Today, the New Jersey Supreme Court ruled that homosexuals are afforded the same rights as heterosexuals, under the state's constitution, in the realm of marriage.
Forty-eight more states to go!
Wednesday, October 25, 2006
Sunday, October 22, 2006
Foreign Adoption
There has been a lot of press given to Madonna and her desire to adopt a Malawi boy. He is currently undergoing an 18 month transition period where his progress will be marked and the final approval will be given to Madonna and her husband (who he is again?) to adopt this small, African boy.
Now, the boy's father says he never understood the implications of the government documents he signed given Madonna custody over his son. He says he only thought Madonna, and Mr. Madonna, would "raise" his son, but he would remain his child's legal parent. The man, apparently, is illiterate, which might complicate matters if it is proved that the Malawi government and Madonna's lawyers tried to pull a fast one on this poor simple man.
Some agencies have looked down on this so-called adoption. They say children should be raised in their own countries, and by people who are their countrymen. I can agree with that somewhat. Now, speaking as a person who may someday look to foreign adoption to answer the "expiration" of my own biological clock, I believe it is completely fine to look toward foreign adoptions for a multitude of reasons.
Some of these reasons are quite obvious. Firstly, in the United States it is near impossible to finalize an adoption. You have to sift through years of paperwork that only a team of Harvard trained lawyers can fully understand. Secondly, many people are looking to adopt children who are less than a year old. That creates a bit of headache for these families, because over 90% of families seeking to adopt a child are looking for babies. If I can file paperwork in Russia and then six months later come out with a newborn baby, why would I seek to crush myself in paperwork and make the whole overall experience harrowing?
The next part I do agree with. Celebrities, who adopt, may be looking for some glory from the limelight that goes with international adoptions. They are seen as saviors, who aren't pretentious or stuck-up about their families and what is important to them.
I doubt that if I adopt a child the media will care. That's the bottom line!
Now, the boy's father says he never understood the implications of the government documents he signed given Madonna custody over his son. He says he only thought Madonna, and Mr. Madonna, would "raise" his son, but he would remain his child's legal parent. The man, apparently, is illiterate, which might complicate matters if it is proved that the Malawi government and Madonna's lawyers tried to pull a fast one on this poor simple man.
Some agencies have looked down on this so-called adoption. They say children should be raised in their own countries, and by people who are their countrymen. I can agree with that somewhat. Now, speaking as a person who may someday look to foreign adoption to answer the "expiration" of my own biological clock, I believe it is completely fine to look toward foreign adoptions for a multitude of reasons.
Some of these reasons are quite obvious. Firstly, in the United States it is near impossible to finalize an adoption. You have to sift through years of paperwork that only a team of Harvard trained lawyers can fully understand. Secondly, many people are looking to adopt children who are less than a year old. That creates a bit of headache for these families, because over 90% of families seeking to adopt a child are looking for babies. If I can file paperwork in Russia and then six months later come out with a newborn baby, why would I seek to crush myself in paperwork and make the whole overall experience harrowing?
The next part I do agree with. Celebrities, who adopt, may be looking for some glory from the limelight that goes with international adoptions. They are seen as saviors, who aren't pretentious or stuck-up about their families and what is important to them.
I doubt that if I adopt a child the media will care. That's the bottom line!
Arrogance & Stupidity: Thank you!
Finally, a senior diplomat, Alberto Fernandez, said it: history will judge the United States' foreign policy regarding Iraq (meaning Bush and his Republican sycophants) as being "arrogant" and filled with "stupidity." Of course, he points out that these things have been said by other top diplomats, but none of them have been so directly and in such a vulgar manner. Nonetheless, I appreciate candid remarks.
Arrogant and stupid...I can't say much more than that!
Arrogant and stupid...I can't say much more than that!
Friday, October 20, 2006
Sick Days
There's nothing better than taking a sick day, especially when you're not sick! I can catch up on my reading and watch a bit of daytime television. What's better than that?
Thursday, October 19, 2006
Just fondling...
The priest who molested former Republican Congressman Mark Foley stated that he only fondled Foley when he was a teenager. He even said, "he seemed to like it." That's pretty funny.
Of course, nothing legally will happen to the priest. He is currently living in Malta. Who is going to extradite over something that happened over thirty years ago?
Of course, nothing legally will happen to the priest. He is currently living in Malta. Who is going to extradite over something that happened over thirty years ago?
