Patterns in lockstep
Even when damage control seems a lost cause, I suppose you have to follow the playbook. So Mark Foley resigns his House seat in a nanosecond, then explains those creepy electronic messages to young congressional pages by declaring himself an alcoholic, effectively blaming it all on demon rum. House Speaker Dennis Hastert promptly calls for a really thorough meaning really slow investigation. The rest of the Republican leadership declares itself shocked and/or saddened, but agrees that the time has come to move on, folks, nothing to see here.
These practiced responses have long served politicians but you don't get the sense that anyone thinks they'll work this time. There's really no effective spin you can put on the Foley scandal, no way that even the Republican Party's image-making geniuses can make people feel good about a 52-year-old man discussing masturbatory techniques with a male teenager via instant message.
[Eugene Robinson - Seattle Times - October 3, 2006]
In their efforts to keep their party in power, Republican leaders have not hesitated to hit the Democrats hard when it comes to the issue of protecting children.
The strategy was on display in Indiana, where the National Republican Congressional Committee recently ran a series of television spots showing a man accused of child molesting who was inadvertently released under the watch of Brad Ellsworth, a county sheriff and a Democratic candidate for Congress.
Now, Democrats are suddenly seeing an opportunity to turn the tables, questioning the actions of Representative Thomas M. Reynolds of New York, the chairman of the Congressional committee, and other top Republicans who have acknowledged that they had been aware for months of e-mail exchanges between Representative Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, and a former teenage page.
In a statement issued over the weekend, Mr. Reynolds said that when he first learned of the issue, he personally brought it to the attention of House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert. Republican leaders have described the e-mail messages that initially came to their attention as "lover-friendly" and said that they were not sexually explicit, like the messages between Mr. Foley and other pages that were disclosed later.
But Democrats are accusing Republican leaders of keeping silent about Mr. Foley and allowing him to remain as chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children until the disclosure on Friday of the more sexually explicit e-mail messages. Carl Forti, a spokesman for Mr. Reynolds, defended the actions of Republicans, emphasizing that there was nothing overtly sexual about the e-mail messages they had initially seen. He also defended the advertisements sponsored by the Republican House campaign committee.
The Democrats, Mr. Forti said, are "trying to take advantage of a very tragic and wrong situation".
[Raymond Hernandez - New York Times - October 2, 2006]
Why is the congressman and the page story so familiar? Let us count the ways.
Familiarity No. 1: "The parallel is striking" with our own priest abuse scandal, says Anne Barrett Doyle, who collects data on the crisis at BishopAccountablity.org.
Priest abuse is "the rare exception," said Cardinal Law in the midst of the Father Porter scandal, when he already knew - though we did not - of allegations against Paul Shanley, Joseph Birmingham, Ronald Paquin, Bernard Lane and some 250 other priests.
Meanwhile top House Republicans - including Speaker J. Dennis Hastert - knew for months, in some cases years, about creepy e-mails between ex-Congressman Mark Foley and a former teenage page. They not only downplayed it and did nothing; they also kept him in his job as head of a congressional child abuse caucus.
ABC News reported that the GOP House staff warned pages as far back as 2001 to keep clear of Foley. Yet that same year Foley spoke at the page farewell and was praised by fellow Republican John Shimkus for spending "a lot of time with" pages. Then and now Shimkus heads the page board created after previous scandals (Gerry Studds and a 17-year old boy; Daniel Crane of Illinois and a 17-year-old girl).
Incredibly, Foley this same night told of taking a young page out to a private dinner. "We proceeded to cruise down in my BMW to Morton’s," Foley said.
Shimkus learned of new Foley e-mail problems late in 2005. He told Foley to stop e-mailing the teenage boy in question. And that was the end of that.
More parallels with the church? Absolutely. The congressmen, like the Catholic hierarchy, didn’t bother interviewing alleged victims. The congressmen, like the hierarchy, chatted to each other - not to police or child protective services. And as with the priests, the individual offender was bad enough; the cover-up could prove even worse.
"Where I hope the parallels end," said Doyle, "is seeing the people who covered up here held accountable."
Familiarity No. 2: Yet again, Mr. Big Moral Crusader turns out to be Mr. Makes-Your-Skin-Crawl. Mark Foley made a career railing against "animal" molesters, particularly those who exploit children over the Internet.
This summer President Bush commended Foley as a member of a congressional "SWAT team for kids," a choice of words he may regret today. Foley, among other anti-smut crackdowns, pressed for investigations into a Florida nudist camp for teens and sponsored legislation to get easier access to child predator databases.
Pushing for Bill Clinton’s impeachment, Foley asked, according to former Clinton aide Paul Begala, "What do we tell the children?"
"Apparently we tell them in a sexually explicit e-mail," Begala deadpanned to The New York Times.
Beware those too wrapped up in child sex abuse and/or pornography. There’s always a reason. It’s never good.
Familiarity No. 3: These guys give alcoholics a bad name. Does anyone believe that a nonpedophile, after a few too many, suddenly starts hitting on 14-year-olds? Yet Foley’s immediately checked into alcohol rehab, just like ex-Congressman Bob Bauman, the ultra-family values guy who got caught having oral sex with yet another teenage boy; and Sen. Bob Packwood, who planted unwanted French kisses on at least a dozen female staffers; and Congressman Bob Ney, who pleaded guilty in the Jack Abramoff scandal; and scores of priests, of course.
