Why does the press print this garbage?

Question

"Panel blasts Hastert in Foley scandal"

Yet it writes in the first paragraph

Republican lawmakers and aides failed for a decade to protect male pages from sexual come-ons by former Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record) — once described as a "ticking time bomb" — BUT THEY BROKE NO RULES and should not be punished, the House ethics committee concluded Friday.

Note the nasty headline against Republicans, yet they broke no rules.

Here is the link

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20061209/ap_on_go_co/congress_ethics

Why not say, Republicans cleared of any wrong doing, yet scolded for inaction. This is much more accurate than what it actually says.

Answer 1

Please forgive the babblings of the morons vainly trying to respond to your question. Due to poor upbringing, little useful education, and just plain lousy genetics they're unable to make any contribution. But, hey, give 'em a gold star for trying - their mommies and teachers did it for years and it made 'em FEEL sooooo goooooood!

As to your question - the press is simply engaging in its usual policy of employing a double-standard when it comes to Republicans. Given the same circumstances, the Reps get hammered and the Dems get a very light going over.

That plus the fact that they are no longer primarily in the business of reporting facts - they're more about entertainment these days and they feed their bone-headed readers what they want to hear. If they don't the readers head elsewhere for their "news". Pathetic, I know, but this is the state that we are in at present.

Answer 2

Just because someone disagrees with the political and social left it doesn't mean they hate them. People can disagree with homosexuality for other reasons besides hate. Calling people who disagree with you bigots or hate groups is a sloppy and childish debate tactic that just deflects the real issues. Not everyone in the world is going to agree with you and everything you do. That's life. Get over it. And considering the amount of folks on YA who support idiotic ideas like banning the bible or banning Christianity, maybe those FRC types have a point.

Answer 3

Second paragraph:

"The committee harshly criticized Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., saying the evidence showed he was told of the problem months before he acknowledged learning of Foley's questionable e-mails to a former Louisiana page. It rejected Hastert's contention that he couldn't recall separate warnings from two House Republican leaders."

Sounds like he was blasted to me. The headline is in good standing. Why it offends you so much is a mystery. It happened, he was HARSHLY CRITICIZED. There, capital letters, does it stand out now?

Answer 4

It was their own rules, so they could decide if they broke them or not. The Dems are not totally clean in this since everyone in Washington had known about Foley for years.

No doubt, there was some dealing involved whereby the Repubs walk away with a slap on the wrist and the Dems got (or will get) something in return.

They only care about their own wealth and power and, secondarily, their party's. They (both parties) do not care about America or the American people.

Answer 5

That's right, go ahead & defend people who knew about a gay pedophile & did nothing for fear that it would interfer with them pushing their right wing christian agenda. Typical republican! President Clinton got a bj (from an adult female) & the republican witch hunt started. Maybe if President Clinton was chasing little boys around they would have let that slide.

Answer 6

because there are many Republicans on the ethics panel...they have to show they are tough on pedophilic senators, but they are partisan in that they won't do anything to hurt Hassert, just like he didn't want to hurt the Republican party by attacking and booting a pedophilic senator.

YOU FORGOT THE MAIN REASON THEY DIDN'T DO ANYTHING TO HIM....FOLEY HAD ALREADY RESIGNED AND HE WAS OUTSIDE OF THEIR JURISDICTION OR CONTROL...THEY CAN'T IMPEACH OR CENSURE A MAN WHO RESIGNS...FOOL

Answer 7

because it's a boring headline... and 90 percent of people won't look at the story with your headline...

and if no one looks, then it doesn't matter what it says...

but it wasn't wrong, the panel did scold him, but no punishment...

if you don't believe me, start your own paper...

Answer 8

All you are apparently interested in is the letter of the law, not the spirit of it. They might not of broken the rules but they still failed to live up to their responsibilities and address the issue.

Answer 9

What are you, a Republican sympathizer. You don't make a bit of sense. Get your head out of their butts and smell clean air! The press is merely reporting what's in the document. Go and read it.

Answer 10

Your point is specious, spurious, scurrilous, mendacious, apocryphal, vituperative, equivocal, casuistic, puerile, and false.