What I find curious is that the Democrats, even if they didn't do any of the things people have said (had the IM's and timed their release, for example), are trying to claim that all the Republicans had to have known what the Dems didn't even have a clue about.

How does that work?

I saw one news clip of a Democratic congressman saying that the fact that Foley was gay and friendly was sufficient, should have prompted investigations.

What? None of the Democrats knew Foley was gay and friendly and involved in the page program?

Of course they did.

What would you think of someone who knew about something bad happening to young people and did nothing because, well, someone else had the majority? Suppose it was in school and the excuse was, everyone knew but it wasn't happening in *my* class, that other lady I don't like is the teacher in that class and it's her responsibility. Just how far would something like that fly?

The fact is that it's not a crime to be "gay and friendly." The original e-mails didn't have anything actionable in them. Only in retrospect does the "little bit creepy" become "very much more creepy". Even those who had "seen" the e-mail wouldn't have cause to invade Foley's right to privacy.

What Republicans knew is what the Democrats knew and if the Republicans are responsible for not doing something about it, so are the Democrats in congress.

Now, if someone knew *more* then they'd be responsible for that. If someone had the IM's and saved them for October, that's a serious charge.
Synova | Homepage | 10.12.06 - 12:16 pm | #

At first I thought you might have been overstating the evasion when I watched the clip. I watched it again and it's not just "never saw them" then it's a list of everyone who revealed them being Republican, after which he says "no involvement" presumably about revealing them.

You're right. He never did say anything remotely like "we didn't know about them" or "I'd never heard about them".
Synova | 10.12.06 - 12:23 pm | #