Advice Goddess Blog
« Previous | Home | Next »

Duck And Cover!
A huge loogie of a weasel job on National Review Online about the Foley case, by Mark Levin:

As best I can tell, ABC News has yet to report on or address Drudge’s revelation, i.e., that former congressional page Jordan Edmund “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.”

Of course, this doesn’t expunge Foley’s conduct. But it does put at least this page’s conduct into a completely different light. He wasn’t the innocent victim portrayed by some who have sought to exploit this situation.

Although ABC hasn’t reported on Drudge’s revelation at this writing, it has apparently communicated its position to rawstory.com.

Among other things, ABC claims that this couldn’t be a prank because there are other pages and other communications. That may well be true. And nobody would argue, I think, that Foley shouldn't have resigned over his communications with Edmund. But it certainly does raise other questions. For example, Speaker Hastert is under political attack because he is accused of not doing enough in response to the Edmund’s e-mails. As I understand the Drudge revelation, these e-mails, among other communications, were intentional attempts by Edmund to get the kind of reaction from Foley that, in fact, he got. So, not only hadn’t Hastert seen these e-mails, if he had seen them any subsequent decisions Hastert might have made would have based on Edmund’s prank. Perhaps that might have resulted in the discovery of additional communications between Foley and other pages, but that’s not a basis for concluding that Hastert was negligent or should resign.

Here's the WSJ:

A statement on behalf of the executive committee of the family-coalition Arlington Group, including cultural conservative leaders Don Wildmon, Tony Perkins, Gary Bauer and Paul Weyrich, wants the "whole truth," which apparently consists of "when House Leadership or other members from either party knew of this situation." The group demands that "legal authorities prosecute any person who had knowledge of any such activity but did not report it immediately." And of course while the House Speaker was taking this public beating, his No. 2, Majority Leader John Boehner, pulled down the shades and turned away with his now-famous dismissal: "It's in his corner; it's his responsibility."

And so with an election weeks away and its troops already at the edge of the cliff, the Republican elites decided to jump into the sea over Mr. Foley.

We doubt that Messrs. Boehner, Wildmon, Perkins, Bauer and Weyrich will feel as politically cleansed as they seem to be this week if they wake up November 8 to a House run by Ms. Pelosi and Messrs. Rangel, Murtha, Dingell, Waxman, Obey and Frank. And if the pundits are right, the Foley wilding may even give them a Harry Reid Senate.

And, of course, that's all that matters here. Family values, schmamly values!

Posted by aalkon at October 6, 2006 5:45 AM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.advicegoddess.com/mt4/mt-tb.cgi/1743

Comments

More drama unfolding from the Foley's Follies department. It should be a Broadway musical by now.

Day one, he resigns in disgrace. Fine. Day two, his lawyer announces that he has checked himself into rehab (not that his supposed alcoholism is being offered as an excuse; they just felt like sharing). Day three, his lawyer announces that Foley was sexually abused as a child (not that this is being offered as an excuse; they just felt like sharing). Day four, Foley announces that he's gay (duuuuuh, not that there's a connection; they just felt like sharing).

This is why we keep talking about him. Because he won't shut up! Whatever happen to being responsible and taking your punishment like a man? Where the hell is Bill O'Reilly when you really need him?

Posted by: Patrick at October 6, 2006 2:26 AM

Mark Levin is a disturbing individual. Have you ever actually listened to his syndicated radio show? I have. In fact, sometimes I've listened to it for the same reason that people stare at car crashes with bloody victims in the car: Because it's so horrifying that you can't turn your eyes away.

He's also fond of bashing the International Red Cross for treating wounded Hezbollah fighters during the recent hostilities in Lebanon. Levin seemed not to realize that the Red Cross tries very hard to be neutral, for the very sensible reason that, were it ever to be seen as favoring one side, its workers and doctors would become legitimate targets.

Posted by: Orac at October 6, 2006 4:37 PM

I haven't heard him, probably just because he doesn't run in LA. So much of what's on talk radio these days is just nonthink, very loudly voiced. Somehow, despite my pretty cynical (read: realistic) take on human nature, I'm still a little bit shocked when I hear lies dispensed on the radio -- not misinformation trotted out by lazy, stupid people -- but falsehoods paraded around as truths by people who have to know they're telling lies.

Posted by: Amy Alkon at October 6, 2006 6:28 PM

Somehow, despite my pretty cynical (read: realistic) take on human nature, I'm still a little bit shocked when I hear lies dispensed on the radio -- not misinformation trotted out by lazy, stupid people -- but falsehoods paraded around as truths by people who have to know they're telling lies.

That's been going since Rush Limbaugh first tried to tell us that Reaganomics was good for us.

Posted by: Patrick at October 6, 2006 11:31 PM

Leave a comment