Nothing Rove and his dirty tricks department pulls out of the muck would surprise me. Remember the Swift Boat liars? Remember how McCain got accused of having an illegitimate kid with a black woman?
2006-10-06 17:52:07
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
3⤊
2⤋
Diversion against what: World War III? The Earth Shifting on its Axis? Why in the world would they want Foley's sickness to come out? They lied like rugs until they couldn't lie anymore and then they blamed the Democrats. No, doesn't sound like a diversion. Sounds like they're getting what's coming.
2006-10-06 18:02:21
·
answer #2
·
answered by HawkEye 5
·
1⤊
1⤋
The Republican party isn't that calculating. Besides it would be the worst thing for the conservative part of the party to loose Haskert.
It's the dems calling for his head, so the thought that it was a Republican plan is silly. And completely shows how much paranoia is on the left.
2006-10-06 19:42:17
·
answer #3
·
answered by .45 Peacemaker 7
·
2⤊
0⤋
Now you will say that Rep Foley was never a Republican. He was a disguised Democrat.
2006-10-06 17:53:38
·
answer #4
·
answered by Smiling face 2
·
2⤊
1⤋
not likely. but it is diverting attention away from the real problems created by the republicans and is overshadowing their attempts to focus on isssues they want to stress while allowing the dems to paint them as corrupt and not the moral leaders they claim to be. they are being hurt , badly it seems, and the religious right may desert them this election due to getting into so many scandalous affairs , especially where the leadership is involved. their failure to act decisively years ago is a definite problem they will not be able to overcome, without getting hurt at the polls first.
2006-10-06 17:47:24
·
answer #5
·
answered by de bossy one 6
·
2⤊
1⤋
I believe liberals are behind this, but both sides do the exactly the same things, distracting the public from the real issues at hand. It's called politics.
2006-10-06 17:51:46
·
answer #6
·
answered by Sadiyah 1
·
2⤊
1⤋
No a real Democrat suprice would be anounceing that Hilary Clinton would run for the Presidency.
2006-10-06 18:13:00
·
answer #7
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
1⤋
That would be one bad diversion if that's the case
2006-10-06 18:08:15
·
answer #8
·
answered by saoirse49326 1
·
2⤊
0⤋
No. Clinton was the wag the dog guy, remember?
I know that the liberals really do believe that Bush, the Republicans and the whole US besides them are really this stupid, though...
2006-10-06 17:46:04
·
answer #9
·
answered by ? 7
·
2⤊
2⤋
But it could truly torpedo GOP hopes to hold onto the edges in both parts of the Congress
2006-10-06 17:48:05
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
2⤋