Pelsoi, et al, are trying to pin this in Hastert, claiming he knew all about this. The only evidence we have of that is the email sent to the kid in Louisiana, which is the one 4 newspapers, one TV network, and the FBI all said did not have enough in it to warrant an investigation or concern. This would mean that all Hastert is really guilty of is coming to the same conclusion thos other folks did—and for not having 20/20 foresight.
On the other hand, the Instant Messages are incintrovertible proof that the guy is a perv. When Hastert saw those—at the same time we all did—he forced Foley to quit.
If Hastert, those newspapers, Fox News and/or the FBI had had those Instant messages at any time before this weekend, Foley would have been gone a long time ago, and the Dems would have nothing really to accuse Hastert or any other Republican of. Right now, they are accusing the Republicans of putting children in danger by not getting rid of the guy based on an ambigous email, and trying to insinuate that Republicans knew about the Instant Messages as well.
BUT……if the only people who knew about the Instant Messages were the Pages and the DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES, then it’s not REpublicans who put children in danger to protect House seats, it’s Democrats who did it in order to GAIN House seats.
The vet told us the mother dog licks the little puppy dog’s butts to get them to do #1 and #2, and that if we didn’t do that, in a weel or so they would fill up with #1 and #2 and explode.
I thought a wet paper towel would be a better than both the tounge thing and the puppy dog explosions.
I did NOT stand on my head…I followed the little buggers around on my hands and knees, wiping thier little tiny orifices with a wet paper towel under the desired conclusin had been reached.
All they knew about when the first ABC story brioke was the emails that were contained in that story…the IMS didn’t come until two days later.
The FBI had already said there was not enough “there” there, and so did the newspapers, and so did Hastert.
When the IMs surfaced, Hastert did the right thing immediately. It was not until that poin that anybody had an real proof that anything was going on.
The only people who DID have knowledge that Foley was a pervwert preying on children were the pages, and the “Dempcrat Operatives.”
It will be interesting to see what thier “damage control” looks like wheh presented with the evidence that the people who knew abouthis came from thier own side of the aisle.
I tend to agree with you on the Foley thing. Something just doesn’t look right to me (it’s a conservative feeling not to trust DLWM). There’s something fishy here. Foley, of course, needed to go for what he did. How the topic was leaked needs to be looked into.
So. Because Foley is a pervert, all the pubbies should resign in shame for not kmowing about his proclivities? You guys never cease to amaze me. Why don\’t you just vote dem and give the rest of us a break.
Or, you might want to wait for \”The rest of the story\” before you start throwing all those stones.
Sounds good, dude. I go back and forth in my thinking sometimes as libertairan or social conservative. But, both have a place in the party and balance it out nicely. The dhimmicrats are lock step on most things and are so screechy, there is no voice of moderation, just the extremes are heard there. The system does not support a 3rd party and there is really no viable alternative but to hold one’s nose and vote for the least stanky SOB. The ones with (R) next to their name need to realize that libertairan leaning and social conservatives are the ones that got them there, not the liberals.
I skipped over it the first time. PDF’s lock up computer when I download them on my dial up here and I’m working at the same time I’m blogging (yes, right now). it does look interesting and I especially like this:
All hope is not lost, however, as Sager proposes a way out of the mangled mess. He calls it a renewal of fusionism, a better blend between liberty and tradition, between freedom and responsibility; one that emphasizes small government instead of Republican-controlled government, morality instead of moralism, and principles instead of politics.
While I will admit that I do prefer “Republican controlled government” over “Democrat controlled government” because I think that the first will go in a conservative direction, eventually while the other will go towards the loony left that now populates the Democrat party, also would much more prefer the “small government” Libertarianism that has been put in the back seat.
I also think that, even with all it’s problems, the Pubbies still do better on
morality instead of moralism, and principles instead of politics
and if it turns out that it can be proven that ti was Democrats who conccealed childabuse for their own poltical advantage—while accusing Republicans of doing it, it will go a long, long, LONG way to proving that point.
The “prank” story is not being offered by anybody as an excuse for Foley. It is given as reason why the Instant messages were saved, adn is a dam good one.
The thing that always puzzled me was why someone would keep IM’s for three years. They would have had to copy them, then paste them into MS Word or some other text document and saved.
This explains not only why they were made, but also why copies were made and are floating around. I’m still trying to find the story about the pages passing these thigns around at one of the reunions. That kind of “frat boy” thing is, to me, exceedingly beleiveable among the upper class teenagers from poltically connected families that populate the Page program,ad gives the best explantion as to why the IM’s exist as hard copy and are still around.
