TommyB said:
Come on man, if we're gonna have an honest debate, then we both have to agree to meet on some common ground and admit some basic facts. You're implying that only Democrats are guilty of dirty politics, and that is absolutely false. If we can't agree on that, then there is nothing to discuss.
I'm saying that the Democrats are guilty of this example of dirty politics, but this is more than just "dirty politics." It's coordinated. It involves the media, non-profit groups, and then party themself. The fake organization goes public, the media picks up the story repeating the charges, and the Democrats are immediately ready to seize on it.
In this case, if Foley really was an aggressive predator it means the Democrats knowingly held onto the information purely for political gain.
Even assuming Democrats were behind the Foley leak -- and we don't know that yet -- it appears from my point of view that they're only doing what they learned so well from Republicans.
First of all, we do know that this story was organized.
But they "learned it from Republicans? Really?
Let's use Presidential politics as an example.
1992... Just prior to the election, the special counsel Walsh announces the indictment of Casper Weinberger in connection to Iran-Contra.
1996... No October surprise because that election wasn't even close....
2000... on the weekend before the election, the story about George W. Bush's 30 year old DUI hits the news.
2004.. Right before the election, forged documents are released to CBS regarding Bush's service in the Air National Guard.
Look at what they did to their own John McCain in South Carolina in 2000. Conducting phone push-polls asking voters, "Would you be more likely or less likely to vote for John McCain for president if you knew he had fathered an illegitimate black child?" Even though it was completely untrue (he and his wife had adopted a Bangladeshi girl).
First of all, do you even know how many people were contacted with that phone call? Second, do you know who was responsible for it?
Or what about the ridiculous John Kerry "
Intern Scandal" that also turned out to be completely untrue?
That story came- and it went. It was a rumor on Drudge, reported as a rumor, and it was early in the campaign.
I didn't hear the speaker of the house commenting on it. I didn't hear the party leadership calling for his resignation. And the story wasn't released a few weeks before the election either. That was FEBRUARY..... the elections were 8 months later.
FURTHERMORE- it's believed that the story you just cited wasn't "leaked" by Republicans, but it came from DEMOCRATS who were trying to undermine Kerry's front runner position in the primaries.
Even the article cites the source as being Wes Clarke.
So you're example further discredits your position.
And let's not even get into the wholly Republican-backed smear campaign that was the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. You're actually gonna tell me that that wasn't politically timed?
Yes. They campaigned against Kerry through the primaries, and they continued to do so through out the Presidential campaign. Furthermore, the media virtually ignored them through out the entire campaign. The only attention they got from the mainstream press was negative criticism of the group, not an honest look at their criticisms.
If Democrats had all this damning evidence against Foley and sat on it, what makes you think that Hastert or someone else in Republican circles didn't? If a reporter for Harpers hknew about it, it defies common sense to suggest that no Republican knew. Even if Hastert was oblivious, someone on the Republican side of the aisle had to know, but chose to keep quiet.
Every one knew about the e-mails. This includes the Speaker of the House as well as some major media outlets like the St. Pete Times and the Miami Herald. The IMs were a different story.
Isn't sitting on a scandal until after an election in order to preserve your party's majority a much worse offense?
Much worse that just holding onto it until a few weeks before the election?
The spin put forth by the DNC after the story broke was that Foley was a predator and that the Republicans were jeapordizing kids. The reality is, the DNC probably knew more than the House leadership, yet they still sat on the story until a month before the election. Had Bush not been experiencing a surge, had fuel prices not been falling, had the market not been experiencing record highs, they would have waited until a day closer to the election so that Republicans had NO time to respond.
This sh!t is what our political process has been reduced to. Both sides are guilty, only the Democrats are finally catching up to the Republicans in the mud slinging department.
Yet you can't provide any good examples of coordinated attacks from the right on Democrats?
I'm not saying it hasn't happened. I'm saying it's not nearly as common as you allude
It's nothing but a game of gotcha to keep the scum sucking pundits well-fed and divert attention from real issues that actually matter. You don't like it? Neither do I. But until the American people finally wise up and realize how entrenched and corrupt these people become and decide to throw their asses out (or demand term limits), this is what we have to put up with.
Term limits aren't an answer. A bunch of newbie congressmen isn't necessarily a better solution.
This game of "gotcha" is disgusting.
Politics is a nasty business, but you can not lay blame evenly here. The RNC is NOT operating at the same level as the Democrats.
The RNC and affiliated groups do not run ads implying Democrats want to drag black people to death behind their trucks.
The RNC and affiliated groups do not say that Democrats want to starve children and kill old people.
The RNC does not wait until 10-30 days before an election to release forged documents or the weekend of an election, release a 30 year old stories.
Besides, like I said earlier, I'm absolutely positive that the Republicans have a bombshell to drop before election day. And then you'll be climbing all over it.
Let's see.
And if they use a phoney blog to release the story. Then use their friends in the mainstream press to parrot it. And then misrepresent the story. And then have the party leadership immediately ready to comment and finally ask to have Nancy Pelosi step down, you'll be right.
