Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons

Townhall.com The Blogspot for Political, Conservative and Republican Blogs and Bloggers


Thursday, October 05, 2006
Nothing New Under the Sun
Posted by: Dean Barnett at 3:50 PM

What’s different this time? Every other scandal, be it Democrat or Republican, runs its course and then is thought of no more. To coin a phrase, the public moves on. But this time, the thought (or in my house, fear) is that the Foley scandal will linger for five weeks and thus usher in an electoral catastrophe for the Republican Party. Apparently, I’m not alone in harboring such worries. The right wing pundictocracy is full of similar concerns, and these concerns apparently preoccupy the highest ranking Republicans in the land. Why?

The first reason is because the Foley scandal stinks. I mean it really, really stinks. Phil Donahue used to cry to people on his unlamented TV show that they wouldn’t get any media coverage unless they generated the publicity equivalent of a baby in a well. Sadly for us, this scandal has that. A congressman sharing self-abuse with a teenager over the internet certainly qualifies.

There’s also the lingering consternation that the highest ranking Republicans in the land will be revealed as either complicit or negligent in allowing Foley to do his thing. With no way to prove a negative, the House leadership can’t win on this one.

I’VE COME HERE THIS AFTERNOON to tell you, oh concerned conservatives, that this too shall pass. Right now, as I watch Fox News, I see two possible takes on the Foley scandal. One is that it will make political history, turn an election upside down and effect an electoral tidal wave. The other is that like all previous scandals, even ones that involved a President, a cigar and a zaftig Valley Girl, it will run its course and either exit the public consciousness or bring the public’s wrath upon the parties who insist on bringing it up after its shelf life has expired.

Supporting the “historic scandal” interpretation, a Republican pollster briefed the House leadership this morning and said Mark Foley and his filthy IM’s will be the proximate cause for the Republicans losing 50 House seats in November. Supporting the contrary view is a Pew poll taken following the Foley revelations that shows the Foley scandal hasn’t moved the public opinion needle. Also supporting the latter view are the Rasmussen tracking polls of the president’s approval which have remained steady (miserable, but still steady!) since last Friday. Both of these metrics suggest the public hasn’t shifted into widespread rebellion over the Foley scandal.

I can hear you asking, How can this be? I don’t have any answers, just theories. My lead theory is that decades of Gerry Studds, Mel Reynolds, Bob Packwood, Barney Frank, Bill Clinton and a whole bunch of people named Kennedy has hardened the American public to the notion that America’s halls of power will be prowled by a fair number of very odd men. A Congressman behaving inappropriately with youths that strike his fancy may sadly fall into the dog-bites-man category.

There also exists the question of why has the GOP, both its loyal pundits and its leadership, taken on a Chicken Little demeanor and felt as if the sky is falling over this particular scandal? After all, Clinton had the Monica thing break wide three months before the 1998 election and the Democrats went on to romp.

I think the rush to prematurely go to the mattresses comes from two+ years of living in an incredibly tight political climate where every news cycle has been treated as a life-or-death struggle. The race between Bush and Kerry took shape nine months before Election Day. The only time either candidate got any breathing room was right after the Republican convention, and the president yielded that cushion with a first debate performance that was the rhetorical equivalent of the Hindenburg. (I blogged that he won at the time, but thankfully no one was paying attention.)

Since the 2004 election, the distance separating the parties has steadily remained wafer thin. Whenever something happens that ephemerally alters the dynamic, the side on the losing end of that particular cycle understandably gets a little antsy. For Republicans this week, “antsy” has morphed into panic.

So how will it play out? The Republican leadership will get its act together. The story will soon die of old age; news gets old much faster in this, the era of the Internet.

Democrats will become enraged at the scandal’s ineffectiveness and overplay their hands. Embellishments and things that look like dirty pool will come to light. (Be sure to check out Drudge for tip of the iceberg in that regard.) At the end of the day, Foley will be revealed as one very weird guy. And the Democrats will look more bilious and impotent than ever, spewing anger at Republicans about deeds done in the past while having no plans they’re willing to share about the future.

Foley won’t be the first politician to earn such a rap. And his party won’t be the first to be virtually unaffected by it. Remember where you read it first.

Complaints? Compliments? Contact me at Soxblog@aol.com



View in ascending order View in descending order
peacethrustrength writes: Friday, October, 06, 2006 3:02 AM
Dean Has It Nailed
I will only add a few other points:

1) The Dem base that they need to turn out to win in key swing states is fueled nearly entirely by Pathological Bush Hatred, not by any moral issues, unless they are voting in favor of gay marriage. The Dems haven't energized a single bit of their "base".

2) The Republican base is intelligent enough to differentiate between one kooky gay Florida (of all places) Congressman and the rest of the Republican Congressional Delegation. Who would be foolish enough to look at Rick Santorum or Charlie Taylor and see anything pro-gay or pro-child predator?

3) Mid-terms elections are mostly referendums on the public mood regarding the economy and jobs, or can be swayed by retirements/redistricting. Open seats are my only worry in that regard.

4) Last, but not least...

Please do not lose faith, because never in the history of the United States of America has the U.S. House of Representatives changed the party in power in a year that did not also include a change of power in the U.S. Senate.

If the Republicans retain the Senate, history says they will hold the House too.
IfAFrogHadWings writes: Friday, October, 06, 2006 1:18 AM
Re: Excellent PBS Moyers documentary
Briggsy,

You need to type more carefully. You obviously wanted Trollhall.com. You're in the wrong place.
Joe writes: Thursday, October, 05, 2006 7:24 PM
GOP Base Not Stupid
The base is not stupid and will glean the wheat from the shaft, but there is some definite GOP shaft in the House. There is some real dissatisfaction with the GOP with its base, so I do not see a GOP gain under any circumstances. It will be mitigated because the Dems offer no good alternatives (except perhaps in a few close races).
Gamecock writes: Thursday, October, 05, 2006 6:42 PM
Were 3000 Americans Killed last Friday?
Voters are not stupid. They vote on what matters and all the chatter between elections that occupy us chatterers matters not a whit, except to provide the MSM with a narrative to blame their bi-ennial losses on anything but the rejection of appeasement and liberalism by the majority of the American people.

