Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Josh Marshall's excellent take on the Big Picture, and on emails vs IMs

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU
 
StefanX Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:04 PM
Original message
Josh Marshall's excellent take on the Big Picture, and on emails vs IMs
Edited on Mon Oct-02-06 06:06 PM by StefanX
Here's Josh Marshall's take on the big picture in Foleygate:

I've gotten a lot of questions about the larger political impact of this debacle. So I'd like to draw back for a moment to take stock of that question.
...
Foley's downfall has pretty nearly decapitated the leadership of the House GOP with just five weeks to go before election day. And that's devastating.
...
The simple fact is that to the ext{e}nt campaigning determines the outcomes of elections, the race goes to the side that can remain on the offensive most consistently and define the national debate on its own terms. Foleygate has made it very hard for the leaders of the House GOP to go on the offensive on anything relevant to the election.
...
For political purposes they're basically out of commission... This is in the context of an election that was already going very badly for House Republicans. Foleygate has now made them all but politically defenseless in the final stretch of the campaign. And that is a very big deal.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/010107.php


Josh's writing style usually strikes me as fairly muted and sober (except that time when he talked about "tectonic plates" -- and there's still time for those tectonic plates to shift once Libby gets dragged into court this January!), so when Josh uses words like "decapitated" and "devastating", that shows how bad it really is this time for the Republicans.

Democratics can easily tie all these Republican failures together by saying stuff like:

Republicans always say:

WE DIDN'T KNOW!
WE HAD NO IDEA!
NOBODY COULD HAVE IMAGINED!
- THAT FOLEY WOULD TRY TO HAVE SEX WITH UNDERAGE PAGES
- THAT THE LEVEES WOULD BREAK
- THAT TERRORISTS WOULD USE AIRPLANES AS WEAPONS.

Notice a pattern here? Had enough of these know-nothing, do-nothing Republicans already?


=====

Also worth checking out: a TPM reader demolishes the Republicans' attempt to finesse the whole emails-versus-IMs thing:

TPM Reader JM gets it ...

There's a weak excuse emerging from Republicans for Foleygate - they might have known about the e-mails to Rep. Alexander's page, but they never knew about the explicit IMs {instant messages}. Too much of the media coverage right now is centering on that question, as if knowledge of the IMs is the only way to show the leadership was remiss.

But that's irrelevant, and here's why: Once ABC got hold of the e-mails, it took them one day to flush out the IMs. That's what an actual investigation looks like. The Republican leadership simply didn't want to know how bad the Foley situation was. That's just as morally negligent as if they had started digging and found the IMs.


Exactly. Hastert's et al.'s defense here seems to be that their hands were firmly clasped over their ears. They never knew.

http://www.talkingpointsmemo.com/archives/010113.php


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:06 PM
Response to Original message
1. If only someone had told them exactly what time and exactly
which computer Foley would be on, they would have Done Something!

:evilgrin:

"Decapitated"---- I like the sound of that.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StefanX Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. Excellent soundbite! Jon Stewart / Stephen Colbert quality!
Ridicule really hurts politicians. Elsewhere in the same post above, Josh says:

The one thing a pol can't brook is being the object of ridicule and derision. And at the moment that's about the best these characters can hope for.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:15 PM
Response to Reply #3
6. Oooohhhkay.... bookmarking!!
I gotta have this in writing that my silly words were compared to my hero, Colbert!!

Thanks--I needed that!!

Geeeeez, maybe at the grand old age of 60, I'm learning something...

:silly:

"That's the best these characters can hope for". GOOD!

I'm soooo enjoying the Foley Follies today!

:bounce: :bounce: :party: :hippie: :bounce: :bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Eurobabe Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:30 PM
Response to Reply #1
12. Hey now, that's the Kindasleazy excuse!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:31 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Hey! I resemble that remark!
Thanks for the nightmares! :) :hi: :)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
LiberalArkie Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:08 PM
Response to Original message
2. They just did not care. "We are Republicans, we can't do any wrong"
Edited on Mon Oct-02-06 06:09 PM by LiberalArkie
And they may be right, if they control the ballot boxes as many assume.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
StefanX Donating Member (801 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:14 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Only this time they'll have to rely on Diebold more...
...because it's going to be harder to convince people the anti-gay vote was what tipped things in their favor this time.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
momzno1 Donating Member (434 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
5. maybe we ought to be thinking about how thorough repubs are...
How can people who seem to have no F**king clue as to what is going on... they can't recall, they didn't get the memo, they didn't read the article etc... how can they be qualified to be in office?
Can we just call them the Dementia Party? Or the ADHD Party? Or maybe just the Lying Lazy Ass Party?

They are awfully forgetful, are they not?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:19 PM
Response to Original message
7. Something very unusual in the UK. The bookmakers normally
seem to act like the pollsters in the Republicans' pay, and quote the right-wing party as favourite, irrespective of the reality. At some while before an election.

I believe for the last two elections, they made the Republicans favourites - although, barring the occurrence of a totally inordiate scale of fraud (which of course did eventuate) - the indications were that it was a very remote possibility; in the event borne out by the statistics.

Now our bookies make the Democrats the strong favourites - 8/11 - to win the 2008 election, to the Republicans' evens.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
bobbolink Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:23 PM
Response to Reply #7
9. from your lips to the ears (or fingertips) of the Goddess!
What do these bookies know of Diebold?

Is that taken into account?

Interesting post--thanx!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Joe Chi Minh Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-03-06 02:39 PM
Response to Reply #9
15. Let me put it this way: the bookies often know when there is
something amiss with a fancied horse, before the trainer does; their intelligence service is awesome.

True some of them have got badly stung by this US legislation relating to online betting, but the Mr Bigs sold their shares at an early stage and made a fortune - more probably, another fortune to add to those they had already made.

I was heartened to read the position they were taking on the election, so I'm very glad you were, too. It's what I'd hoped.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
mac56 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:22 PM
Response to Original message
8. K & R
nm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ProgressiveEconomist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 08:25 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mayberry Machiavelli Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:25 PM
Response to Original message
10. Not to mention: even without a real investigation, any hint of the email
improprieties and what they suggested, and he should have been IMMEDIATELY yanked off the committee regarding missing/exploited children, investigation or not.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sweetheart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Oct-02-06 06:29 PM
Response to Original message
11. There are a lot of paedophiles in the republican ranks
There are a bunch of religious leaders, who've been near caught before,
screwing young boys, and all of them have a consensus agreement not to rat
out each other, or the whole house of cards will fall... hence the dead
silence and the failure on any of their part to point an accusatory finger
at a sex predator.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blogslut Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Tue Oct-03-06 02:42 PM
Response to Original message
16. ABC's Brian Ross
...says that these IMs go back to April 2003. I am wondering if they did know about the IMs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 19th 2024, 08:33 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (01/01/06 through 01/22/2007) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC