Friday, October 27, 2006

Was too flip about Harold Ford

Much as I'd love him to help the Democrats take the senate, Harold Ford is adamantly against gay marriage... what's wrong with him? Hasn't he thought the issue through? There's really only one logical, moral position to hold on this issue, and that's "in favor of equal rights."

Tuesday, October 24, 2006

The Horrible anti-Harold Ford Ad...

The Republican party is sponsoring an ad against Democratic Senate candidate Harold Ford that implies that he... gasp... has sex with hot white women. Obviously, the Republicans think so little of their voters that they hope that insinuating that a black man would have sex with a hot white woman will somehow work against the black man. But, seriously... all legitimate moral objections to the ad and what it's hoping to accomplish aside... if Harold Ford is hooking up with women at the Playboy mansion, as the ad says, then I might be able to put aside my actual political differences with Ford aside and vote for him.

I mean, I thought getting laid was a good thing.

Click the link and watch the ad. Truly dishusting.

Saturday, October 07, 2006

If Only We Knew What Rick Santorum Thinks

Less than a week after voting to impeach Bill Clinton over the Lewinsky scandal, Sen. Rick Santorum told an audience of mostly school children that he had done so in part because members of Congress should be "good role models, not just good legislators."
He said the scandal was proof that his generation, raised in the 1960s and 70s, consisted of people unable to make a moral judgment: "I'm not going to judge you if you don't judge me. I'll do whatever I want to do. You do whatever you want to do."

Interesting, how with a crucial midterm election a month distant, Santorum doesn't have anything to say about Rep. Mark Foley (raised in the 1960s) or about the possibility that the Republican House Leadership hushed up the Foley's sexual harrassment of underage pages. Think he'll be arguing that we need to impeach Hastert?

Wednesday, October 04, 2006


...disgraced congressman Mark Foley did, at least, vote "no" on the Clinton impeachment. I only looked this up because I expected to find some real hypocrisy.

Tuesday, October 03, 2006

Representative Foley

By now, anyone reading this knows that Florida representative Mark Foley has resigned his positions because he sent naughty emails to, and engaged in naught IM chats with, young congressional pages.

I have to be honest, I hate sex scandals of any sort. My immediate reaction is always that, as Woody Allen once said, "The heart wants what the heart wants," and my social libertarian leanings always push me towards ignoring sexual behavior, even if that behavior falls outside the boundaries of what I'd allow for myself. I am way more, "live and let live," than most people.

The pages are minors, though. I believe in total freedom for consentint adults, but not between adults and impressionable minors. Congressional pages are high school students working on capitol hill.

There's some question, though, about what the age of consent in Washington D.C. is. But not question enough to get Foley off the hook. Turns out, though the age of consent there is 16, that there are provisions in the law that prevent a full-fledged adult like Foley from going after teenagers. Such provisions are in place in order to prevent teen-on-teen sex from being a criminal offence, while still keeping adults away from children.

But... Foley didn't actually, so far as we know, and based on his claims, ever actually lay a hand on a minor. He engaged in naughty chat, he teased, he even asked for it, for he never actually did it.

Now, he's in therapy and rehab for alcoholism. Let's wish him the best in that. It's the proper place for him.

As a matter of the 2006 elections, where I'd like to see the Democrats take the House and Senate, Foley's follies are good news for me. It especially helps that the Republican leadership seems to have known there was a problem, but didn't do anything about it. House Speaker Denny Hastert might well have put out that fire by simply saying, "I knew, I tried, but didn't do enough." Instead, he dissembled, Now, he's in peril too. Politically, I react to such news with a mixture of glee and hope.

But, much as I defended Bill Clinton during his impeachment, I hate the villification of Foley right now. Sure, the situations are not identical. Monica Lewinsky was a full fledged adult. That makes a world of difference.

But, still...

I just hate when sex intersects with politics. It's not a healthy thing for either party. Foley is out of congress and in therapy, which is where he should be. But let's not hang the election on this. There are bigger issues, as far as I'm concerned.

Sunday, October 01, 2006

Get me off the ballot!

The first goal of any serious campaign for national office is to get your candidate's name on the ballot. Everyone wants to be on the ballot. If you're not, you have to run a write-in campaign and write-in candidates never win in major races.

So, it's funny to me that in the mid-terms, Republicans who have been plagued by scandal are trying to get themselves off of the ballots.

Congressional resignee Tom Delay is on the ballot in the current Texas race, and he's been wanting off for a long time. He resigned his post because he's been indicted over campaign finance issues that connect him to discgraced Republican lobbyist Jack Abramoff. He actually went to court to get his name taken off the ballot and he lost. His Replublican replacement now has to run as a write-in candidate. Delay, his party's fairly chosen nominee, can't get his name off of the ballot.

Now, Florida Congressman Mark Foley can't get his name off of the ballot either. He just resigned in the face of allegations that he has innapropriate Internet contact with a teenage congressional page. His name will also appear on the ballot in the next election. Votes for him will go to whoever his party chooses to run in his steed, but his named will be there.

I'm making no comment here about the guilt or innocence of either Delay or Foley. I only want to point out that a party in ascendence wants to get the names of its candidates on the ballot. This year, two people want their names off. They're both Republicans. Bad sign for them. Their candidates want off when every serious candidate wants to get on.