An interesting article over at The American Spectator verifies what I've been hearing from other sources. Democrat operatives are confirming that the Foley story wasn't supposed to be released until about 10 days before the election - and it was supposed to be the culmination of a series of orchestrated October surprises, rather than the beginning.
What changed? Poll numbers. Republicans were coming back strongly -- Democrat hopes were evaporating. With the new age of media and the Internet, Democrats figure that a poll swing that results from a story like Foley would last about two weeks before voters start paying attention to real issues again - and that's nationally. In individual races, where often local issues are paramount in a non-presidential election year, the swing benefit from such a story might even be shorter (see NYT story later in this post):
"You pull out the bright shiny things that distract the average American voter away from the issues we all know they care about -- national security, anti-terrorism -- and focus on the ugly: Foley and Iraq."
...'Republicans had to have known we'd be looking to change the national debate,' says a House Democrat leadership aide. 'You had our leadership looking at cratering polling numbers. A majority within grasp wasn't drifting away, it was being yanked back by Republicans. I wouldn't be surprised if Foley had to be bumped up on the scandal schedule. That makes a lot of sense given where we were two weeks ago, and where we are now.' "
As much as Katie Couric et al try to keep the Foley fires burning, there is now enough evidence that this was a political stunt -- and that no one out there knows where this is heading. Leaders and operatives from both parties are going to be put under oath by the FBI and the Justice Department in the investigation of a cover-up.
Democrats beware -- there was just too much coordination beween liberal groups like CREW, a fake blog, American Family Voices, David Corn's McCarthyesque "Gay Staffers List", and Nancy Pelosi to be a coincidence. Now that evidence has surfaced that the communicant with Mark Foley of the IMs (not the e-mails, which not even Brian Ross was willing to write about in August) was a legal consenting adult, the story turns into a gay version of the Clinton-Lewinsky Scandal. The differences are homosexuality, a page instead of an intern, and there being no physical contact in the Foley story.
The latest twist, that congressional staffers like Kirk Fordham "warned" Hassert's office three years ago about Foley's penchant for young men, lacks any detail about what the warning was, and is contradicted by Fordham's own documented actions regarding the Foley Scandal.
If no evidence that any crime was being committed, what can be done about someone like Foley except what the National Journal is saying happened?:
Foley's friends ruefully speak of knowing that Foley was friendly with congressional pages. One recalls jokingly telling Foley to be careful not to confirm a stereotype about sexual predators. Foley laughed, a friend says.When the Foley story first hit, I was furious. Based on what I was reading and hearing, I thought that Mark Foley was at the very least a sexual predator and a pedophile. Now, even according to Andrew Sullivan, no evidence exists that he is either. Right now I'm glad he's gone (he seems like a time-bomb waiting to explode), and we may still find out that he has committed crimes against young children. But right now this whole thing is looking more and more like a political hit piece designed to surpress the conservative vote. And according to the New York Times, it's not looking as if it's going to work long-term:
...But then, in the fall of 2005, a page sponsored by Rep. Rodney Alexander of Louisiana, complained. After Foley had furtive discussions with House officials, his friends warned him to police himself. And one former Foley staffer recalls asking the lawmaker directly whether there was anything more serious floating around. Foley, according to the former aide, said no.
...Foley's former chief of staff, Kirk Fordham, last spring promised both Rep. John Shimkus, the chairman of the page board, and a top assistant to Hastert that he would make sure Foley behaved himself. At that time, Fordham was the chief aide to Rep. Tom Reynolds of New York, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee. Fordham's assurances, according to this account, apparently were enough to persuade Hastert's staff not to recommend further action
...Fordham told ABC News that in 2003 he warned Hastert's powerful chief of staff, Scott Palmer, that he was worried about Foley's penchant for doting on male pages. Palmer, according to Fordham, subsequently notified Hastert. Palmer responded that Fordham's version of events is untrue. And a House leadership aide wondered aloud why Fordham, who professed to be surprised by Foley's conduct on Monday, was saying two days later that he remembered having long-standing anxieties.
But in dozens of interviews here in southeastern Virginia, a conservative Christian stronghold that is a battleground in races for the House and Senate, many said the episode only reinforced their reasons to vote for their two Republican incumbents in neck-and-neck re-election fights, Representative Thelma Drake and Senator George Allen. "This is Foley's lifestyle," said Ron Gwaltney, a home builder, as he waited with his family outside a Christian rock concert last Thursday in Norfolk. "He tried to keep it quiet from his family and his voters. He is responsible for what he did. He is paying a price for what he did. I am not sure how much farther it needs to go."So the ABC News polls out this morning reflect the American public being hit in the face with the Foley Scandal and its spin, and the trickle-down from that. But it reflects national opinion, not local races. The local polling will take a hit as well, but only for as long as local issues (or the War on Terror and Immigration) aren't the focus. The more the Democrats use Foley in their ads and the media obsesses over it, the more of a chance that the Democrats will experience a blow-back from the voters. It sometimes takes a while, but generally voters know when they're being played for fools - and don't appreciate it. This Foley business certainly doesn't help the Republicans, but it's not the fatal blow that is being portrayed in the media, either.