Exactly. I know it is not being offered as an “excuse” for Foley — there are no excuses for his behavior. I’m getting suspicious of “October surprise.” Why wait until now for it to come out? Maybe it is just my suspicious nature!
Thanks. That’s my “problem!” I tend to think things out! I suspect any Republican who would automatically think that the allegations are true without any investigation. Sure, Foley resigned, but that in itself does not make him guilty. I get sick and tired of Republicans saying “this is the nail in the coffin for Republicans!” The Dims opposed Louis Freeh investigating this scandal. I wonder why they do not want an investigation.
Jeff and Neo,
I agree. I will let the cards fall where they lie and then make my decision. There is too much speculation in the media…heck, I can speculate on my own, thank you! For the record, I think Foley could re-apply as a Democrat and this whole thing will disappear…(Being a Libra sux!)
#110 ST
If Foley was a lib this would not be an issue. And to hell with all that we repubs are better that that stuff. Wrong is wrong. We do not put up with this stuff and that does not give dems the ok to do what they will. I for one will call them on it. AND, I will not throw the repubs to the ditch because “WE are the more moral party”. Thats true but, I’ll not let the dems get away with indecent behavoir. Period!
Oh, Wow; it’s been a while since I have been first; probably since I have been on vacation (lolling in bed until 0630)
“Do you really want to sleep a waking fox?”
“Let sleeping foxes lie.”
“Before you skin ‘em, make sure he’s dead’”
I got $50 on that badger!!
Well, scratch Islam off my list of possible religions to convert to.
“Psst! Wake up! It’s Thursday morning and you promised to take me to the hen house”
#5………hehehehehehehe (izzat anything like da chicken ranch?)
Katfish: Nah! You surely remember the tale about the fox in the hen house? That had nuttin’ to do with Marrrrrrrrrvin Zindler and the ladies of the evening!
#7……….hehehehehe yep I know………just a severely twisted individual here is all!
rino sneaking up on a taxpayer to get more tax dollars.
I don’t NEED no stinkin test! =D
I think that is a bandicoot. The fox sure is relaxed…would love to see pix #2.
Honey, I’m home!
Mornin’ youse guy’s…..and gal’s. Post early, post often, and make it smarthy. I’ll be lurking as usual and post when I can. Have a great day!!
“Hey Kinky, Wake up! You dead?”
No Hawaii vacation for us this year. We are going to Rockport, Fulton, Corpus for a few days. It’s bird migration time and we may join the hawk migration counters for a while.
It ain’t the mona loa resort but it is nice.
http://www.pelicanbayresort.com/
Signing off for now.
Kind of looks like a ring-tailed lemur to me.
Hey Butch, that’s MY job!
Hey GopBob,
Are you a social conservative or a libertarian conservative?
http://www.rhsager.com/thebook/index.php
I consider myself of the libertarian conservative camp. You, being a Perry supporter I presume, would suggest to me that you are of the social conservative camp.
There’s a .pdf of the first chapter within the link above. I’d recommend reading it with an open mind.
The pharmacist walks into the store to find a guy leaning heavily against a wall. He asks the blonde clerk, “What’s with that guy over there by the wall?” The blonde clerk responds, “Well, he came in here this morning to get something for his cough. I couldn’t find the cough syrup, so I gave him an entire bottle of laxative.” The pharmacist yells, “You idiot! You can’t treat a cough with a laxative!” The blonde clerk responds, “Of course you can! Look at him, he’s afraid to cough.”
“you’ve got to move it move it…..”
You want captions. I tried to make it political or about Democrats but couldn’t. So, here’s my “Top Ten” list of captions for this picture:
1) Watch me outfox this fox!!!
2) Come on, teach me how to guard the hen house.
3) Let’s go, I know where there’s a hen house.
4) You idiot, this isn’t a hen house.
5) Your a poor excuse for a fox!!!
6) Where’s my share, you “good for nothing” fox?
7) Just how many hens do you have in that belly of yours???
9) Get up!!! There are still hens to be caught.
10) Some fox you are, this is like stealing candy from a baby.
I hope you like these!
Nah;
It’s a security camera shot from Fred Hills office the night of the burglary.
The guy in the back is the homeless guy, and the one on the block is Fred Hill.
#21, here is another one.
Uh, fella you it is not safe to lay there what with Thanksgiving around the corner. Some fool may mistake you for a turkey….