Sunday, October 15, 2006
Student Fighters
I recently read an article where a school system in Texas is teaching students and teachers how to fight back against an attacker in the school. Now, first of all, I was a bit taken back by this prospect. The last thing you want to do is create a school full of vigilantes. It also forces the issue of allowing students and teachers to take unnecessary risks. But if your life is in the balance, what is unnecessary really? It would seem that staring down the barrel of a gun in the hands of a mad-man (or woman) is a catalyst for self-preservation.
Personally, I do not agree the decision that creates a room full of students who can fend off an attacker is the right one. It is better to simply follow the directions of the person holding the gun and afford the art of negotiation to the police; however, many people who take classrooms hostage are not looking for a simple and quick fix to their problems. They are there because they have become so overwhelmed by the issues and delusions in their life, whether they are a student or not. Often times, they are there to commit suicide and take a few friends/enemies along for the journey.
Perhaps, the school system in Texas has the right idea. If you attack and surprise your captor, then perhaps you have a chance at survival. After all, they are there for blood. Why not let it be the would-be-captor's blood instead?
Personally, I do not agree the decision that creates a room full of students who can fend off an attacker is the right one. It is better to simply follow the directions of the person holding the gun and afford the art of negotiation to the police; however, many people who take classrooms hostage are not looking for a simple and quick fix to their problems. They are there because they have become so overwhelmed by the issues and delusions in their life, whether they are a student or not. Often times, they are there to commit suicide and take a few friends/enemies along for the journey.
Perhaps, the school system in Texas has the right idea. If you attack and surprise your captor, then perhaps you have a chance at survival. After all, they are there for blood. Why not let it be the would-be-captor's blood instead?
Saturday, October 14, 2006
Posturing
Today, the United Nations Security Council voted unanimously to implement sanctions against North Korea for its nuclear test on Monday. What does it all mean?
It is simply more meaningless posturing by the United Nations. North Korea will not suffer anymore than it has in the past ten years under these sanctions. How can you punish a nation that already has nothing?
It's pointless and fruitless.
It is simply more meaningless posturing by the United Nations. North Korea will not suffer anymore than it has in the past ten years under these sanctions. How can you punish a nation that already has nothing?
It's pointless and fruitless.
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Nuclear Bombs & Ethics
There is something of irony regarding the North Korea issue. The United States is ardently opposed to North Korea possessing nuclear weapons; however, the US, as you know, has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons in the world. In addition, the US is the only nation to have used nuclear weapons during a confrontation.
The irony is a bit like me telling someone the virtues of gun control while I have a large collection of guns in my home. Perhaps if the US took proactive steps of complete nuclear disarmament of its own stockpile, then other nations might be less likely to create this type of weaponry. After all, they refer to our healthy supply of nuclear weapons when we scream "foul!"
Just a thought for a Wednesday.
The irony is a bit like me telling someone the virtues of gun control while I have a large collection of guns in my home. Perhaps if the US took proactive steps of complete nuclear disarmament of its own stockpile, then other nations might be less likely to create this type of weaponry. After all, they refer to our healthy supply of nuclear weapons when we scream "foul!"
Just a thought for a Wednesday.
Monday, October 09, 2006
North Korea Acts
According to North Korean media outlets, the country has tested it's first nuclear device today. Although, the United States is unable to independently verify this fact, the South Korean geological society reported a 3.6 point "artificial" earthquake from North Korea, which probably means they did, in fact, test a nuclear test.
George W. Bush says the nuclear proliferation of North Korea will not be tolerated by the rest of the world. It would seem they are already doing well enough on their own without the rest of the world's permission.
Let's keep fighting in Iraq. We can't stop North Korea.
George W. Bush says the nuclear proliferation of North Korea will not be tolerated by the rest of the world. It would seem they are already doing well enough on their own without the rest of the world's permission.
Let's keep fighting in Iraq. We can't stop North Korea.
Sunday, October 08, 2006
North Korea
North Korea says it may postpone the test of its first nuclear device if the United States will agree to direct bilateral talks, instead of posing unilateral sanctions against the nation.
Why doesn't the United States engage North Korea directly? What is the point of talking to one country through different nations? It's like when you were small and you said, "I'm not talking to mom...dad will you tell mom that I'm not talking to her." The funny thing is, mom is standing right in the room with you! That's how this whole "We're not talking to North Korea, except through China..." deal comes into play.
Bill Clinton's administration sought to directly engage the North Koreas. Secretary of State Madeline Albright went to Pyongyang and met with Kim Jong-il. This was a very large step of diplomacy for both nations and a great gesture of open relations with the North Koreans on the part of the Americans. What happened to this new relationship? George W. Bush is what happened.
