SEX SCANDALS COST REPUBLICANS MORE DEARLY
Charles Krauthammer compares the Foley scandal to a similar situation involving a Democrat:
In 1983, REPRESENTATIVE GERRY Studds, Democrat of Massachusetts, admitted to having sex with a 17-year-old male page. He was censured by the House of Representatives. During the vote, which he was compelled by House rules to be present for, Studds turned his back on the House to show his contempt for his colleagues' reprimand. He was not expelled from the Democratic Caucus. In fact, he was his party's nominee in the next election in his district--and the next five after that--winning reelection each time. He remained in the bosom of the Democratic Caucus in the House for the next 13 years.Krauthammer left out a few incidentals but got it essentially correct:
In 2006, Republican congressman Mark Foley was found to have been engaged in lurid sexual Internet correspondence with a 16-year-old House page. There is no evidence yet of his ever laying a hand on anyone, let alone having sex with a page. When discovered, he immediately resigned. Had he not, says Republican House Speaker Dennis Hastert, "I would have demanded his expulsion." Not only is Foley gone, but half the Republican House leadership has been tarred. Hastert himself came within an inch of political extinction.
Am I missing something? There seems to be an odd difference in the disposition of the two cases. By any measure, what Studds did was worse. By any measure, his treatment was infinitely more lenient.
On July 14, 1983 the House Ethics Committee concluded that Rep. Dan Crane (R-Ill.) and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.) had engaged in sexual relationships with minors, specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. In Crane's case, it was a 1980 relationship with a female page and in Studds's case, it was a 1973 relationship with a male page. Both representatives immediately pleaded guilty to the charges and the committee decided to simply reprimand the two.Sex scandals are a big deal for Republicans; for Democrats they're business as usual.
However, Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) demanded their expulsion. On July 20, 1983, the House voted for censure, the first time that censure had been imposed for sexual misconduct. Crane, who subsequently apologized for his transgression, lost his bid for reelection in 1984.
Studds, although he did admit that he had made "a very serious error in judgement", also called a press conference with the former page, in which both stated that the young man, who was 17, consented. Studds did not break any U.S. laws in what he called a "private relationship." He continued to be reelected until his retirement in 1997.
1 Comments:
So the fact that Gerry Studds SUDDENLY ends up (gasp) dead even though he appeared to be recovering??? Fox reports: "Studds regained consciousness, remained in the hospital, and seemed to be improving. He was scheduled to be transferred to a rehabilitation center, but his condition deteriorated Friday and he died at about 1:30 a.m. Saturday" (isn't Saturday one of those no news days) Those damn Republicans can't drag his name through the mud, after all -- if they bring it up, would that be disrespectful? I guess the democrats were granted free slinging rights over the Foley story. Does this seem a little TOO convenient to anyone else?
Post a Comment
<< Home