The quick sly bandicoot jumped over the lazy brown sleeping fox.
152121
I’ll tell you what’s wrong with it, my lad. ‘E’s dead, that’s what’s wrong with it!
No, no, ‘e’s uh,…he’s resting.
Look, matey, I know a dead fox when I see one, and I’m looking at one right now.
No no he’s not dead, he’s, he’s restin’! Remarkable fox, the Norwegian Red, idn’it, ay? Beautiful fur!
The fur don’t enter into it. It’s stone dead.
Nononono, no, no! ‘E’s resting!
All right then, if he’s restin’, I’ll wake him up!
#25…………..Squawkie yew cypherin??
Edd mentioned a site that listed the “Top Ten Democratic Congressional Sex Scandals”, does anyone know what it is?
28
List was on Drudge for a couple of days. Not sure if still is.
If Wile E. Coyote had enough money to buy all that Acme crap, why didn’t he just buy dinner?
‘E’s dead I tell ya! (picking up the stiff corpse by the tail and smacking the other guy in the face with a dead fox)
See! DEAD!
#4
If the radical Islamist get their way, you will either convert to Islam or be killed.
#28
It was on Human Events.
Reply to No. 28: That list is on Rush’s website. You have to open one story, it is on a list of additional stories pertaining to the topic.
10. Sen. Daniel Inouye. The 82-year-old Hawaii Democrat was accused in the 1990s by numerous women of sexual harassment. Democrats cast doubt on the allegations and the Senate Ethics Committee dropped its investigation.
9. Former Rep. Gus Savage. The Illinois Democrat was accused of fondling a Peace Corps volunteer in 1989 while on a trip to Africa. The House Ethics Committee decided against disciplinary action in 1990.
8. Rep. Barney Frank. The outspoken Massachusetts Democrat hired a male prostitute who ran a prostitution service from Frank’s residence in the 1980s. Only two Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to censure him in 1990.
7. Former Sen. Brock Adams. The late Washington Democrat was forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988.
6. Former Rep. Fred Richmond. This New York Democrat was arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election—before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.
5. Former Rep. John Young. The late Texas Democrat increased the salary of a staffer after she gave in to his sexual advances. The congressman won re-election in 1976 but lost two years later.
4. Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976.
3. Former Rep. Gerry Studds. He was censured for sexual relationship with underage male page in 1983. Massachusetts voters returned him to office for six more terms.
2. Former Rep. Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.
1. Sen. Teddy Kennedy. The liberal Massachusetts senator testified in defense of nephew accused of rape, invoking his family history to win over the jury in 1991.
Ring tailed lemur.
“Look, another pansy!”
Speaking of pansies, we have a bunch with (R) behind their names.
I just clicked on the picture. According to the story, he is a republican lemur. In which case he is a pansy too!!
The headline says it all…
Muslims are waging civil war against us, claims police union
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2006/10/05/wmuslims05.xml
Then we have this…
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3311189,00.html
and you wonder why they are so angry about things….
Then you have this democratic hate message…
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/04/AR2006100401762_pf.html
Dhimmicratic party Über Alles….
Here ya go: Welcome to the year 1709. I wonder how affects the hyper-dispensationalist types.
The Phantom Time Hypothesis
http://www.damninteresting.com/?p=164
(snip)
So Illig and his group went hunting for other gaps in history, and found a few… for example, a gap of building in Constantinople (558 AD - 908 AD) and a gap in the doctrine of faith, especially the gap in the evolution of theory and meaning of purgatory (600 AD until ca. 1100). From all of this data, they have become convinced that at some time, the calendar year was increased by 297 years without the corresponding passage of time.
(snip)
#42…………………now that IS ‘Damned interesting’!
Jaime
Dang it… And I thought I hated daylight savings time! Now my calendars are crap!
http://www.tcsdaily.com/article.aspx?id=092006B
another quote from the article above:
Off to the museum, next to the buggy whips
I see Liberals are lying again, trying to convince us that after 5 days they still don’t know the difference between Instant Messages that had actual, incntrovertible proof that Foley was victimizing childre and the email he sent to the page in Lousiana that contained notning overty sexual in it’s content, as dertermined by 4 news agencies and the FBI.
They are also trying to say that trying to finjd out who held this evidecne is just bunch of conservatives saying “Foley should go…BUT”. Without adding the key phrase:
“….BUT we should also be looking for the person or persons who did not reveal the incriminating evidence of a man victimizing children so that they can be punished for THIER despicable and immoral crime as well.”