We'll here all the "GOP base comes home", as if they went anywhere. They get to vote one day every two years and they vote conservative on the issues of war, peace, prosperity and social issues.

GOP gains seats.
kchand writes: Thursday, October, 05, 2006 6:17 PM
Those wacky Dems
Insist on running through the rear view mirror. Let's investigate the last 3 years of Foley. Let's investigate Bush and Iraq. Let's second guess the tax cuts. (just can't stand this booming economy)

Think voters MIGHT want to look to the future and PLANS the Dems have?
Vinny Vidivici writes: Thursday, October, 05, 2006 6:13 PM
We are not serious people
Mark Steyn commented earlier today on how the spectacle of the world's remaining superpower making primary election issues out of the sexually-explicit messages of a minor league congressman (now resigned) and whether or not this or that candidate uttered the 'n' word three decades ago is not particularly reassuring to a world which, while it may love or hate the U.S., looks to the U.S. for leadership.

I'll add that many of the same people who wring their hands over America's image in the world are the ones pushing these things to the forefront.
slarrow writes: Thursday, October, 05, 2006 6:00 PM
Foley the past, not the future
Nice return to sanity here, Dean.

Here's the thing: Foley's indiscretions are in the past. He's already resigned, so there's nothing for leadership left to do to him. All the yammering about who knew what when is about re-examining recent history, and heaven knows we've done enough of that the past several months. So in sum, all the Foley brouhaha is yet another case of shoulda-shoulda-shoulda.

Well, we already know that's how the Democrats have been planning to win: by pointing and saying "these guys haven't been good, we've got to be better." That really hasn't been looking to be working that well--but now they've doubled down. Real people aren't going to care about Washington-style inner-circle buck-passing; this ought to die out in the hinterlands soon, leaving only the Republicans talking about the future...again.

The GOP needs to get beat one of these years, but only by a party that can do a better job of protecting this country. This ain't that year, and I don't think they WILL get beat. A pair doesn't beat much, but it will win if the other guy's got nothing.
Joe writes: Thursday, October, 05, 2006 5:43 PM
This story's half life. . .
If the revelation by Drudge about the IMs being a prank--I predict this story has a half life of a week. That means it will be half as reported in the second week and half again as reported in the week after that.

Nothing for the Republicans to write home about and the GOP certainly could have done a better job to avoid it--but I knew the hyperbole was getting extreme when predictions were a 50 seat loss for the Republicans if Hastert stayed.

My prediction--the Republicans will lose the House but not by a major swing of seats and will cling to a majority in the Senate.
Sign Up to Post Your Comments Sign Up to Post Your Comments
Please take a few seconds to sign up, then you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, create your own blog and more! If you are already registered, click here.
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.
 


Your Blog Postings:
Last updated 20 Minutes 15 Seconds Ago
Last updated 20 Minutes 21 Seconds Ago
Last updated 1 Hours 19 Minutes 34 Seconds Ago
Last updated 1 Hours 44 Minutes 10 Seconds Ago
Last updated 1 Hours 48 Minutes 34 Seconds Ago
 

Archives of our Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs

Blog Search



Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Townhall Blogs
Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Columns Columns
Your Townhall Conservative, Republican, Political Blogs Your Blogs
By Month
 November 2009
 October 2009
 September 2009
 August 2009
 July 2009
 June 2009
 May 2009
 April 2009
 March 2009
 February 2009
 January 2009
 December 2008
 November 2008
 October 2008
 September 2008
 August 2008
 July 2008
 June 2008
By Issue
 A Culture of Life
 Budget & Government
 Campaigns & Elections
 Education
 Energy & Environment
 Faith & Family
 Foreign Affairs
 Health Care
 Immigration
 Jobs & Economy
 Judges & Courts
 Media & Culture
 Property Rights
 Safety & Security
 Science & Technology
 Second Amendment
 Social Security
 Tax Relief
Advertisement

Comments Comments

douglas 11:59 AM
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Bob Munck
clarityseeker claims
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By MellorSJ2
Jillian says:
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By DanNV
Lonny
 Re: NYT: Being On Food Stamps No Longer Carries A Stigma
  By peacefrog
Jo--for the utterly pedantic Libs...
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By clarityseeker
Lonny and Pat
 Re: Christmas Outlawed
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
Lonny
 Re: Christmas Outlawed
  By Patriotic Liberal
Jo
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
Both Sides Now?
 Re: ACORN and "Journalistic Standards"
  By DanNV
Careful
 Re: Twenty lessons your teenage daughter will learn from the Twilight movies
  By MellorSJ2
Rainey may be wrong
 Re: ACORN and "Journalistic Standards"
  By Kermudjin
Examining Dreadnuts view on movies...
 Re: Twenty lessons your teenage daughter will learn from the Twilight movies
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
Jo
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Patriotic Liberal
Jo
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Careful with that axe, Eugene
I have to go
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Jo
They'll ignore it
 Re: Only Global Warming Critics Can Save Climategate Scientists
  By Stoic Patriot
Flunck 12:15 PM...I rest my case...
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By clarityseeker
Timeline for Eugene 4
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Jo
Timeline for Eugene 3
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Jo
Timeline for Eugene 2
 Re: Here Comes the Judge?
  By Jo

The Latest on Town HallThe Latest on Town Hall


Blog Roll Blog Roll