The Democratic Party is "the party that is tolerant of, maybe more so than Republicans, that lifestyle," Mr. Gwaltney said, referring to homosexuality.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 12)
46. AND LIKE EVERYTHING FROM KARL ROVE SOUND BITES, TO THE SWIFT-BOAT CROWD AND ENDLESS INVESTIGATIONS OF CLINTON - WHITEWATER, TRAVELGATE, BLAH, BLAH, ALL CREATED BY REPUBLICANS - OR DREAMED-UP BY REPUBLICANS - WE ARE IN CONSTANT SPIN CITY. THE 2/3RDS -3/4ERS OF THE AMERICAN PUBLIC WHO ARE NOT RAPID REACTIONARY REPUBLICANS ARE FED-UP WITH FAILURE AFTER FAILURE FROM THIS ADMINISTRATION - WRAPPED IN SOUND BITES, THE FLAG AND DEROGATORY REMARKS ABOUT HONEST AMERICANS.
I MORN THE DEAD AT THE WORLD TRADE CENTER AND IRAQ TO KEEP THIS MORNIC CREW IN POWER. AND YES BUSH ET. AL ARE RESPONSIBLE - 100% FOR THIS FIASCO.
IF THIS WAS A DEMOCRATIC PLOT A NUMBER OF REPUBLICAN CONGRESSMAN AND STAFFERS SURE CAME OUT OF THE WOODWORK TO SAY THEY GAVE WARNINGS ABOUT FOLEY. IT JUST UNDERSCORES THE SIZE OF HASTART'S COVER-UP OF A RICH FRUITCAKE, THAT WAS SEXUALLY HARASSING GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES - AND THAT IS A CRIME.
THE REPUBLICAN PARTY CONTINUES TO REACH NEW ETHICAL LOWS - AND BLAME EVERYBODY ELSE - JUST LIKE 9-11!
JAY SULLIVAN at 7:41PM on Oct 10th 2006
47. Mark Foley may not have committed a crime but his intentions were wrong. These pages are High Schoolers which most are not 18 yet, so they are minors. Bill Clinton had sex with a woman not a child or minor. I can't believe this is just political.
Political it may be to some extent. What I want to know is why has this gone on for so long before being investigated. If it were my son sitting there being hit on you bet I'd raise hell. This smells like Water Gate.
John Donnelly at 7:42PM on Oct 10th 2006
48. why would AOL put something like this article on the front page of my homepage? what a disgusting article to try to safe republican face and maybe give a few rightwingers an article to quote from with "as seen on aol" source line. it is appalling to this conservative democrat that this trash can be written when the bottom line is the man resigned the minute it all hit the presses. can we please find smart decent independant thinking hardworking above all the backdoor porkbarrel stuffing garbage politicians or has this republic turned so far south that all is left is a ENRON mentality where the only object is say the right things go through the right motions and all the time you try to figure out ways to improve your own lot in life.
jack aucoin at 7:53PM on Oct 10th 2006
49. This is just one giant piece of ill-informed propaganda. All it took was for me to read the term "Democrat party," a Republican right-wing euphemism putting down the Democratic party, to know this author is trying to feed the readers a load of crap.
There is no evidence whatsoever for this Republican spin. Even ABC has said outright that it was a Republican who broke the story. Republicans own this scandal. Trying to push it off on anyone else is just another example of the cowardice and mendacity of the so-called "ruling party."
I'm amazed AOL allows trash like this to be posted even on a blog.
Marilynn Kupersmith at 7:56PM on Oct 10th 2006
50. The real victims in all this are the American voting public who find their corporate controlled media pandering for ratings with this tabloid tripe instead of serious economic, health care and foreign policy issue coverage. Taxpayers are also victimized by having their inflation proofed, overpaid elected representatives investigating who knew what, and when they knew it. This fear mongering, do nothing Congress, continues to fiddle madly while the middle class burns!
Jack Stoner at 7:57PM on Oct 10th 2006
51. Classic Republican rambling post. Face it, your party is wrong on this just like it's wrong on its bumbling of the Iraq War and a host of other issues. I'm sure they will continue to try and blame Dems for this "October Surprise" or gays or the mediarather than accept the fact that it was their own fault.
Steve at 8:07PM on Oct 10th 2006
52. ABC's Brian Ross, who broke the story, has admitted his sources were Republicans, not Democrats. This blog and the American Spectator are engaging in what Republicans usually do, spin and lying. Rest assured, more despicable facts will come out about the Republican leadership knowing that Foley was preying on pages, and still left him on the committee for Missing & Exploited Children. Shameful. Bye, Hastert.
John Hilary at 8:06PM on Oct 10th 2006
53. Obvious is obvious. Anyone who thinks the timing of the release of Mr. Foley's folly was not planned doesn't deserve a serious discussion. They are either niave or dishonest in the discussion.