Be careful with what you hear, guys, they are intentionally confusing the issue. It seems a number of people knew about the original email. It DID contain evidecne of a “creepy” nature, and in hindsight, should have raised flags. But the actual evidence that would have left no question in anybody’s mind AT ALL were the ones that contained disgusting phrases and lewd suggestions, and these were the Instant Messages held by persons unknown at this time.
But maybe one of the reasons they are so desperate to get people to think that the email to the Louisiana boy and the disgusting Instant Messages is this:
http://littlegreenfootballs.com/weblog/?entry=22839#c0024
It may takea bit longer for bloggers to find out who had that information, but we’re getting closer.
Especially since we now also know who the page was who recived those Instant Messages. He’s going to be talking to the FBI soon, and he knows it. He just hired a lawyer.
BTW;
I do find it interesting that in some of the conversations by Liberals I’ve been noting they are mentioning how disgusting it was that Foley appeared to be having Internet Sex with this boy, who may have been 18 at the time.
I whole heartedly agree. It’s immoral and a definite indication that someone is not fit to hold office, and is not a fit Leader as well.
But, both Internet Sex and Phone Sex involve performing an act that we afre told we should not be doing during Ramadan.
Trivia question:
Who was in the news for having phone sex with the fat chick from work who was half his age at the time?
Is he still a Leader in one of the poltical parties?
What we’re being told is that Republicans should be held to a higher standard than Democrats.
Bovine fecal matter. Both parties should be held to the same standard–andthe one that does not meet it should not be rewarded with the reins of power. The Democrats are trying to get away with telling the citizens of this country that the should not be held to the same standards as Republicans.
Which party still has it’s perverts in or near to achieving Leadership Status in their party or the reins of power in this country?
Which party supported and still supports the reelection time after time of perverts and criminals with money from thier coffers?
It’s a valid question, not whining or finger pointing to avoid an issue. Its a qustion worth asking one’s self before one pulls the lver in the voting booth.
Maybe ABC should have followed NBC’s lead and actually lured the Congressman thru NBC’s “To Catch a Predator” series. I’ve seen where NBC has exposed all kinds of professional people from religious leaders to coaches who actually have access to children. The Democrats had better check their own ranks. I’ve seen that list and most of them actually got caught red handed. The liberal media also has to be careful for showing obvious bias which is already reflected in their viewership numbers. The Democrats had better remember they have the liberal media but there are a lot of other sources of information.
leave my liver ALONE in the voting booth!
I may be dubbed Sir Oscis of the Liver before I ever make it to the voting booth if I keep watching this pre-election hysteria.
The pic looks like a New Orleans robber getting ready to roll a drunk with his check right after the first of the month.
Sometimes when I think of Hillary, Reno, Helen Thomas, Molly Ivins, and Madeleine Albright, I think to myself, “Can Sharia law and burkhas be all that bad?”.
Robert;
NBC is ore honorable in that program than the people who held this evidecne were. They have Law Enforcement with them throughout the entire prosess.
Why?
Because it is both Criminal and Immoral to withhold evidence of someone victimizing children.
There’s a cop outside the door of every one of those incidents, and a cop supervising the collection of evidence.
In this case, the evidence was collected, wihtout Law Enfrocement supervision, oversight, or knowledge; and then held for poliitical reasons while the abuse continued.
I don’t want to catch these guys because they are likely to be Democrats—I want to catch them because they are immoral irresponsible creeps who held onto this information while gleefully rubbing thier hands waiting until the moment it would do them the most good.
In that sense, they were ECSTATIC that this abuse was going on and that they could prove it…but that wasn’t enougnh for them. They had to destroy other people along with the guy who was victimizing children.
And their political supporters are hoping they get away with it, and trying to direct your attention away from it by lying and confusing the issue.
Hastert needs to call for a DIET!
Sarge,
Interesting though that post on LGF is, 69.14.20.# represents a range of IP addresses (256 possibilities) and is most likely a proxy server, as noted later in the thread. Therefore, it really doesn’t narrow anything down to usable information. I think everyone (who’s following this) understands the difference between IMs and emails. Your note of caution about information in this matter applies to every source, including those who are telling us what we want to hear.
Sorry, no link.
SIREN On Drudge.
Page Prank gone awry.
Wow, Drudge is now claiming the Foley IM’s were a prank.
The Truth, The whole Truth, and Nothing but the Truth. Any one want to bet we get it?
ABC should know the Idenity of who ever it was that held onto the Instant Messages until their release could do the most good politically.
