« Please Support Applebee's and Dunkin Donuts | Main | Tenet Failed to Follow Through »
October 02, 2006
Democrats Do Not Care about Children - They Care Only About Power
All of this is a political game to them. They do not care about the safety of pages or eithics. The Democrat playbook (leaked like the NIE?) is all we need to see:
1. Pay no heed to the distinction between the e-mails and IMs. There's no evidence (yet) that any Republican leaders knew about Foley's cybersex IMs. There's plenty of evidence that they knew how uncomfortable the "overly friendly" e-mails made at least one page. So the Dems will press the GOP on what they knew about the former and will constantly, in their press releases, refer to the "GOP's knowledge of the sexually explicit e-mails."
2. Enlarge the wedge between House leaders. The tension this weekend between Speaker Dennis Hastert and NRCC chair Tom Reynolds was thick. Dems want it to suffocate the party and throw the Republicans even further off their game.
3. Be aggressive about how Dems will -- and are -- protecting children. Dems want to keep the issue poisonous in a way that's clear and direct to middle America. (In other words: this ain't earmarks.)
4. Choose unimpeachable spokespeople to be their public face. The DCCC has enlisted Patty Wetterling, its candidate for MN 06, to call for "a thorough investigation" of the House leadership over Foley. Wetterling's son, Jacob, was kidnapped in 1989.
5. Deride the Republicans for incompetence. How can you possibly trust them with national security if you can't trust them with your own children?
6. Bring up Terri Schiavo's case and compare the heated GOP attention back then to their allegedly lax attention to the welfare of their pages.
7. Compare what the GOP leadership says about Foley with what Republicans said about Jack Abramoff.
8. Use the Foley cash. Already, the DSCC wonders why George Allen didn't immediately return the Foley. The quotable Phil Singer: “It is more than a little disturbing that Allen apparently sees nothing wrong with holding on to contributions he got from an adult who has been caught sending sexually explicit email to children." Allen and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) will return the cash. But the NRCC already spent the $550K and won't.
Just like Cindy Sheehan uses her sons coffin as a soapbox, the Dems will use up this young man and spit him out. It really is just sick.
Posted by Aaron at October 2, 2006 08:54 PM
Trackback Pings
TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.lifelikepundits.com/cgi-bin/mt3/mt-tb.cgi/2878
Comments
As though Republican treatment of Monica Lewinsky was any different.
Posted by: paul at October 3, 2006 12:25 AM
I don't remember Republicans trying to smear EVERY house democrat over Clinton's behavior.
Posted by: aaron at October 3, 2006 05:39 AM
Democrats care about children...
Well those they don't want to abort...
If they don't abort them, they don't want to raise them, that should be done by the village...
Oh, and they don't want to be parents, they want to be friends.
Palm Beach Florida is building a new city hall right on the water front so the mayor can have an office that looks over the water. She is doing this because she cares about the children. The city hall will also have a library, so the new city hall over looking the intercoastal waterway *is* for the children.
She how it is always for the children.
Posted by: DoubleU at October 3, 2006 08:41 AM
Way to change the subject. I thought this post was about the Democrats using the victims of Foley's behavior.
Posted by: paul at October 3, 2006 08:42 AM
Monica Lewinsky was an adult, and therefore Clinton's contact with her, however distasteful, was legal. Big difference. And let's not forget why he was impeached: because he lied under oath about it. If he had done his usual "I'm sorry, I feel your pain" schtick, the whole thing would have been over with a lot sooner.
Posted by: Pam at October 3, 2006 09:15 AM
Pam, let's not forget why the affair was investigated in the first place: civil suit for sexual harrassment. That's a crime. Clinton wanted to cover up the Lewinsky scandal because he did not want Paula Jones' atty to be able to establish a pattern of womanizing and victimization of female subordinates.
There was much more to this than Clinton lying about an affair. It was a concerted effort to falsify testimony and impede justice for Ms. Jones.
Posted by: Aaron at October 3, 2006 09:52 AM
"Way to change the subject"
Er...paul, you're the one who brought it up
Posted by: Charles at October 3, 2006 11:14 AM
I brought up Lweinsky. He changed it from using victims to tarring bystanders. You didn't leave a period in the quotes.
Posted by: paul at October 3, 2006 12:06 PM