SwiftVets.com

Anker-Klanker · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 2:34 pm Post subject:

As a result of the panel discussion on Brit Hume's show on Fox yesterday, a moment of clarity came to me...

It seems that Republicans have long (self-) claimed to be the party of morals, ethics and family values, so the Foley disaster is being hurled back into their faces by Democrats as an example of Republican hypocracy, etc. It was commented that Democrats are not being judged by the same standards because they've never been known as the party of high values.

Well, I'd modify the Republican position to say that Republicans aspire to those values, but being humans, too, don't always attain them.

But a party with no such aspirations?? That certainly explains the easy "pass" MSM is giving the Democrats/Liberals/Progressives, and also explains why there is apparently no embarassment of double-standards among them.

Gotta tell ya - that revelation hit me between the eyes like a baseball bat!

shawa · CNO Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 2004

From the the comments section at polipundit.com:

Doll · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 7:17 pm Post subject:

BuffaloJack · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:02 pm Post subject:

Doll is 100% correct on the IM history thing.
If it's AOL, they can certainly provide every IM, date, time-stamp, etc.
My daughter once used a bad word in an AOL IM and they suspended my account. When I asked about it, they presented me with a complete history of every IM, email and chat that she'd ever done. I got my account reinstated after explaining (groveling) to them that she was a minor and I and her mother would punish her and restrict her internet habits.
If they can do this with my daughter, they can certainly do it to anyone.
_________________
Swift Boats - Qui Nhon (12/69-4/70), Cat Lo (4/70-5/70), Vung Tau (5/70-12/71)

Doll · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:18 pm Post subject:

Anker-Klanker · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:26 pm Post subject:

Those names, Mike Rogers and John Aravosis, are popping up all over the Internet as definitely having a hand in setting the ambush. I guess we can be grateful to them for being the agents that exposed a predator, or near-predator, who might otherwise have never been exposed. Their motivation and selectivity for exposure stink to high-Heaven, though.

We should not forget that this mess is a two-parter, despite the MSM and Democrats efforts to conflate the two. Foley was exposed and it appears to me that - IMHO - he deserves all the censure and punishment they can throw at him. His exposure is the first part.

The second part of the mess is who knew what and when (i.e., who was responsible for not exposing Foley before now.) The Democrats are doing their best make it sound like it was the "Republican leadership" who were the guilty parties of the second part. But, again IMHO, it's looking more and more like it was activists within the Democrats who are the guilty parties (I didn't say all Democrats, or even any elected Democrats - though they are definitely the ones trying to make hay while the sun shines - but rather political activists and behind-the-scene operatives aligned with the Democrats.)

And just to make it even more complicated, it is pretty obvious that certain right-wingers who have taken a dislike to Hastert for other sins (in their eyes) that he has committed, are using this scandal to try to bring him down. IMHO their motivations and methods stink just as badly (and I'm no fan of Hastert BTW).

What should have been a serious inquiry into a scandal has become nothing more than a Washington food fight. I guess it's all just normal pre-election Washington politics, but no wonder - sez I - that the average voter is confused, apathetic, or totally down on all politics and politicians.

Anker-Klanker · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:34 pm Post subject:

Regarding IM recording and monitoring, and such, it is important to realize that - like much in the communication field - it is rapidly evolving. What might be true today was not necessarily true 3 years ago when the filth IMs in the Foley scandal were created.

Hugh Hewitt has a very good technical discussion of IM capability and evolution posted at his site, at:

http://hughhewitt.townhall.com/g/d4c30ddf-1365-46f1-8fb6-8d8c068f0d20

Be sure that you read this all the way down to the last posting. (Nothing in this discusses what might be found by computer forensics by experts, but that process had not been done when these IMs came to light.)

Doll · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:43 pm Post subject:

Doll · Posted: Wed Oct 04, 2006 8:58 pm Post subject:

Just read this at USNews.com --

shawa · CNO Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 2004

A question that has been on my mind is that the damning IM's are from back in 2003. Nothing since then. Now it appears the source who provided the IMs is was Kirk Fordham, former Chief of Staff to Foley until January, 2004. He is gay and I think he may have been blackmailed?
He has changed his story twice, first saying he had no idea about Foley's IMs; then turns around and says he told Hastert about Foley last year. ???
The dates are interesting in that the incriminating IMs were generated in 2003 and stopped after Fordham quit as Foley's Chief of Staff, and after scummy Mike Rogers threatened to out Fordham.
Fordham has now retained an attorney and is being questioned by FBI.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776)

shawa · CNO Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 2004

This is all going to backfire BIG TIME.
"Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive."

Back when Rahm Emanuuel became head of the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee. I just knew things were going to get down and dirty for this election. Emanuel was Bill Clinton's "Chief of Dirty Tricks". And that's what this whole Foley exposure is all about.

From The American Spectator

shawa · CNO Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 2004

FOX News is Reporting Louis Freeh will be tapped by Hastert today to head an independent investigation of Foleygate. Also reporting that four dozen subpoenas have gone out. Drudge reporting it also.

EDIT:
JUST UP ON DRUDGE!!
According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal... Developing...
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776)

shawa · CNO Joined: 03 Sep 2004 Posts: 2004

Pelosi and Dem leaders have nixed the Freeh appointment.
LOL!
They suddenly don't want a serious investigation. Or at least one that they can't control.
_________________
“I love the man that can smile in trouble, that can gather strength from distress, and grow brave by reflection. ‘Tis the business of little minds to shrink; but he whose heart is firm, and whose conscience approves his conduct, will pursue his principles unto death.” (Thomas Paine, 1776)

homesteader · PO3 Joined: 17 Sep 2004 Posts: 294 Location: wisconsin

So it may turn out that the entire Dem strategy and their philosophical positioning for the next election was based on a juvinile prank by a conservative Republican heterosexual former page. Do I smell some Roveian conspiracy accusations coming?