Common sense tells us that it was not a Republican. No mater who it is, at this point we need to who knew, what they knew, and when they knew it.
A PRANK GONE BAD? Anyone believeing that?
I doubt it was a prank.
I don’t buy any of the excuses Foley has been trying to manufacture.
Foley is a discusting individual who acted inproperly, while claiming to represent us. I am not yet sure if he actually broke any laws, but if he did he needs to be prosecuted.
Why do we need to spend taxpayer money on Louis Freeh to investigate this? What a waste, yet another way for politicians to avoid tough decisions.
I offer up the following as a willful effort to mislead the public about the nature of the emails, the Instant Messages, who realesed what and when:
The article is plainly and cearly talking about the email that was sent to the boy in Louisiana, and not the Instant Messages.
The writer of the above post is, like most of his bretheren, misleading, lying, and trying to confuse matters.
And, if the Drudge stuff is true, we are about to see a shinola-storm like you’ve never seen before.
It may also be a good reason why these folks didn’t want anybody looking for who held onto the evidence.
Lots of people are going to be asking: Which is worse, holding onto evidence of an ongoing crime for poltical advantage, or holding on to something an offering it as evidence of a crime you knew was not committed for poltical advantage?
It would be even worse than this lie told without the benefit of investigation:
Check this out:
http://www.alertnet.org/thenews/newsdesk/N22430447.htm
#61
It should have been Foley perversion found out, Foley resigns, end of story.
But instead of getting this done the simple way, some unknown individual or group held on to it and released it for political gain, and to many people have now ran to the microphones to make sure they get their share of fallout. Now it has taken on a life of it’s own and an investigation is required. Unfortunately, I doubt we will ever get the WHOLE TRUTH.
TRL3;
I will caution that, yes, Drudge has been wrong before.
BUT…and it’s a big BUT…this comes hours after the kid was identified, and minutes after an independent investigator is named.
Oh,
And it wouldn’t be an escuse by Foley in any case. he’s in”rehab” in Florida. The kid in question is going to school in California and is from Oklahoma.
#63
There is absolutely no reason to bring in Louis Freeh or anyone else to set up a 30 million dollar boondoggle for this. There are dozens upon dozens of federal employess at the Justice Dept that could do this if it were important. Bottom line is that it isn’t important. He’s gone. Resigned. Kaput. Outta-there. History.
Just a press story now and a waste of tax dollars.
Sargevining
I like Drudge, I hope Drudge is right and I am wrong, But common sense would indicate that this was not a practical joke gone bad.
Drudge has been VERY wrong in the past. It’s hard to imagine though, that he’d put it out there without being somewhat sure that it’s viable…if not absoultely verifiably true.
But why does “common sense” dictate only one outcome?
This kid has just hired a criminal defense attorney–the guy that defended Tim McVeigh—one of the most expensive criminal lawyers in Oklahoma, his home state.
“Common Sense” would therfore dictate that there would be many reasons for doing so…one of them that he thinks he may be held criminally liable for not correcting this sooner.
OR…it could be that he spent the time between realizing it was his IM’s and finding the best lawyer he could before making things public.
If this is a prank, Common Sense would also dictate this to be a prudent move once one considers might be the response from angry Demcrats once they learn they’ve been painting all Republicans with a broad brush, and accusing them of covering up an “obvious” crime that truned out to be not so “obvious.”
Again…we have ALL OF US, MYSELF INCLUDED….made assumptions here based only on limited news reporting…and reporting that is confusing to begin with,. and being made intntionally more so by Democrats
Sarge - the exchange you referred to in 62 - that was a tiring message thread, no
Wonder if this will slow down GWB’s plan to import as many Muslims as possible so they will like us. After all its the religion of peace.
Sargent Hastert-This just in from press conference
http://www.audiosparx.com/sa/play/port_lofi.cfm/sound_iid.44148
Photo from AAP
http://www.blogscanada.ca/egroup/content/binary/Schultz.jpg
It’s hard for me to picture a page being able to “goad an unwitting Foley” into doing something without Foley being incredibly inept and/or irresponsible to begin with. Then again, like you say, we’re all working from an incomplete picture here.
Criminal vs. just plain inept is thankfully not for me to decide. What I have decided is that major changes are going to be required in the Republican party for them to retain my support.
Speaking of which, Sarge… read the link in #18 above and give me your opinion if you would.
