I've had a lot of response to my earlier blog posting on Pagegate. I'm interested in the best use of the issue by candidates in the field.
Here's my contribution, courtesy of John Nichols from today's TomPaine.com
Hastert and Boehner are scheduled to attend fundraising events on behalf of embattled Pennsylvania Republican Congressman Don Sherwood in coming weeks. Sherwood's Democratic challenger, Chris Carney, a Lieutenant Commander in the United States Navy Reserve who served as a senior advisor on intelligence and counterterrorism issues at the Pentagon, has asked the Republican congressman to cancel the events. "Holding happy hour fundraisers with people who cover up the cyber-molestation of children should be below even the questionable morals of Don Sherwood," explained Carney campaign manager Andrew Eldredge-Martin. "Sherwood should immediately cancel his upcoming fundraisers with Hastert and Boehner. Don Sherwood has already brought Washington's values back to the district, now he wants to bring a depraved cover-up home."
There are a number of additional things to be mindful of as evident from the pushback so far. But let me first agree with Roger and add this:
the first thing to ask is WWRD: What would the Republicans do? Knowing that answer Ds should do the same. This non-sense about not focusing on the important issues is laughable in the face of this do-nothing Congress . Their leadership was derelict in its duty and should resign. As Lee Atwater said:"If I could get a gun right now, I'd pull the trigger!"
But for any D afraid of being too harsh here's Atwater on going negative: "Negative makes it sound as if you're beating up on the guy for no reason, which is different from choosing symbolic platforms, like the Pledge of Allegiance or the furlough program in Massachusetts, upon which to make compelling comparisons between candidates."
What more symbolic platform do we need than "child predator" and compelling comparison than any D and the(choose your adjective) Republican leadership!!!?
Posted by: The Scout | October 02, 2006 at 04:23 PM
An Inconvenient Truth: 1 + 1= 2
The Rs have a troubling problem in saying that they didn't know about the IMs and whoever did should have turned them over to law enforcement. This in an attempt to trap a Dem.
They forget an inconvenient truth about the "innocuous" but inappropriate e-mail and why it should have alerted them: they knew Foley was gay.
"You don't need 'gaydar' to understand he has certain dispositions."
-- Rep. Chris Cannon (R-UT) on Mark Foley, Deseret Morning News, 10/3
Being gay in no way makes you a child predator but the confluence of the e-mails and Foley being gay should have set alarm bells off in the leadership.
Posted by: TheScout | October 03, 2006 at 04:12 PM