Our Lost War
I did read on this Foley stuff a few hours last night and when I did get to bed at 7:15 I stayed awake quite awhile with it in my mind. I can't say I actually thought about it --it's too junky and yucky for it to attract the intellect. It is going to be bad and it is going to hurt Republicans. It could be very bad. It's one of those things that just creates distaste. That means emotion not reflection, so so much for my idea that this will be the smartest election ever. Just what's going to happen I don't know but this is the silly season so it's not going to go away and it's going to be a mess. The ramifications could be immense. Loss of the House, loss of the Senate, loss of the war.
I don't consider the moral infraction to be that great. I consider slight, occasional, private sexual weirdness to be probably nearly universal, but this particular stuff is particularly yucky. Politically, the worst thing a Republican could do is say: It's no big deal. (That's a Democrat position, though that's not the way they're going to play this.) There's no upside for the Republicans. Do the right thing, hope for the best, and hope the Democrats overplay their hand to the point of being offensive... Pretty weak. Looks bad.
.........................
UPDATE UPBEAT
An exceptionally interesting piece in the American Thinker on the Foley matter. The author (Clarice Feldman) doesn't draw these inferences but from the material presented they're obvious: It's possible this whole thing may not only be a setup, it may be a fraud! Maybe. It's possible Foley didn't write those emails, not the sexually explicit Instant Messages that are the real problem. They may have been created by an anonymous blogger, utilizing Foley's known email handle, and the knowledge that Foley had previously been admonished to take care not to appear to be in inappropriate contact. Psychologically, this makes immensely more sense than that Foley was a secrete pederast. I can see viscousness and smear from a blogger, and I would be pleased to think that Foley was actually an upright man. I would vastly prefer this even apart from concerns with Republican fortunes.
This evening maybe I'll write out the logic, but right now I've got to go outside and make use of the little remaining daylight.
Read the article. The argument is obvious, which is perhaps why it's not stated. It's only a possibility but it's easily and creditably possible.
(5;38 PM)
I don't consider the moral infraction to be that great. I consider slight, occasional, private sexual weirdness to be probably nearly universal, but this particular stuff is particularly yucky. Politically, the worst thing a Republican could do is say: It's no big deal. (That's a Democrat position, though that's not the way they're going to play this.) There's no upside for the Republicans. Do the right thing, hope for the best, and hope the Democrats overplay their hand to the point of being offensive... Pretty weak. Looks bad.
.........................
UPDATE UPBEAT
An exceptionally interesting piece in the American Thinker on the Foley matter. The author (Clarice Feldman) doesn't draw these inferences but from the material presented they're obvious: It's possible this whole thing may not only be a setup, it may be a fraud! Maybe. It's possible Foley didn't write those emails, not the sexually explicit Instant Messages that are the real problem. They may have been created by an anonymous blogger, utilizing Foley's known email handle, and the knowledge that Foley had previously been admonished to take care not to appear to be in inappropriate contact. Psychologically, this makes immensely more sense than that Foley was a secrete pederast. I can see viscousness and smear from a blogger, and I would be pleased to think that Foley was actually an upright man. I would vastly prefer this even apart from concerns with Republican fortunes.
This evening maybe I'll write out the logic, but right now I've got to go outside and make use of the little remaining daylight.
Read the article. The argument is obvious, which is perhaps why it's not stated. It's only a possibility but it's easily and creditably possible.
(5;38 PM)
posted by mouse at 3:39 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home