#71 - Sounds like Bettencourt on KSEV. He does a pretty good Schultz…
Looks like they aren’t appointing Freeh right away. Perhaps they will take a breath and see this for what it is.
On the lighter side:
This woman is an idiot…
# 70
I hope so.
#75
Yes she is, so are the 3 guys that tried to claim their ticket was lost.
#58 Everyone that believes that, spit in their hand and slap their face. First it was booze, then being abused by a priest and now a joke. I may have missed a few excuses since I quit paying attention to the story. I was born at night but it wasn’t last night. He’s gone, history and so should any Republican that covered up the story. Denny who?
#75……………….cantcha just picture folks crawlin around behind their lil doggie with the clorox in case their ticket re-appears badly soiled??
BWAAAAAAAAhahahahahahahahahahahaaaaaaaaa
Wonder why the page hired the same defense lawyer as Timothy McVeigh? And why would anybody hire an attorney whose last client ended up with a needle in his arm?
Reply to No. 80:
For the same reason that lady who ran over her cheating husband hired Andrea Yates attorney–notoriety for both the client and the attorney. Unfortunately for the lady who ran over her husband, she had to hire another attorney because Parham was incompetent or so her new attorney alledges.
“Hey! I know you’re just foxin’…hang around here much longer and you’ll get the chop!”
#79 Kat
Ya know how our hearts take pictures? Little clips of time forever captured in memory?
Your comment reminded me of when Sugar, Sarge’s dog was stolen from his yard shortly before we were to be married - and Sugar had 8 - 3 day old puppies! So, Sarge brings over the puppies and a plastic kiddie pool to my house and we set up a neo-natal triage puppy ward in my living room. (Which of course meshed PERFECTLY with a dad with Alzheimers, a teenage boy in that awful angry stage and my work and school schedule…)
The puppies needed to be bottle fed every two hours, and afterwards we needed to recreate the action their momma would do to stimulate….um….puppy poopy. We accomplished this by crawling around behind these teeny tiny little things and dabbing their teeny tiny little bottoms with warm, wet paper towels.
I had my reservations about marrying Sarge, until I saw him standing on his head while trying to find a puppy’s teeny tiny butthole…
And oh yea….. Foley is gonna fry and he pulled the plug on The Republican party.
#83 SM that’s simply PRICELESS! We want a photo of that!!
Foley…………..I dunno what to say about such a PUTZ………….electioneering sure seems to get uglier every cycle when we thought we’d ’seen it all’ before huh………..
TERM LIMITS TERM LIMITS TERM LIMITS!!!!!!!!!!!
(and NO congressional paychcks while we’re at it)
OOOOOOOOOOOPS……….there I go thinkin again………
Soldier Mom Says:
I had my reservations about marrying Sarge, until I saw him standing on his head while trying to find a puppy’s teeny tiny butthole…
…………
You have got to give me a warning ahead of of time when you say stuff like that. I am frantically searching for the pictures to photoshop that image.
85
Don’t leave out the tinfoil helmet, SWK.
Man I just LOVE ole Chuck Muth!!!
check THIS out!!
Bellwether State
It’s 1994 all over again in Nevada.
http://opinionjournal.com/cc/?id=110009046
Good call Shannon
Those who discount the “prank” angle here, are completely forgetting the capacity for cruelty that young teenaged boys have–especially towards gay people. If all pf us are being honet with ourselves (men only), you know exactly what I’m talking about.
Here are a couple very plausible scenarios that make perfect common sense. None of them exonerate Foley, they merely are presented as examples that this is not as far fetched as one may think at first blush:
1. They knew he was gay (just about everybody did) and baited him into this exchange to be mean to a gay person. Then they could pass the messages around the Page Dorm or next reunion and laugh about it. There is at least one story out there that supports this scenario. It doesn’t let Foley off the hok, as he was a willing participant, unless, of course, he knew the kid was 18,,as has been reported, which means Foley did the saem thing Bill Clinton did when he had phone sex with Monica Lewinsky, he just did it with a legal aged young man.
The difference between REpublicans and Democrats: Republicans condemn the immoral actions of both men.
2. They knew he was gay AND that he was trolling for sex partners, thought it was funny, and pulled the prank on him so they could laugh about something that was embarrasing to them otherwise. This is the most plausible as it explains both why they did it, and why the young man has hired a criminal defense attorney as he had evidecne of an ongoing crime against children and did not report it properly or in a timely manner.
Now, because the scenarios are plausible, this would tend to lend beleiveability to the real bomb in the Drudge story—the one that is very, very, very bad for Democrats.