Even Mel Gibson blamed his anti-Semitic tirade on liquor. Does anyone buy it?
It’s the same old story. Obvious parallels; excuses the same; patterns in lockstep. We never learn.
[Margery Eagan - Boston Herald - October 3, 2006]
These practiced responses have long served politicians but you don't get the sense that anyone thinks they'll work this time. There's really no effective spin you can put on the Foley scandal, no way that even the Republican Party's image-making geniuses can make people feel good about a 52-year-old man discussing masturbatory techniques with a male teenager via instant message.
[Eugene Robinson - Seattle Times - October 3, 2006]
In their efforts to keep their party in power, Republican leaders have not hesitated to hit the Democrats hard when it comes to the issue of protecting children.
The strategy was on display in Indiana, where the National Republican Congressional Committee recently ran a series of television spots showing a man accused of child molesting who was inadvertently released under the watch of Brad Ellsworth, a county sheriff and a Democratic candidate for Congress.
Now, Democrats are suddenly seeing an opportunity to turn the tables, questioning the actions of Representative Thomas M. Reynolds of New York, the chairman of the Congressional committee, and other top Republicans who have acknowledged that they had been aware for months of e-mail exchanges between Representative Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, and a former teenage page.
In a statement issued over the weekend, Mr. Reynolds said that when he first learned of the issue, he personally brought it to the attention of House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert. Republican leaders have described the e-mail messages that initially came to their attention as "lover-friendly" and said that they were not sexually explicit, like the messages between Mr. Foley and other pages that were disclosed later.
But Democrats are accusing Republican leaders of keeping silent about Mr. Foley and allowing him to remain as chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children until the disclosure on Friday of the more sexually explicit e-mail messages. Carl Forti, a spokesman for Mr. Reynolds, defended the actions of Republicans, emphasizing that there was nothing overtly sexual about the e-mail messages they had initially seen. He also defended the advertisements sponsored by the Republican House campaign committee.
The Democrats, Mr. Forti said, are "trying to take advantage of a very tragic and wrong situation".
[Raymond Hernandez - New York Times - October 2, 2006]
Why is the congressman and the page story so familiar? Let us count the ways.
Familiarity No. 1: "The parallel is striking" with our own priest abuse scandal, says Anne Barrett Doyle, who collects data on the crisis at BishopAccountablity.org.
Priest abuse is "the rare exception," said Cardinal Law in the midst of the Father Porter scandal, when he already knew - though we did not - of allegations against Paul Shanley, Joseph Birmingham, Ronald Paquin, Bernard Lane and some 250 other priests.
Meanwhile top House Republicans - including Speaker J. Dennis Hastert - knew for months, in some cases years, about creepy e-mails between ex-Congressman Mark Foley and a former teenage page. They not only downplayed it and did nothing; they also kept him in his job as head of a congressional child abuse caucus.
ABC News reported that the GOP House staff warned pages as far back as 2001 to keep clear of Foley. Yet that same year Foley spoke at the page farewell and was praised by fellow Republican John Shimkus for spending "a lot of time with" pages. Then and now Shimkus heads the page board created after previous scandals (Gerry Studds and a 17-year old boy; Daniel Crane of Illinois and a 17-year-old girl).
Incredibly, Foley this same night told of taking a young page out to a private dinner. "We proceeded to cruise down in my BMW to Morton’s," Foley said.
Shimkus learned of new Foley e-mail problems late in 2005. He told Foley to stop e-mailing the teenage boy in question. And that was the end of that.
More parallels with the church? Absolutely. The congressmen, like the Catholic hierarchy, didn’t bother interviewing alleged victims. The congressmen, like the hierarchy, chatted to each other - not to police or child protective services. And as with the priests, the individual offender was bad enough; the cover-up could prove even worse.
"Where I hope the parallels end," said Doyle, "is seeing the people who covered up here held accountable."
Familiarity No. 2: Yet again, Mr. Big Moral Crusader turns out to be Mr. Makes-Your-Skin-Crawl. Mark Foley made a career railing against "animal" molesters, particularly those who exploit children over the Internet.
This summer President Bush commended Foley as a member of a congressional "SWAT team for kids," a choice of words he may regret today. Foley, among other anti-smut crackdowns, pressed for investigations into a Florida nudist camp for teens and sponsored legislation to get easier access to child predator databases.
Pushing for Bill Clinton’s impeachment, Foley asked, according to former Clinton aide Paul Begala, "What do we tell the children?"
"Apparently we tell them in a sexually explicit e-mail," Begala deadpanned to The New York Times.
Beware those too wrapped up in child sex abuse and/or pornography. There’s always a reason. It’s never good.
Familiarity No. 3: These guys give alcoholics a bad name. Does anyone believe that a nonpedophile, after a few too many, suddenly starts hitting on 14-year-olds? Yet Foley’s immediately checked into alcohol rehab, just like ex-Congressman Bob Bauman, the ultra-family values guy who got caught having oral sex with yet another teenage boy; and Sen. Bob Packwood, who planted unwanted French kisses on at least a dozen female staffers; and Congressman Bob Ney, who pleaded guilty in the Jack Abramoff scandal; and scores of priests, of course.
Even Mel Gibson blamed his anti-Semitic tirade on liquor. Does anyone buy it?
It’s the same old story. Obvious parallels; excuses the same; patterns in lockstep. We never learn.
[Margery Eagan - Boston Herald - October 3, 2006]
posted by F at 2:05 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home