George Bush's administration worked to undo all the work Clinton and his Administration had done. They returned to the indirect communication method and closed all relations with the North Koreans. What has that gotten us? It has gotten us a North Korea that is working tirelessly to build its own nuclear arsenal. It is creating tension on the Korean Peninsula and with the Japanese. It is giving China the upper-hand on dealing with this problem, because they are primarily the go-to-country for even speaking to the North Koreans.
If Bush was smart (and we all know he's not) and surrounded by equally intelligent, diplomatic people (instead of sycophants), then we might have averted this whole new North Korean tension. We might have followed the same model with Iran. The United States (Bush mostly) must get out of this mentality that we can bully other nations around and they will blindly follow along. We can no longer be the biggest, meanest kid on the school playground. Eventually, these little nations are going to gang up on us and give us a bloody nose. The United States is the world's oldest democracy. We have been in existence for over 200 years. From these many years of struggle and strife, we must have learned something of wisdom. The United States is in the best position of being the broker of genuine world peace; however, this can only be accomplished through direct talks with the parties involved. It must also take into account the art of compromise and the understanding that all parties have authentic positions on the issues at hand. It's not about one nation having the upper-hand on the other one. It's not about throwing around insults and insinuations. The United States must sit evenly at the middle of the negotiation's table and say, "This is what each party has brought to this discussion. Now, what can we do--with the things you have brought today--to find a balance to the issues and find commonality?"
That is called diplomacy!
Why doesn't the United States engage North Korea directly? What is the point of talking to one country through different nations? It's like when you were small and you said, "I'm not talking to mom...dad will you tell mom that I'm not talking to her." The funny thing is, mom is standing right in the room with you! That's how this whole "We're not talking to North Korea, except through China..." deal comes into play.
Bill Clinton's administration sought to directly engage the North Koreas. Secretary of State Madeline Albright went to Pyongyang and met with Kim Jong-il. This was a very large step of diplomacy for both nations and a great gesture of open relations with the North Koreans on the part of the Americans. What happened to this new relationship? George W. Bush is what happened.
George Bush's administration worked to undo all the work Clinton and his Administration had done. They returned to the indirect communication method and closed all relations with the North Koreans. What has that gotten us? It has gotten us a North Korea that is working tirelessly to build its own nuclear arsenal. It is creating tension on the Korean Peninsula and with the Japanese. It is giving China the upper-hand on dealing with this problem, because they are primarily the go-to-country for even speaking to the North Koreans.
If Bush was smart (and we all know he's not) and surrounded by equally intelligent, diplomatic people (instead of sycophants), then we might have averted this whole new North Korean tension. We might have followed the same model with Iran. The United States (Bush mostly) must get out of this mentality that we can bully other nations around and they will blindly follow along. We can no longer be the biggest, meanest kid on the school playground. Eventually, these little nations are going to gang up on us and give us a bloody nose. The United States is the world's oldest democracy. We have been in existence for over 200 years. From these many years of struggle and strife, we must have learned something of wisdom. The United States is in the best position of being the broker of genuine world peace; however, this can only be accomplished through direct talks with the parties involved. It must also take into account the art of compromise and the understanding that all parties have authentic positions on the issues at hand. It's not about one nation having the upper-hand on the other one. It's not about throwing around insults and insinuations. The United States must sit evenly at the middle of the negotiation's table and say, "This is what each party has brought to this discussion. Now, what can we do--with the things you have brought today--to find a balance to the issues and find commonality?"
That is called diplomacy!
Friday, October 06, 2006
All that I am...
Have you ever felt like your life is hidden away? I feel like that every day of my life. I am forced to live according to "standards." I suppose I live a life similar to someone in public life. I cannot engage in activities that I want to do, because I must think of their consequences. I was reading about the documentary/movie The Queen, which shows the life of Queen Elizabeth II after the Princess Diana debacle in 1997. There was a quote associated with the film that is germane to my life: "That which enables me also restrains me."
UGH!
UGH!
Thursday, October 05, 2006
Help Wanted: Speaker of the House
When November rolls around, and goes by, we may be looking for a new person to fill the Office of Speaker of the House of Representatives. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) is getting involved very heavily in this Mark Foley issue. It has come to light that, perhaps, Mr. Hastert's office knew about concerns regarding Foley's behavior up to three years ago. Instead of them acting on these reports, in the form of an investigation, they simply allowed them to fall by the wayside and moved on with rubber stamping Bush's failed domestic and international policies.
