ANY ethics violation by anyone in- or protected by- power is reprehensible, whether it's insider trading after auditing Harken [when Daddy's SEC chair can seal your files] or abusing pages. Unforthunately, my first inclination after reading posts like Tomcat's is to reflexively push back against the obvious right-wing rhetoric with its less-than-factual embellishments. After all, you know it’s more important to these guys to push their partisan slants than to get the facts just right. For example, why do we have to ask Hillary Clinton to explain Bill’s presidential pardons? He’s certainly around to explain them himself and from Nixon to the entire cast of Iran-Contragate, a host of unsavory characters has received undeserved presidential pardons. Oh yes, of course. The r-wingers have to insert all the talking point buzz-words-of-hate into their diatribes and this one covered both Clintons, Jesse Jackson, and liberal voters from Martha’s Vineyard, Massachusetts. I guess he couldn't find a way to fit Al Sharpton in there seamlessly enough. But in truth, most people were peaved by Studds' actions back then and by Clinton's foolish indiscretions when it was his turn, so I don't want to end up defending things that are unethical just because they're brought up by close-minded ideologues. The only thing more bothersome about the unethical behavior of the Foleys, DeLays, Gingriches, Reeds, etc of the world is the egregious hypocrisy of it all. However, the behavior of the democrats shouldn't be defended or excused just because they aren't self-righteous. But still, something about Tomcat’s post reeked of truthiness. Fortunately, Frank Smith, Bluff City, KS posted this at another Salon thread [10-9-06 This Modern World]. It clears up SOME [not all] of Tomcat's most partisan embellishments:

>>Republicans do have our heads spinning...

I just posted this note to the right wing noise machine virtual rag, "Townhall." It refers to this article: http://www.townhall.com/columnists/column.aspx?UrlTitle=holy_moly,_mark_foley&ns=BurtPrelutsky&dt=10/09/2006&page=full&comments=true

Monday, October, 09, 2006 5:28 AM

When "facts" are not facts...

I've been hearing regularly from right wing commentators that "Gerry Studds had a relationship with a male page in 1983." Of course that's wrong, and they must know it even as they spin it. In Burt Prelutsky's article, Studds was said to be unapologetic, but of course he wasn't. He admitted it was inappropriate to have a relationship with any page, because they are in fact subordinates to House members. It was said he "turned his back," on his House colleagues, when his reprimand was read for the 1973 affair. Actually, he faced the Speaker. The same commentators must know that. A reprimand is the mildest form of action taken by the committee. http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,953990-1,00.html

Then we're told that our hero, Newt Gingrich, demanded the expulsion of both the batchelor Studds and the married Dan Crane for these ancient affairs (Crane's was in 1979). Of course, Newt had an affair with a Congressional ultimate subordinate over which he dumped his second wife. http://www.robertscheer.com/1_natcolumn/99_columns/081799.htm

This adultery and betrayal was about the time Newt engineered the impeachment of Bill Clinton for having an affair with a subordinate.

In 1983, the House Ethics Committee spent eight months dealing with the Crane-Studds matters. In 2004 the Ethics Committee found Tom DeLay guilty of three serious violations and recommended reprimands. DeLay removed the Republican members who voted for reprimand, replaced them with his allies, then changed the rules, which shut down the committee for all of 2005.

It appears that Burt is hoping we're all unread, or retarded or something. Please don't continue to insult our intelligence with spin masquerading as "facts."<<

Your guys changed the rules when they came into power. Liberals aren't the ones who insist upon the Government being in our bedrooms and doctors' offices, trying to legislate morality. It was theoretically the Republican Party's supposed high moral authority that won all of those elections; now that the shoe is on the other foot, you ought to stick to your high moral ground, kick the bastards out, restrain yourselves from interfering with the election process, and let the cards fall where they may. You certainly can dish it out, but you can't take it, and, for what it's worth, we tarred Liberals take some measure of pleasure in rubbing your noses in it.

In 1983, Democratic congressman Gerry Studds was found to have sexually propositioned House pages and actually buggered a 17-year-old male page whom he took on a trip to Portugal. The 46-year-old Studds indignantly attacked those who criticized him for what he called a "mutually voluntary, private relationship between adults."

When the House censured Studds for his sex romp with a male page, Studds -- not one to be shy about presenting his backside to a large group of men -- defiantly turned his back on the House during the vote. He ran for re-election and was happily returned to office five more times by liberal Democratic voters in his Martha's Vineyard district. (They really liked his campaign slogan: "It's the outfit, stupid.")

Washington Post columnist Colman McCarthy referred to Studds' affair with a teenage page as "a brief consenting homosexual relationship" and denounced Studds' detractors for engaging in a "witch-hunt" against gays: "New England witch trials belong to the past, or so it is thought. This summer on Cape Cod, the reputation of Rep. Gerry Studds was burned at the stake by a large number of his constituents determined to torch the congressman for his private life.”

No one demanded to know why the Democratic speaker of the House, Thomas "Tip" O'Neill, took one full decade to figure out that Studds was propositioning male pages.

But now, the same Democrats who are incensed that Bush's National Security Agency was listening in on al-Qaida phone calls are incensed that Republicans were not reading a gay congressman's instant messages.

You know the drill. You've read and heard the Democrats' sordid track record on these matters. They not only didn't condemn Democratic congressman Gerry Studds for his actual sex -- not perverted flirting -- with a page; they gave him ovations. Congressman Barney Frank remains a respected Democrat even though an aide ran a prostitution ring out of Frank's apartment. The Democrats told us that Clinton's defilement of the Oval Office was a private matter.

These are some things I would like to see happen or be answered to:

1. An explanation from Chuck Schumer as to why he did not support expulsion of his then House Caucus-mate Gerry Studds after the Democrat proudly admitted to having sex with a 17-year old male page.

2. An explanation from Shelly Silver as to why he didn't fire his Counsel Michael Boxley after the first charge surfaced of Boxley sexually violating a much younger woman, and demand that the Assembly Ethics Committee release a full report on the repeated sexual scandals involving Shelly Silver's Counsel Michael Boxley.

3. Have Democratic House leaders explain why they failed to take appropriate action against Congressman Barney Frank after it was revealed that his boyfriend was running an illegal prostitution ring out of Congressman Frank's Washington DC residence.

4.An explanation from Senator Hillary Clinton as to why then-President Bill Clinton granted a midnight pardon to convicted child molester and former Democratic Congressman Mel Reynolds, immediately commuting the jail sentence of the disgraced Democratic luminary for yet other felony crimes he committed.

5. Have Speaker Silver fully investigate and disclose the findings regarding the mysterious resignation of Assemblyman Karben after it was revealed that he allegedly watched gay pornographic movies with an intern and often made unwanted sexual advances toward male interns and staffers.

6. Have former Democratic Presidential candidate Jesse Jackson immediately rescind and explain his hiring of convicted child molester -- and former Democratic Congressman -- Mel Reynolds as a "youth counselor."