What about Foley's fall should be self-evident

I have to imagine the mood in the West Wing is dismal these days. And that there are a lot of people who can't help but gloat, but in a classy way. As John Dickerson points out, this is a time for the Democrats to stand back and let the Republicans dig the hole even deeper.

In truth, scandals such as these shouldn't invite partisan politics. There is no reason to believe that the Republican party attracts more scumbags than the other party, what's it called...? And if there is, it better be substantiated pretty thoroughly to be used as political currency.

What's a little strange about all this is that it isn't entirely clear what Mark Foley did wrong, at least by a narrow definition. He may have been inappropriate with the pageboys, but he didn't assault them, try to seduce them, or get them involved in pornography. I mean, he cut awfully close to being a child sex offender, and the investigation has yet to show the connection between nasty thoughts and words, and actual actions.

Still, his political career is sunk, and Hastert might go down with him for not dealing with this issue in a more timely way.

No doubt, Foley is a sleeze bag that you would advise your kids, your parents and anyone else to stay away from. And he probably doesn't have many friends left. I don't know how his family is dealing with it all, but I'm going to guess he's pretty alone right now.

But it seems to me that the Republicans are terrified to concede something that is obvious to everyone else in America: they're comprised of people, who are fallible, full of contradictions, and prone to egregious errors of judgment and lack of impulse control. Just like some Democrats one might think of.

This is where the Democrats should score their points. They should say that Foley is a sick man, he needs help, he probably shouldn't be in Congress anymore - but that his fall demonstrates that flawed individuals can champion good causes. They should highlight his efforts for such worthy (i.e., bipartisan) causes, call for an end to partisan bickering, talk about tolerance and mercy, etc. They should express understanding for Hastert's situation, express the hope that such issues can be dealt with in a principled rather than a partisan way in the future, say that the need for investigation should be balanced with the need for healing, etc.

And they should never once mention Clinton.

Comments

[Giustino]

Leif,

The thing with Foley is that one of the central tenets of the Republican Party since the rise of Reaganism has been that they are the party of "family values."

The Democrats - the party of Clinton and Kennedy - may argue that they will make your family more fiscally secure [ie. raise the minimum wage, expand healthcare coverage], but they've mostly been an "whatever you do in the privacy of your own home" party.

Foley himself took part in writing legislation to protect youth from sex offenders and also ran on the "family values" platform. So Foley's very detailed and public advances to underage boys is a great political way to negate the Republican's "family values" strength.

The Republicans sort of brought this one on themselves.