Wah! No fair! Democrats are engaging in politics of personal destruction!

[Philosoraptor]

Boo hoo! Dirty tricks! Personal smears! Is this all the Democrats have is mean spiritedness?

Makes one laugh a bitter laugh huh?

[Heidi]

1. No matter how they spin it, it was Foley who engaged in the politics

of personal destruction. As far as I can see, the only dirty tricks in Foley's situation are those he used in his vile attempt to groom an adolescent. Republicans claim to care deeply about personal responsibility and "family values," so they should be first in line to hold one of their own accountable. :shrug:

[JohnnyRingo]

2. I remember back in about 2000

When DeLay publicly announced that the Republican party was going to campaign more aggressively.
That the party would adopt a "no prisoners" attack against all democrats in order to maginalize or remove them from American politics.

I told a Repub friend about it back then, complaining that it sounded very polarizing, and that a new era of partisanship would result in dirty politics.

His reply?
"It's about time"

It's hard to feel sympathy, but these 'pubs haven't done much since to improve our government have they?

[Name removed]

3. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[sendero]

4. You wait and see..

.... this isn't about consensual heterosexual sex between adults, no matter how hard they try to spin this, comparisons to Clinton are ridiculous.

The Dems were wet noodles because average Americans don't understand or give two shits about the issues involved. Plus, the net effect of the bill will be minimal, it is unconstitutional on its face and international laws are the problem, not US law.

But Americans understand a sexual predator and online trolling for minors just fine thanks to the "liberal media".

[ClintonTyree]

5. I beg to differ.

Clinton's sexual peccadilloes involved a member of the opposite sex who was past the age of majority. Foley, on the other hand, preyed on young boys well beneath the age of majority. Using the standards set by the Republicans themselves, i.e. the criminalization of homosexuality, Foley is MUCH more susceptible to criticism and censure.

Contrary to your belief, "gutter politics" DO work if the gutter is in a criminal neighborhood. Clinton lied about sex with a consenting adult. To my knowledge, heterosexual sex hasn't been criminalized. Yet. Homosexual sex, on the other hand, especially pedophilian homosexual sex, has been touted as the worst sin imaginable by the religious right. It is THEY who have framed the debate here and they've been caught in their own web of condemnation.

Foley, Reynolds, Hastert et.al. are in a HEAP of trouble with their constituency about this. Or at least they will be once the dust has settled. It couldn't happen to a nice bunch of guys.

[zalinda]

6. Okay, the Clinton comparison has really gotten to me

First, SHE seduced him, in fact she told her old boyfriend that she was going to do it BEFORE she moved to DC. Second, she was well over the age of consent. Third, back in my day, gentlemen NEVER admitted having sex with someone, to protect her reputation, and I'm 2 years younger than Clinton. I know everyone thinks he was lying to protect himself, (and I'm sure some of that was true)but I never looked at it that way. He didn't know she was bragging about the affair at the time, and I always thought he was trying to protect her good name.

zalinda

[Tarheel_Dem]

7. You guys are all in a tither.....

Clinton = consentual extramarital heterosexual affair?

Foley = predatory stalking of minor BOYS (in his charge) online?

We'll let the public decide. By the way, you Republicans invented "gutter politics".

[Binka]

13. The Ole Ordinary American Straw-man

You need a new playbook dude.

[SmokingJacket]

16. Hey, Foley got into the gutter all by himself. nt

[Name removed]

8. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Tarheel_Dem]

18. So, you're saying that Dems shouldn't be calling....

for investigations? Investigations that should include at least eleven congressmen & staffers (that we know of). You'll excuse me if I disagree. This has been known at least as far back as 2002, because pages were warned by Supervisors to keep their distance from Foley. The House leadership decided to play "politics" with this issue in order to retain Foley's seat, and put countless young underage boys at risk. He then makes a $100,000.00 campaign "contribution" to the man (Reynolds) charged with oversight of the Page Program? Do you honestly expect Dems to sit back & say nothing? If Dems don't yell for investigations, the "sleazoid press" will drop this quicker than a hot potato. But, nice try.

:hi:

[spanone]

9. All I can say is it's about time.

And you only reap what you sow.

[Atman]

10. Why not? Isn't this whole scandal about "PERSONAL DESTRUCTION?"

There's you're talking-point, dems. Spit it right in their faces.

[Avalux]

11. Um - not dirty tricks; none of this shit is made up, lol.

That's what's so funny; Democrats aren't using Rove tactics; character assassination through blatant lies. Republicans have done this to themselves and Democrats would be crazy to not use it to their advantage.

[Binka]

12. Excellent Points

Somebody needs to tell that to the stinky foot up thread already starting with the RW talking points. I'm way too tired today to engage with newbies today.

[Name removed]

17. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lonestarnot]

15. They can't STAND truthiness! Simply can't STAND it!