Furthermore, I find it interesting that the same group of people demand different treatment for lesser abuses than they do from their own more flagrent abussive favorites. This political mindset is their own undoing. The hallmark of conservatives is consistent application of principles. Mr Foley is gone, and no conservative defends his actions. Examination of the behavior of the democrats and their supporters reveals the lack of honesty in thought that undermines their words. Winning at all cost appears to be the motto of our liberal minded compatriots.
gleb moysaenko at 8:08PM on Oct 10th 2006
54. From the info. given, it sounds as if Foley sent emails to this Page, which were very friendly, but not as over the line as the IM messages sent at a later date. It is my understanding that the boy left the office where he was working at 16, time passed, and Foley again contacted(IM)the boy, now 21. That's when the story broke.
Charging Foley with sexual abuse of a minor seems inappropriate to me, if the boy was no longer a minor having passed the age of consent, and is gay. That seems to me to be now, a personal decision on the part of the boy as to his choice of lifestyles. Now if the Page isn't gay, that's another story.
Laurie Oylear at 8:13PM on Oct 10th 2006
55. This should have been revealed years ago - when Hastert stepped in to save those pages from a sexual predator. Of course, he didn't, and it broke wide open the month before the election. Perhaps it was a vast Democratic conspiracy (which I doubt) - but if Hastert had any sense of ethics, then this wouldn't have been available for Dems to use. Besides, it's only a small factor in the general discontent. Bush and the GOP have made a mess of things.
David at 8:09PM on Oct 10th 2006
56. For the past 12 years, Republicans have had control of the house and senate. For the past 6 they have had the White House also. In the past 26 years, the Republicans have had control of the White House for 18. The Democrats have control of both houses and the White House in the past 26 years for a total of 2. As a voter, I've voted Republican for president every year since 1980 with the exception of 2004. I agree strongly that William Jefferson Clinton should have resigned the presidency of the Monica Lewinsky incident. He didn't. But you know what, Billy is not president, hasn't been for 6 years now. So can the republicans quit blaming everything on him and start accepting responsibility for things that have gone on during their watch. Ask yourself, as I have, would we be better off with Al Gore as President? Would we be in Iraq? Would we have captured Osama? I want a new political party, a party that accepts blame as well as credit, a party that represents all americans, not just the relious right, or the anti abortion activists, a party that puts it's heart and sould into providing the best military with the best equipment and the best equipped. A party that when they go to war, turns the war over to the military and says, give it back when you have finished. I'm tired of the Cheneys, Bushes, Rumsfields, DeLays, Haslerts, etc. Can we run a political campaign that is about more than gay marriages and abortion. What the hell does it matter if 2 men sleep together, and as for abortion, i'm not going to have one, since i'm male and 60, so that should be left up to the person or persons involved. I'm Putting all my hopes in the McCain basket, god there is no one else.
Jasper at 8:11PM on Oct 10th 2006
57. The constant spin, deflection and blame passing of the Republicans is not gong unnoticed by voters. Either is the desperate attempt at bringing up "scandals" from decades ago ... a time when Foley's "love interests" were not even born yet.
A Republican Congressman preyed on minors on the Internet, Republican leadership brushed if off, other Republicans exposed Foley and the GOP inaction and they shamelessly try to pass responsibility off on Democrats. Disgusting, stupid and ineffective preaching except where their blind "choir" is concerned.
Fmrgopmmbr at 8:14PM on Oct 10th 2006
58. The constant spin, deflection and blame passing of the Republicans is not gong unnoticed by voters. Either is the desperate attempt at bringing up "scandals" from decades ago ... a time when Foley's "love interests" were not even born yet.
A Republican Congressman preyed on minors on the Internet, Republican leadership brushed if off, other Republicans exposed Foley and the GOP inaction and they shamelessly try to pass responsibility off on Democrats. Disgusting, stupid and ineffective preaching except where their blind "choir" is concerned.
Fmrgopmmbr at 8:14PM on Oct 10th 2006
59. It's just another play from the Democratic Playbook. Is anyone really "surprised" there was an October Surprise? It's what they do (e.g., Kerry, Gore, & their media cohorts, etc.). They can not win elections based on their "ideas". So, in the last few weeks before an election, they distract the country from what really matters. And, the media is their best "breathless" friend.
The Republicans, who were discussing the topics of the day, were doing well in the polls before this election's October Surprise. Democrats can't have you discussing the topics of the day, they can't compete.
In addition, the difference between Republicans & Democrats voters/politicians is when these types of issues (e.g., Foley) arise, Republicans demand a response. On the other hand, in the Democratic arena when such issues arise (e.g., Stubbs, Frank, Kennedy, Clinton, etc.) you're behaviors are excused, applauded, & ultimately, you're reelected! No accountability & all backed by a media with their own agenda! It's a disgrace. Just one of the many reasons I left the Democratic party.
Former Democrat at 8:20PM on Oct 10th 2006
60. With any luck, the Right Wing Republicans and the Conservitave Christians will stay home in November. After all...FAMILY VALUES and W. are what is keeping this country great. Not...
Andi Decker at 8:32PM on Oct 10th 2006