Foley, even though he may be small potatoes, is indirectly working to bring down the remaining portions of the Republican establishment in Washington. Republicans can no longer proclaim themselves the "moral leaders" of this nation when they allowed something so sinister to take place under their collective noses. Not every Republican is to blame, this is true, but when the leadership of the Republicans--who should be the most moral of the moral--ignore something so blatant, then something is going to have to give. That much we can count on happening!
Hypocrisy, yes!
Foley, even though he may be small potatoes, is indirectly working to bring down the remaining portions of the Republican establishment in Washington. Republicans can no longer proclaim themselves the "moral leaders" of this nation when they allowed something so sinister to take place under their collective noses. Not every Republican is to blame, this is true, but when the leadership of the Republicans--who should be the most moral of the moral--ignore something so blatant, then something is going to have to give. That much we can count on happening!
Hypocrisy, yes!
Wednesday, October 04, 2006
Foley Aide Delivers the Dirt
Kirk Fordham, a former aide to Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL), resigned today. He states that he notified the office of Dennis Hastert (R-IL), who is the Speaker of the House, of his former boss' exchanges with congressional pages. When did the notification take place? Two years ago! What did Hastert do about it? Nothing!
Copy Cats & the Media
Firstly, I believe in the constitutional right to freedom of the press. That is one of our hallmarks in this country. Now, what exactly do we need to know in a free press? Some would argue that we need to know every detail. That argument, indeed, has teeth. But I argue there are some issues that need only be reported in a succinct manner without any real depth or involvement by the media.
Secondly, let's examine the recent shootings in schools across the United States and Canada. Do we need to know about every detail surrounding these types of cases? I argue that we do not. Sure, we need to know they happened. It is important to be able to know the current events going on in our world. It is not usual for there to be three school shootings in one week, however. These are simply copy cat events.
How do we protect ourselves from such events? The sorrow of loss is immeasurable for the families and communities directly touched by these events, as we know. We can empathize with loss and terror; however, the media need not dwell on these issues. Basically, the people who commit such crimes are those who are ostracized in some form by society. They are overlooked as individuals in some manner, which should be horrifying in-and-of-itself. The media gives them a quick and somewhat glamorous outlet. It is a final homage to themselves. For a brief (or not so brief) moment a person becomes a superstar. Now, for most of us it's not the type of super stardom we want attached to our final memory; however, to some it is the outlet they have been searching for their entire lives. All you need is a gun, a semi-plausible plan, and a school full of students. That's a plan that lands you as the lead story on the evening news. Your name is flashed for the entire world to see. To the perpetrator, it doesn't matter what the circumstances are for it being there. Certainly, you won't be forgotten by the families you destroyed. Finally, you may have lived alone or felt as if you were an outcast by society, but you won't die alone. You, for a brief moment in time, will be the master of life and death. You will hold someone else's life in the balance. The moment of live-or-die will be completely at your discretion. Then at the moment you chose you can take as much life as you wish with no consequences, because you are going to die then and there also.
You may not be a rock star, but the allure of the lights and the drama, even though you may be dead, to some is too much to pass up. The media should simply touch on the issue and then move away as is if it were nothing major. Of course, we all know it is major. But not every homicide in the United States gets the lead story on the evening news. Not every murder victim's face is put on television for the world to see. When we sensationalize and glorify this type of deed, we only endanger the lives of other people who go to school or work there.
(Hey, I'm biased when it comes to this issue! It's the place I spend most of my week. I certainly don't want someone coming into my classroom and blasting away at me because they felt as if they could be the lead-in to Larry King Live.)
Secondly, let's examine the recent shootings in schools across the United States and Canada. Do we need to know about every detail surrounding these types of cases? I argue that we do not. Sure, we need to know they happened. It is important to be able to know the current events going on in our world. It is not usual for there to be three school shootings in one week, however. These are simply copy cat events.
How do we protect ourselves from such events? The sorrow of loss is immeasurable for the families and communities directly touched by these events, as we know. We can empathize with loss and terror; however, the media need not dwell on these issues. Basically, the people who commit such crimes are those who are ostracized in some form by society. They are overlooked as individuals in some manner, which should be horrifying in-and-of-itself. The media gives them a quick and somewhat glamorous outlet. It is a final homage to themselves. For a brief (or not so brief) moment a person becomes a superstar. Now, for most of us it's not the type of super stardom we want attached to our final memory; however, to some it is the outlet they have been searching for their entire lives. All you need is a gun, a semi-plausible plan, and a school full of students. That's a plan that lands you as the lead story on the evening news. Your name is flashed for the entire world to see. To the perpetrator, it doesn't matter what the circumstances are for it being there. Certainly, you won't be forgotten by the families you destroyed. Finally, you may have lived alone or felt as if you were an outcast by society, but you won't die alone. You, for a brief moment in time, will be the master of life and death. You will hold someone else's life in the balance. The moment of live-or-die will be completely at your discretion. Then at the moment you chose you can take as much life as you wish with no consequences, because you are going to die then and there also.
