Flame — HabitableZone

Flame » in reply to Interesting article

The Studds case is a more appropriate example IMO.
Tom Brosz — (archived)

The Reynolds thing has been used by talk show hosts because they can tie Clinton into it.

Studds actually had sex with a minor, admitted it, and was re-elected five times. He retired, I believe, in 1996, which means that quite a few current House members have worked with him knowing full well what he did. Didn't seem to bother anyone then, and it's odd that no reporter has asked any of them about this.

While I haven't been following the Foley story day by day, to the best of my knowledge (open to correction):

--There is no evidence he has had any physical relationship with a minor.

--Even if he had, there is no evidence (yet) that he committed an actual crime (morality aside). Age of consent in the District of Columbia is 16. Why, in a district ruled by Democrats it's 16 is another question.

--This isn't about Foley anyway. It's about winning the election.

The bottom line is that Democrats get a pass on the hypocrisy charges because they really don't think Foley did anything wrong. The "Vagina Monologues" celebrate the sexual awakening of a 13-year old by an older woman (later revised to 16).

I have no reservations in saying that if Foley had been a Democrat in a safe Democratic district, this story would have been treated much differently.

Log in or register to post.

The whole thread (58 posts)