This means that the Democrats who have been screaming to punish the Republicans for covering up eidence of a member of congress sexually prey on children, will now have to do two things:
1. Apologize for making accusations without proof.
2. Scream for the heads of the “political operatives” and everybody associated with them
This coulod be the Democrat Watergate. I say that because they “dirty poltical tricks” that brought down Nixon began coming to lightjust before an election, one that Republicans rejoiced in a victory some said they would not beable to achieve; but did not see the full light day until a year later. And when it all came out, it put the Republicans out of Congress for the next 20 years.
If the claim made in the Drudge Report is true, then it is Democrats who concealed and condoned the ongoing commission of child abuse to further thier own political ends…not the Republicans as they are claiming now. Leaders of that party will be forced to publicly admit it, or start defending the despicable, illegal, and immoral acts of their cohorts as they are claiming Republicans are doing now.
Americans don’t like hypocrites. They don’t like dirty tricks. They don’t like it when someone commits a crime, then tries to blame the other guy.
Hold onto you seats…it’s going to be a bumpy ride.
Sarge
Prank or not why did the guy resign and later admit all kind of stuff?
The pubbies are in deep trouble with this. Instead of standing their ground and demanding all the facts come out they have explained their way right into a corner.
Nothing kills a duck but its beak.
Say what?
Squawk;
I didn’t say any of it lets him off the hook. He’s a scumbag who did some scummy things and probably won’t get all of what he deserves..or at least what he’sd get if I was in charge of meting out punishment.
If this kid comes forward, says that they did this to foley for one of the reasons I said above or another, and did not reveal the results of the “prank” to law enforcement, he is guilty of Obstruction of Justice.
Same thing fro the “Democrat poltical operatives” who eventually got the mail.
Pelsoi, et al, are trying to pin this in Hastert, claiming he knew all about this. The only evidence we have of that is the email sent to the kid in Louisiana, which is the one 4 newspapers, one TV network, and the FBI all said did not have enough in it to warrant an investigation or concern. This would mean that all Hastert is really guilty of is coming to the same conclusion thos other folks did—and for not having 20/20 foresight.
On the other hand, the Instant Messages are incintrovertible proof that the guy is a perv. When Hastert saw those—at the same time we all did—he forced Foley to quit.
If Hastert, those newspapers, Fox News and/or the FBI had had those Instant messages at any time before this weekend, Foley would have been gone a long time ago, and the Dems would have nothing really to accuse Hastert or any other Republican of. Right now, they are accusing the Republicans of putting children in danger by not getting rid of the guy based on an ambigous email, and trying to insinuate that Republicans knew about the Instant Messages as well.
BUT……if the only people who knew about the Instant Messages were the Pages and the DEMOCRAT OPERATIVES, then it’s not REpublicans who put children in danger to protect House seats, it’s Democrats who did it in order to GAIN House seats.
And what we’ll get from them is the same defense they used when Clinton got caught:
“Everybody does it.”
meaning that both poltical partys play dirty tricks and scummy things.
The difference here is that very serious crime was committed: Federal Obstruction of Justice.
BTW…on the puppy dog thing:
The vet told us the mother dog licks the little puppy dog’s butts to get them to do #1 and #2, and that if we didn’t do that, in a weel or so they would fill up with #1 and #2 and explode.
I thought a wet paper towel would be a better than both the tounge thing and the puppy dog explosions.
I did NOT stand on my head…I followed the little buggers around on my hands and knees, wiping thier little tiny orifices with a wet paper towel under the desired conclusin had been reached.
Sarge
First of all I did not read your long post to my statement.
My point is that the pubbies were to quick to go on damage control and put themselves deeper into a hole.
It would be funny if Foley was sending emails and IAM to Rev. Fred Phelps.
A masculine kind of love…..
BTW that Phelps fella spends so much time worrying about gays, do you think he might have something to hide?
Squawk;
What damage was ther to control?
All they knew about when the first ABC story brioke was the emails that were contained in that story…the IMS didn’t come until two days later.
The FBI had already said there was not enough “there” there, and so did the newspapers, and so did Hastert.
When the IMs surfaced, Hastert did the right thing immediately. It was not until that poin that anybody had an real proof that anything was going on.
The only people who DID have knowledge that Foley was a pervwert preying on children were the pages, and the “Dempcrat Operatives.”
It will be interesting to see what thier “damage control” looks like wheh presented with the evidence that the people who knew abouthis came from thier own side of the aisle.
break down and read the long post, Squawk…it won’t hurt you and I get email from folks here all the time telling me how much they enjoy them.
