Why were Repulicans so quick to condemn him?
Why didn't they defend him?
2006-10-05 08:27:13 · 27 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Since his "Page" was 18, there was no crime.
2006-10-06 11:43:52 · update #1
Because everyone wants to distance themselves from any sort of impropriety and/or something that causes public scorn. Personally, I don't know if he is "innocent." Also, he is not a "pedophile," but an "ephebophile" according to Slate magazine. See http://www.slate.com/id/2151018/ for the story.
Even if what he did is not illegal, it is still highly inappropriate and an abuse of power and position of trust. I would not want him as my representative.
2006-10-05 08:31:52 · answer #1 · answered by J.Z. 3 · 3⤊ 0⤋
The needed a quick fall guy. They hoped that if they drop him quickly the (w)hole thing would go away, but that backfired. They know that they have to protect Hastert over all, because the guilt with which Hastert is burdened must result in his resignation. A resignation of the speaker just a few weeks before the election would let the rest of the Bush junta fall like the dominoes.
2006-10-05 15:44:20 · answer #2 · answered by The answer man 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
House leaders knew about Foley's problem for over a year or longer but they covered it up. Republicans don't like gay folks and pretend the party has none. Hah!! Party is loaded with them.
2006-10-05 15:31:35 · answer #3 · answered by Jim G 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
It sure looks bad too your electorate if you defend the actions of a pedophile, You political opposition will be quick to call you a liberal for defending Mark Foley and Dennis Hastert
I know I would not vote for them even if I previously liked him and they represented my political party. If you look at the last link the FOX NEWS NETWORK defends both these guys, FOX should be voted out also
2006-10-05 15:29:17 · answer #4 · answered by kniggs 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Ahhh, yes. Ethics ONLY apply to Democrats. We know neo-cons don't have to worry about such silly things. How you guys can be so smug and righteous about being total biggots is entirely beyond me.
One set of rules for you, and another for everyone else. You folks have issues. BIG issues. Nothing an exorcism won't cure, though.
2006-10-05 16:44:05 · answer #5 · answered by tat2me1960 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Actually...
according to the DrudgeReport...this whole thing may be turning into a big prank gone wrong!
The page Jordan Edmund may have been in on a prank against or for Mark Foley
This is HUGE
2006-10-05 15:30:44 · answer #6 · answered by smitty031 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
Because he is not innocent at all, as his quick resignation and declaration of his version of excuses (alcoholism/abuse/gayness) attests. And too many people know about it to successfully cover it up. Condemning him and distancing themselves as fast as possible is the only choice they had.
2006-10-05 15:37:42 · answer #7 · answered by functionary01 4 · 0⤊ 1⤋
the height of this absurdity totally dumbfounds me!! democrats are screaming into their bullhorns about scandal-yet it is the very same democratic party which stands behind (no pun intended ) the aclu and nambla!!! hypocrisy in its purest form! the level the democratic party has sunk to is a pox on all of us in America. rot in hell,just don't try to take me along with you.
2006-10-05 15:41:55 · answer #8 · answered by slabsidebass 5 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Duh, Mark Foley is not innocent, if he was innocent he would have never resigned. I would wait until after the investigation as there are many pages steping forward and saying that he did the same to them.
2006-10-05 15:34:10 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I cannot believe that you or anyone else could think that he is innocent. He should be in jail instead of a rehab center.
2006-10-05 15:32:08 · answer #10 · answered by dkd 2 · 1⤊ 0⤋