You may not be a rock star, but the allure of the lights and the drama, even though you may be dead, to some is too much to pass up. The media should simply touch on the issue and then move away as is if it were nothing major. Of course, we all know it is major. But not every homicide in the United States gets the lead story on the evening news. Not every murder victim's face is put on television for the world to see. When we sensationalize and glorify this type of deed, we only endanger the lives of other people who go to school or work there.
(Hey, I'm biased when it comes to this issue! It's the place I spend most of my week. I certainly don't want someone coming into my classroom and blasting away at me because they felt as if they could be the lead-in to Larry King Live.)
Hastert & Foley sitting in a tree...
It would seem the Foley "buck" is going to be stopping at the office door of the Speaker of the House, Dennis Hastert (R-IL).
It's election season. In essence, it is every man and woman for himself or herself. Even at this time of year your political party can be put on the back burner, when it doesn't benefit you in a meaningful way. The Mark Foley scandal is going to be around a month from now when elections are about to go into full gear. It will be election day on November 7, after all. No doubt there will be lots more to discover and learn about the Foley scandal between now and then. Many Republicans are moving the blame to the top very quickly. Some Republicans in the top echelon of power wanted to "spread" the blame around, in order to minimize the damage any one member of the House would be forced to endure. It doesn't seem that idea is going to pan out. No one is going to be sharing in the blame of this fiasco unless they absolutely were involved in the scandal cover-up. And even then some members of the House are not going to be accepting blame right away.
So, what have we learned exactly? We found out from Foley's attorney that he is an alcoholic who was abused as a teenager by a clergyman. Is that the makings of a class "A" pervert? According to some of the experts I heard on television the other night, yes it is. It is very interesting that he is suddenly meeting the criteria for being a "no-fault" deviant.
Now what about Dennis Hastert, who is the lead Republican in the House of Representatives? Yes, he doesn't deny that he knew about some "inappropriate" communications between Foley and a congressional page that took place a few years ago. In fact, he's known about it since 2005. But what did he do about it? Nothing at all. He turned a blind eye to the facts. He stood in complete party mode. He chose not to rock the boat, because if he did he might give Democrats some leverage to rock the boat in a different direction. Honestly, would the fall-out from the Foley scandal be as broad as it is now if Hastert, and other Republicans, made this issue public in 2005? I doubt it. It would have been almost as if they were doing the right thing. Now there's a novel idea for Washington!
It's election season. In essence, it is every man and woman for himself or herself. Even at this time of year your political party can be put on the back burner, when it doesn't benefit you in a meaningful way. The Mark Foley scandal is going to be around a month from now when elections are about to go into full gear. It will be election day on November 7, after all. No doubt there will be lots more to discover and learn about the Foley scandal between now and then. Many Republicans are moving the blame to the top very quickly. Some Republicans in the top echelon of power wanted to "spread" the blame around, in order to minimize the damage any one member of the House would be forced to endure. It doesn't seem that idea is going to pan out. No one is going to be sharing in the blame of this fiasco unless they absolutely were involved in the scandal cover-up. And even then some members of the House are not going to be accepting blame right away.
So, what have we learned exactly? We found out from Foley's attorney that he is an alcoholic who was abused as a teenager by a clergyman. Is that the makings of a class "A" pervert? According to some of the experts I heard on television the other night, yes it is. It is very interesting that he is suddenly meeting the criteria for being a "no-fault" deviant.
Now what about Dennis Hastert, who is the lead Republican in the House of Representatives? Yes, he doesn't deny that he knew about some "inappropriate" communications between Foley and a congressional page that took place a few years ago. In fact, he's known about it since 2005. But what did he do about it? Nothing at all. He turned a blind eye to the facts. He stood in complete party mode. He chose not to rock the boat, because if he did he might give Democrats some leverage to rock the boat in a different direction. Honestly, would the fall-out from the Foley scandal be as broad as it is now if Hastert, and other Republicans, made this issue public in 2005? I doubt it. It would have been almost as if they were doing the right thing. Now there's a novel idea for Washington!
