October 02, 2006
Time for Hastert to Go II
Leaving aside all the huffing and puffing by the ersatz "righteous indignation" of the left, one can't be conservative and not be utterly disappointed in the ineptitude (and decrepitude) of Republican Leadership.
Yes, I'm talking about the Foley Scandal.
After decades of scandals that SCREAM that the cover-up is worse than the crime, the craven leadership of our party has once again attempted to protect their own at the expense of rationality.
Frankly, I don't care about Studds and Frank. We expect that sort of behavior from Democrats, and we expect their party to defend them. Witness the reaction of the Republican Party rank and file. As to Foley, we all agree that he should be thrown to the wolves. As to our leadership, it is a lesson in schizophrenia.
Do we ask them to step down, or do we defend them in the hope that they can pull it off until November? I say we demand that they step down.
These folks knew of Foley's behavior, and hiding behind legalisms is a sure fire guarantee of larger losses in November. Foley should have been outed and asked to step down the moment the first e-mail popped up.
Until this hit, it was nearly a foregone conclusion that the House would stay Republican. These idiots have put that outcome in jeopardy, and for that they deserve demotion. The only way to turn this lemon into lemonade is to fire the leadership and run on the platform that Republicans punish their failures (see Trent Lott) while the Democrats re-elect theirs.
If you think I'm wrong, feel free to debate me on it anytime from 10AM to Noon on www.WKRS.com, where the Extreme Wisdom Show is now streaming.
Posted by Bruno Behrend at October 2, 2006 08:15 PM
Comments
Actually Bruno, if we conservatives really wanted to make a difference and gain newfound respect, we'd behave in the same manner as the Dems did. Besides, you don't think that the main reason Barney Frank/Gerry Studds got reelected was because of the reaction of CONSERVATIVE REPUBLICANS to their little pecadilloes? Call it an "up yours" reaction, and the electorate is entitled to do it.
You know, if I was a Dem political strategist, I'd be having Nancy Pelosi state, unequivocally, that the Dems will not touch Iraq war funding once elected. Doing so would pretty much cement a Dem takeover of the House. If it means we can get Mike Pence in some leadership role, it would be worth it.
Posted by: Brad S at October 3, 2006 08:20 AM
You expect more from Republicans ... and you'd better get it. - Swearingen, Standard Oil of Indiana in the shadow of Orville Hodges while sponsoring Ogilvie-team work parties for Goldwater in '64.
The fact is that there is a double standard. Republicans cannot act like Dimocrats. Republicans say character counts. Republicans say that good and evil do exist. and that Not everything is relative. There are some absolutes.
Bruno is right. It is time for Hastert to go. He has been bad for Illinois, both in terms of government and politics. He was early told that Crane was a disaster but pretended otherwise. Foley is just another example of the same lack of guts.
Hastert has had a solid majority in the house and has constantly played defense. Common sense would say that when you have possession of the ball, you should play offense and try to score some points.... The best defense is a good offense.
BTW, Foley might be just the tip of the iceberg with additional R and D players on capitol hill to be named later. Hastert&Co has known about them also.
Posted by: Bob Schmidt at October 3, 2006 08:51 AM
If neither party wants a far-reaching backlash in 5 weeks, both sides would be wise to drop this thing, IMHO, with no further damages. This is starting to look like the Jon Grunseth situation in Minnesota in 1990.
Jon Grunseth was the GOP nominee for Governor in MN that year. He was accused of diddling with pre-teen girls at pool parties. The incumbent DFL Governor, Rudy Perpich, pushed this issue as far as he could push it, to the point where Jon Grunseth ended up dropping out.
The guy who replaced Grunseth on the ballot ended up beating Perpich with only a week of campaigning. As a sign of how far the backlash went, that was the same election in which the late Paul Wellstone beat another incumbent Rudy. As a resident of neighboring South Dakota at the time, the media coverage and its associated backlash came very close to toppling my state's incumbent GOP senator at the time, Larry Pressler.
Everyone would be well advised to back off from this.
Posted by: Brad S at October 3, 2006 09:15 AM
Brad,
What's wrong with kicking over as many of these bozo's as possible?
For my part, I'd like to GOP to keep the majority, but the nation will survive a turnover just as it survived Clinton & Carter.
Were it not for the purse strings controlled by party leadership, there would be 10s of house members campaigning on asking Hastert to step down.
What better evidence is there that one is "independent of party control?"
Posted by: Bruno at October 4, 2006 06:02 PM
"For my part, I'd like to GOP to keep the majority, but the nation will survive a turnover just as it survived Clinton & Carter."
We may not survive a return to Democrat leadership of the country. Look at the shenanigans of the Democrats in elections since 2000. We have to remember who appoints the judges -- judges determine if the laws passed are allowed to be enacted.
Further, illegal immigration will increase, leftist education will worsen, same-sex marriage will become federal law; the war on Islamic Jihad will cease while restrictions on the free speech of conservatives will tighten.
I think Bush and many Republicans are frauds on social matters, but they are better than the outright Marxists who are "Democrats."
I believe that Hastert did not know the extent of Foley's "interaction" with pages and acted appropriately when informed of the original, less awful e-mails, given the pro-homo climate of the media, which would have made any ouster of Foley a "cause celebre" prior to the Left's release of those IM's.
Posted by: Margaret at October 10, 2006 08:40 AM