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 5 of 12)
61. ITS NOT ONLY ABOUT FOLEY,BUT ALSO THE FEDERAL PROSTITUTION SEX RINGS GOING ON.ALSO,REMEMBER KARR,OF RAMSEY FAME---------HE KNEW OF WHICH FEDS WERE INVOLVED,WHICH MAY BE THE REASON HE WAS ARRESTED IN THAILAND,SO HE WOULDNT HAVE TO GO TO TRIAL AGAINST THEM!
DEBBIE at 8:19PM on Oct 10th 2006
62. Incredible! If the right blames Bill and Hilary for Foley's behavior and the subsequent coverup, thirty per cent of American voters will believe them, simply because they want to. You can "sell" anything to people who are eager to buy it in advance.
Ted Roth at 8:24PM on Oct 10th 2006
63. Just some questions: why did it take 3 years for these IMs to surface, why were they not referred to law enforcedment agencies, why were they handed to ABC and other media?
Who held onto them? Why? Why if these people were "underage" was there not an investigation launched?
I am not defending Foley...but I want to know why these sat there for three years.
Shadowbane at 8:23PM on Oct 10th 2006
64. Clinton was asked by a youg girl if he was wearing boxer shorts. Does that mean she was a pedophile?Note that every republican who has been exposed in unethical conduct has resigned his position.This seems to be an ethical approach. Did Stubbs, Clinton, or Barney Franks do likewise? Name one republican that hid behind the definition if "is".
It appears that the morality issue is on the side of the republicans. There will be individuals in each party that may be unethical, but this is not worthy of trying to indict the party.
Jim Johnson at 4:50PM on Oct 11th 2006
65. This is utter hogwash. What Democratic Operatives? The only put up job in this whole debacle is the Republican spin machine's attempts to turn one of the worst political scandals in a decades into a none-story.
To attempt to turn the story against the Democrats - who have absolutely nothing to do with the sordid goings on of Mr Foley, nor a thing to do with the subsequent cover up of the cover up by Republicans - this is the saddest day for the Republicans since the hey-day of Tricky Dick.
A party whose hubris has led it to think any story they can disseminate will be taken in by the American people and believed.
At least, they hope, by a sizable enough majority to keep them in power.
I will not brand the entire Republican Party with the evil of the Bush admimistration, and it's neo-con cronies. But they have over-reached themselves, as the power mad always do.
Their projects have worst than turned to dust, they have turned to blood; the blood of the innocent young men and women fighting for those whose only dream is of plunder and power.
I do not think this blatant attempt to evade responsibility will be successful.
I believe it will only make those who attempt to utilize the defense of 'blame the Dems' seem foolish and untrustworthy.
Untrustworthy in defense of their honor, the honor of the Congress and, ultimately, the honor of the United States.
LaVerne Wheeler at 8:30PM on Oct 10th 2006
66. You have confirmed my suspicion that the Republicans are guilty of a coverup. If the Democrats knew, then surely the Republicians knew and did not break the story long ago to minimize the political damage at the upcoming elections. My suspicions is the same with the conservative press. So, don't blame the Democrats for playing politics while the Republicians were foolish enough to play coverup.
Bill at 12:02PM on Oct 12th 2006
67. The man was just plain sick.Gay or not gay, you do not prey on children or teenagers. Poor john walsh must really have a sick feeling having thought this man was trying to protect our children. The republicans Knew about weapons of mass destruction in iraq and knew about plots before we were attacked and knew the results of the last election before it was over, but knew nothing about this! Perhaps many should examine their values or lack there of. Democrats are not much better, but for health care, raising the minimum wage, and social issues they dont pretend to be the party with a direct line to heaven. Perhaps the republican leadership and that ann colteir should see a doctor!! I am told Rush Limbaugh has a few!!!
james zappala at 8:33PM on Oct 10th 2006
68. This really is a scandal about Foley,but I believe George Bush has committed more damaging deeds against the average middle class American with the help of all his cronies from Enron ,Exxon, and just about any major bank,and oh I just about forgot to mention Haliburton and Dick Cheny.
davjd meyer at 8:40PM on Oct 10th 2006
69. What pathetic stretch of revisionist history! Of course, the American Spectator still believes the Earth is flat, witches float, and Republicans are fiscal conservatives.
Tom at 8:43PM on Oct 10th 2006
70. I don't know whether the Deocrats used this story in a political maneuver or not, but the Republicans have done that sort of thing often enough that they have a nerve to complain.
As I see it, Foley did, indeed, write improper E-mails and/or IMs to pages, and it was, indeed, covered up and not corrected. That is the point.
Incidentally, the Democrats are happy to return to the issues, especially since the Bush administration has given us so much fodder to use against the Republicans. It has been one thing after another to turn off people, and we are sick and tired of the Republicans veering off from the issues and telling us only that we MUST stay the course (meaning what, exactly?) Now I have read about several people having been improperly arrested or detained for the most MINOR shows of disagreement with the administration. We don't want a dictatorship in this country, and that is exactly what George W. Bush has been trying to create.
Dorothy Tarantino at 9:10PM on Oct 10th 2006
71. The article said "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 -- "
Yeah, the democrats made Foley hunt young children. Republicans and their "values" are fairly scary.
Dr. John at 8:46PM on Oct 10th 2006
72. This all began on a leftist Cuban homosexual farm run by Ted Kennedy.
Brainwashed kids were then put before Foley while George Soros plied him with liquor, and nature took it's course.
Around 2001, Hillary Clinton began to hold a gun to all the GOP leaders of the House to make sure they would not make any inquiries into the numerous complaints they had been given about Foley.
To show her true evil, Hillary was able to do this without even knowing the GOP had been given strong evidence that Foley was a predator and wanabe molester.
Shortly after, secret, world class computers kept at a top-secret Democrat
location began to track Foley's IM's, which they kept for years and years,
just waiting to spring them.
Then....and here's the part you will never hear in the biased liberal news media...the
e-mails were given to no other than one Mohammed Atta...yes....that one.
Yes..yes....it all makes sense now...Those sneaky Democrats pretending to be powerless and in the minority..all the while plotting and being devious...how could I have been so blind?
hal taylor at 8:47PM on Oct 10th 2006
73. The differences between Foley plays with page boys and Bill Clinton lets Monica entertain him: Foley was a predator (if the boys were underage)or at least an opportunist. The biggest difference: Republicans claim to be the moralistic party, stand up for "family values" and agree that homosexuality is an "abomination." That makes them hypocrites when their own behavior is immoral, contradicys family values, and there are many gays in the Republican Party who are hushed up and shushed (almost in the closet) even as their bosses make anti-homosexual speeches -- Rick Santorum is an example. He compared gay love to having sex with animals, extreme cases of incest, etc. I am not gay but I have seen stable gay couples that stay together for 20 years and are strictly "faithful." Republicans cannot claim any moral high ground, or claim to be better than the "permissive Democrat liberals" if their ranks include adulterers, statutory rapists, page molesters of whatever sex, etc. Similarly, they take the macho military pose and denounce the Democrats as doves, but most of the GOP leaders and talk show propagandists never served in the military, dodged the draft or had safe, cushy stateside military jobs.
Honest Abe at 4:01PM on Oct 12th 2006
74. I have a simple solution to this whole fiasco...
(1) Raise the legal age limit in the District of
Columbia to 18 years of age.
(2) Replace all the Pages, which are currently
High School students with College students.
(3) Enforce a strict moral code upon our current
and future political leaders, and I mean
strict.
(4) Ban all non-heterosexuals from serving in any
government position as homosexuality is
immoral and just wrong.
Steele M. Gibson at 8:53PM on Oct 10th 2006
75. I find it amusing that some try to blame the Dems for exposing (oops) Foley's penchant for young pages. The far right loves to trumpet their deep belief in family values, but their most popular and beloved spokesmen reek of hippocracy. Cheney claims to love his gay daughter equally, but steadfastly backs Bush position on gays. Bill O'Reilly calls himself a 'traditionalist', but buys off his producer's lawsuit against his incessant phone sex. In most businesses it would be 'traditional' for him to visit the company's HR Director for a "you're fired" meeting. (2nd anniversary of her lawsuit this Friday the 13th, my how time flies) Rush Limbaugh--3 wives and counting, taking oxycontin to come down from Viagra using bogus prescriptions.
Readily acknowledging that I am far from perfect, I only present these examples because they are constantly shouting their 'holier than thou' attitudes and moral superiority. Aaaarrgghhhhh!
I guess my point is Dems don't need to time their surprises. There's been a steady stream of them since Bush landed on that aircraft carrier and pronounced mission accomplished several years ago. By the way, why did he need another pilot when he landed that day? After all he was in the Air Force Reserves during Vietnam.
Tim Gillingham at 8:53PM on Oct 10th 2006