Oct 08 2006

Reps So Embarrassed To Elect Speaker Pelosi?

Lot’s of talk about 2006 being a re-run of 1976 when, sickened by the media image of a fallen President Nixon, Republicans stayed home and allowed Jimmie Carter to become our President. In a strange way Carter helped get us to where we are today. He turned his back on the Shah of Iran, allowing that country to fall into Islamic Extremist hands and become the source of money and Islamo-fascism that led to 9-11. So will the actions of Mark Foley shame Reps and Cons into staying home and letting a third liberal disaster come to power (1st being Carter, 2n being Clinton)? Considering the fact everytime Dems take power our most deadly enemies take heart and act – I doubt this will happen. Korea and China and Iran all seemed to be poised, waiting for the fickled Democrats to return to power. They are excited that a party which wants to run away from Iraq is now driving the agenda (with their liberal media enablers) onto something totally inane like the potential Foley crimes (and yes, he is facing a criminal investigation). If there ever was an example of taking their eyes off the ball, the media and Democrat obsession with Foley is example #1.

The American people are sifting through what little is coming out about Foley and there is a lot of smoke and no real fire. Child molestation and sexual predation are serious issues. So far these do not seem to associated with Foley (and I was among one of the Reps harshest, early critics). While I would move mountains to take predators off our streets, political pranksters who cry ‘wolf’ 6 weeks out from an election are not far behind on my list of things to purge from our nation. We need honest and serious debate. That doesn’t mean we use forged emails on contrived websites to smear a party and a nation with. Foley is facing justice, and now America will assess who is serious. Apparently democrats are much more interested in a hyped and exaggerated issue about one man’s sexual dalliances than with real issues of the day. And we all see it. This does not drive someone to sit home, feeling embarrassed, so the misguided dems can create a misguided nation.

14 responses so far

14 Responses to “Reps So Embarrassed To Elect Speaker Pelosi?”

  1. Terrye says:


    We will find out soon enough, but it is hard for me to believe that people who are upset about Foley are going to let Clinton’s party win. At least Foley resigned, the Republicans do have some standards where sexual impropriety is concerned. Can the other party say that?

  2. carol johnson says:

    That’s right, Terrye. AND, if any of them are like me, they do NOT respond to threats of blackmail and impeachment very well!!!

    I believe that starting tomorrow we may see some MAJOR developments in this story. We MUST get this resolved and move on to the issues that this election SHOULD be about instead of this mess. Making Foley, Hastert, and the Republican Party the issue was the game plan all along…I’d be willing to bet on it. If you scrape right down to the bottom of this cesspool you will find one set of fingerprints. You KNOW who I’m talking about.


  3. For Enforcement says:

    Who’s Mark Foley? Seriously, the Dems have once again succeeded in changing the direction of the election.

    The leader of the Republicans is the only one that can immediately change the direction again. Clinton was a master at it. Pres. Bush has to do it immediately.
    Get this issue behind us and get to the serious issues.
    Speaker Pelosi?
    Chairman Rangel?
    Chairman Conyers?

  4. stevevvs says:

    I’m VERY angry that all anyone in the national media want’s to talk about is Mark Foley, who is no longer there. I just hope the Sheeple will get out and vote on the truely important issues. But who knows! Aren’t the issues like The War on Terror, The Economy, Energy, Immigration,the Judiciary, etc. far more important? Of course they are! Thank GOD for Talk Radio and the Internet. It seems it is the Republicans only hope at this point. But 4 weeks in Politics is a long time. I know I’ll be out there voting.

  5. ivehadit says:

    I think the President should, when the timing is right, actually make a point of mentioning the Foley situation and HOW it makes everyone feel. He has been doing some of this last week.

    Put it on the table. Talk about what proud republicans stand for-we are not Mark Foley. Talk about what America stands for and how great a country we are. We all fall short. And talk about praying for all of us.

    Talk about how serious the times are that we cannot afford to play politics with our security. Compare what Mark Foley did to what lurks for us on the national scene…no comparison. Tell the people: “You know your representatives. You know what they believe. They are good people”.

    Imho, George W. Bush represents what we can be proud of in this country…the democrats do not.

  6. OLDPUPPYMAX says:

    I have to disagree with AJs belief that dems and the MSM have taken their eyes off the ball. Sure, for any American interested in the well-being of the country these left supporting hacks haven’t expressed a true interest in US security for years. But given what they are actually trying to accomplish–a dem victory in November–their eyes are riveted on the objective. The question, as usual, is whether they will fool enough voters to get it done.

  7. Ken says:

    Time to get serious now, Strata. I agree with you ,Hastert should not resign over Foley. He should resign over letting Bush drag America
    into a no-win war based on lies, then failing to give it proper Congressional oversight.

    I’ll tell you who funded 9/11, Strata and it wasn’t Iran.
    It was the US meddling in the Soviet sphere of influence by
    CIA funding/alliance with the jihad against them in Afghanistan.

    It was the US funding Israeli dispossession and oppression of
    Palestinians for generations.

    It was the US financing the overthrow of Mossadegh and
    replacing him with an unpopular lackey who suppressed
    his own country’s religious leaders and aligned with Israel.

    Bush has thrown cold water on real conservatives with his
    flag of surrender guest worker program and the coddling
    of queer ephedophiles by the GOP hierarchy makes it
    clear: the GOP deserves to lose both houses.

  8. For Enforcement says:

    Hey Ace, based on lies

    You never were able to actually quote a lie were you?

    what is one of these? ephedophiles, couldn’t find it in dictionary.

    You talk a lot about the US “interfering” in others affairs. What are you, a Frenchman, doing meddling in the US affairs?

    Give Jacque our best.

  9. Ken says:

    FE-France lasted much longer as a political entity than the US will,
    and I believe this is your ultimate, repressed fear.

  10. For Enforcement says:

    what is one of these? ephedophiles, couldn’t find it in dictionary

    You don’t even know your own country’s history. surely you know exactly how many years it has been in it’s current entity vs the US. I think if you look it up, you might be surprised which has existed in it’s current form the longer.

    Since I’m sure you know, maybe I shouldn’t even have brought that up.
    And I’m sure it won’t repress your fear, maybe compress it.

  11. Ken says:


    my misspellings however, are fewer than FEs. as are my

    “Current form” is of course a term I never used which could even
    rule out the US after it acquired Hawaii–which I would have opposed.

  12. For Enforcement says:

    Just for the record, I don’t believe you can point out any words that I have written that are not spelled correctly.

    And of course “Current form” is not a term I used either.

    The Political entity, as you used the term, of course in France has existed only after 1800. You are well aware the the US political entity has existed since the 1780’s. But then you already knew that.

  13. For Enforcement says:

    Ah, now I see why you are using the word.
    You started out accusing Foley of being a pedophile and when it was pointed out to you that pedophilia was toward prepubescent children, you argued that wasn’t true.
    So now to quietly admit you were wrong, you starting using the term, ephebophilia, which means post pubescent.
    Well, as you well know, in most cases post pubescent would not likely be a crime.
    You might want to read that at that link you gave me.

  14. For Enforcement says:

    before you point it out, I did actually use that term once, but it was the second time in the same sentence and was incorrect, it should’ve been entity.

    But the message is the same.