It’s all laid out there…that’s why it’s long
Nevermind Sarge
Still no comment on the link in #18 Sarge?
Sarge,
I tend to agree with you on the Foley thing. Something just doesn’t look right to me (it’s a conservative feeling not to trust DLWM). There’s something fishy here. Foley, of course, needed to go for what he did. How the topic was leaked needs to be looked into.
So. Because Foley is a pervert, all the pubbies should resign in shame for not kmowing about his proclivities? You guys never cease to amaze me. Why don\’t you just vote dem and give the rest of us a break.
Or, you might want to wait for \”The rest of the story\” before you start throwing all those stones.
#101 Neo
I wholeheartedly agree with that sentiment.
100
Sounds good, dude. I go back and forth in my thinking sometimes as libertairan or social conservative. But, both have a place in the party and balance it out nicely. The dhimmicrats are lock step on most things and are so screechy, there is no voice of moderation, just the extremes are heard there. The system does not support a 3rd party and there is really no viable alternative but to hold one’s nose and vote for the least stanky SOB. The ones with (R) next to their name need to realize that libertairan leaning and social conservatives are the ones that got them there, not the liberals.
Ddue;
I skipped over it the first time. PDF’s lock up computer when I download them on my dial up here and I’m working at the same time I’m blogging (yes, right now). it does look interesting and I especially like this:
While I will admit that I do prefer “Republican controlled government” over “Democrat controlled government” because I think that the first will go in a conservative direction, eventually while the other will go towards the loony left that now populates the Democrat party, also would much more prefer the “small government” Libertarianism that has been put in the back seat.
I also think that, even with all it’s problems, the Pubbies still do better on
and if it turns out that it can be proven that ti was Democrats who conccealed childabuse for their own poltical advantage—while accusing Republicans of doing it, it will go a long, long, LONG way to proving that point.
Neo;
The “prank” story is not being offered by anybody as an excuse for Foley. It is given as reason why the Instant messages were saved, adn is a dam good one.
The thing that always puzzled me was why someone would keep IM’s for three years. They would have had to copy them, then paste them into MS Word or some other text document and saved.
This explains not only why they were made, but also why copies were made and are floating around. I’m still trying to find the story about the pages passing these thigns around at one of the reunions. That kind of “frat boy” thing is, to me, exceedingly beleiveable among the upper class teenagers from poltically connected families that populate the Page program,ad gives the best explantion as to why the IM’s exist as hard copy and are still around.
Sarge
#106
Exactly. I know it is not being offered as an “excuse” for Foley — there are no excuses for his behavior. I’m getting suspicious of “October surprise.” Why wait until now for it to come out? Maybe it is just my suspicious nature!
#107 Neo
It’s not just you. It’s anybody that takes the time to think this through.
Jeffj
#108
Thanks. That’s my “problem!” I tend to think things out! I suspect any Republican who would automatically think that the allegations are true without any investigation. Sure, Foley resigned, but that in itself does not make him guilty. I get sick and tired of Republicans saying “this is the nail in the coffin for Republicans!” The Dims opposed Louis Freeh investigating this scandal. I wonder why they do not want an investigation.
BTW, are you still in the states?
Jeff and Neo,
I agree. I will let the cards fall where they lie and then make my decision. There is too much speculation in the media…heck, I can speculate on my own, thank you! For the record, I think Foley could re-apply as a Democrat and this whole thing will disappear…(Being a Libra sux!)
Where are all the gays rights groups on this Foley thing? If he were a Dem they would be out in full kicking and scratching mode.
#110 ST
If Foley was a lib this would not be an issue. And to hell with all that we repubs are better that that stuff. Wrong is wrong. We do not put up with this stuff and that does not give dems the ok to do what they will. I for one will call them on it. AND, I will not throw the repubs to the ditch because “WE are the more moral party”. Thats true but, I’ll not let the dems get away with indecent behavoir. Period!
#111 SOBC
Good point! Damn, I’m tired of this Shiiite!
Southerntragedy
#110
Don’t say that! I’m celebrating my BD on Saturday! I love being a Libra — always balancing things! (Which is why you and I get along so well!)
Cheezy SOB:
heh heh..reminds me of a saying..
(two gay guys in a fight)
PINCH ‘EM, BITE ‘EM, SCRATCH ‘EM SAMMY! ANYTHING’S FAIR WHEN YOU’RE FIGHTING!!!