Tuesday, October 03, 2006
Cyber Sex, The State's Business?
Today, we learned from our friends at ABC News that Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) delayed voting in the House of Representatives to have "cyber sex" with his page pal. In other news, George Bush said, "Democrats can't be trusted" to control the Congress of the United States.
Now, let me ask you: we can't trust Democrats to run the Congress, but we can trust a Republican who delays the People's business to have an orgasm with his online boyfriend? That sounds pretty fucked up to me. Do we really need George Bush as president? I won't even answer that. You already did in your head. :)
Now, let me ask you: we can't trust Democrats to run the Congress, but we can trust a Republican who delays the People's business to have an orgasm with his online boyfriend? That sounds pretty fucked up to me. Do we really need George Bush as president? I won't even answer that. You already did in your head. :)
Monday, October 02, 2006
School Shootings
Quebec
Colorado
Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
Wow! It looks like we have a lot of angry youth (and a pervert) who want to take out their frustration on other students and school faculty with violence. That really makes me want to go back to school!
Colorado
Wisconsin
Pennsylvania
Wow! It looks like we have a lot of angry youth (and a pervert) who want to take out their frustration on other students and school faculty with violence. That really makes me want to go back to school!
Foley: Bush's "Fall Guy"?
Apparently, the Republican leadership in the House of Representatives has been sitting on this time bomb, called "Mark Foley," since 2005. Now, pray-tell, why is it suddenly coming to the light, as it were?
Let's see: a congressman resigns because of a scandal. It involves a former congressional page, who was at the age of consent in most states. It is homosexual in nature, but that's really not outside the mainstream of American life today.
It would seem that Foley never even intended to fight this allegation. He simply resigned. Easy as you please. A bit too easy, if you ask me. He simply went into the sunset. He hurt his family, fellow Floridians, and his party. But he redeemed himself, in a way, by doing the obvious "right thing." And now he's an alcoholic. Everyone has one of those in their family (even under cover). And we all know they aren't responsible for their affliction!
Is it possible that George Bush, and the Republican Party elders, decided to use Foley as a pawn in the public relations war against the war in Iraq? It might be demented enough to work. They use a home-grown-scandal to divert attention away from an international catastrophe. In the beginning, Foley is a monster, yes; but as time goes by and November pops up, people have forgotten what they were supposed to do.
It's a conspiracy theory, for sure, but it's not outside the scope of the possible.
Let's see: a congressman resigns because of a scandal. It involves a former congressional page, who was at the age of consent in most states. It is homosexual in nature, but that's really not outside the mainstream of American life today.
It would seem that Foley never even intended to fight this allegation. He simply resigned. Easy as you please. A bit too easy, if you ask me. He simply went into the sunset. He hurt his family, fellow Floridians, and his party. But he redeemed himself, in a way, by doing the obvious "right thing." And now he's an alcoholic. Everyone has one of those in their family (even under cover). And we all know they aren't responsible for their affliction!
Is it possible that George Bush, and the Republican Party elders, decided to use Foley as a pawn in the public relations war against the war in Iraq? It might be demented enough to work. They use a home-grown-scandal to divert attention away from an international catastrophe. In the beginning, Foley is a monster, yes; but as time goes by and November pops up, people have forgotten what they were supposed to do.
It's a conspiracy theory, for sure, but it's not outside the scope of the possible.
Mark Foley an Alcoholic
Alcoholism! What a great excuse for diverting scandal! It would seem the six-time congressman, Mark Foley (R-FL), has checked into a rehab clinic for the treatment of alcoholism. I wonder if this is a clue as to his behavior? Or is it merely a tactic by some shrewd political spin doctor to divert our attention from the real cause of his fall-from-grace?
Let's see...
Let's see...
Sunday, October 01, 2006
Hell to Pay
Republican leaders are taking former Florida congressman, Mark Foley, to the cross for a good old-fashioned lynching, as I predicted. I give him marks, however, for his timely resignation. Unlike Tom DeLay, who thought he could be a blatant crook and hold his elected office too, Foley decided it was time to close up the shop and head on back home.
It looks as if now some of the Republican leadership should be offering their resignations as well. According to available information, some congressional leaders knew about this incident in 2005! Yet they did nothing to follow through with the allegation. That's what you call keeping it in the family.
It looks as if now some of the Republican leadership should be offering their resignations as well. According to available information, some congressional leaders knew about this incident in 2005! Yet they did nothing to follow through with the allegation. That's what you call keeping it in the family.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)