tomorrow...according to drudge

that certainly doesn't help the GOP uptick of late...

10/2/2006 10:35:07 PM

durr a liberal newspaper calling for hastert's resignation

not worth of the siren, imo

10/2/2006 11:14:42 PM

OMFG THE TIMES!!!!

the TIMES arent the ones....

10/2/2006 11:17:59 PM

http://washingtontimes.com/op-ed/20061002-102008-9058r.htm

Quote :

"Resign, Mr. Speaker TODAY'S EDITORIAL October 3, 2006 The facts of the disgrace of Mark Foley, who was a Republican member of the House from a Florida district until he resigned last week, constitute a disgrace for every Republican member of Congress. Red flags emerged in late 2005, perhaps even earlier, in suggestive and wholly inappropriate e-mail messages to underage congressional pages. His aberrant, predatory -- and possibly criminal -- behavior was an open secret among the pages who were his prey. The evidence was strong enough long enough ago that the speaker should have relieved Mr. Foley of his committee responsibilities contingent on a full investigation to learn what had taken place, whether any laws had been violated and what action, up to and including prosecution, were warranted by the facts. This never happened. Rep. John Shimkus of Illinois, the Republican chairman of the House Page Board, said he learned about the Foley e-mail messages "in late 2005." Rep. John Boehner of Ohio, the leader of the Republican majority, said he was informed of the e-mail messages earlier this year. On Friday, Mr. Hastert dissembled, to put it charitably, before conceding that he, too, learned about the e-mail messages sometime earlier this year. Late yesterday afternoon, Mr. Hastert insisted that he learned of the most flagrant instant-message exchange from 2003 only last Friday, when it was reported by ABC News. This is irrelevant. The original e-mail messages were warning enough that a predator -- and, incredibly, the co-chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children -- could be prowling the halls of Congress. The matter wasn't pursued aggressively. I t was barely pursued at all. Moreover, all available evidence suggests that the Republican leadership did not share anything related to this matter with any Democrat. Now the scandal must unfold on the front pages of the newspapers and on the television screens, as transcripts of lewd messages emerge and doubts are rightly raised about the forthrightness of the Republican stewards of the 109th Congress. Some Democrats are attempting to make this "a Republican scandal," and they shouldn't; Democrats have contributed more than their share of characters in the tawdry history of congressional sexual scandals. Sexual predators come in all shapes, sizes and partisan hues, in institutions within and without government. When predators are found they must be dealt with, forcefully and swiftly. This time the offender is a Republican, and Republicans can't simply "get ahead" of the scandal by competing to make the most noise in calls for a full investigation. The time for that is long past. House Speaker Dennis Hastert must do the only right thing, and resign his speakership at once. Either he was grossly negligent for not taking the red flags fully into account and ordering a swift investigation, for not even remembering the order of events leading up to last week's revelations -- or he deliberately looked the other way in hopes that a brewing scandal would simply blow away. He gave phony answers Friday to the old and ever-relevant questions of what did he know and when did he know it? Mr. Hastert has forfeited the confidence of the public and his party, and he cannot preside over the necessary coming investigation, an investigation that must examine his own inept performance. A special, one-day congressional session should elect a successor. We nominate Rep. Henry Hyde, also of Illinois, the chairman of the House International Relations Committee whose approaching retirement ensures that he has no dog in this fight. He has a long and principled career, and is respected on both sides of the aisle. Mr. Hyde would preside over the remaining three months of the 109th Congress in a manner best suited for a full and exhaustive investigation until a new speaker for the 110th Congress is elected in January, who can assume responsibility for the investigation. "

10/2/2006 11:49:25 PM

do you think the times would call for resignations if the parties were reversed?

10/2/2006 11:51:39 PM

i was always under the impression that the Washington Times was the conservative counterpart to the more liberal Washington Post

10/2/2006 11:58:57 PM

^

Regardless of party or editorial bias, the column is right. If it's true that Hastert knew of these goings on -- especially in this level of detail -- he should resign.

I like Hastert but this one is too much to let stand. You simply don't let people under your charge get away with this kind of thing. It shows serious interpersonal weakness as a leader, and there has to be basic accountability all the way to the top.

Overall, this is a sad state of affairs.

10/3/2006 4:18:00 AM

Ahaha

The Washington Times, folks.

much like the New York Post

10/3/2006 6:47:51 AM

it will really impact in the districts where Hastert has gone in to fundraise. i can only imagine the ads you could run off of "herding pedophiles"

10/3/2006 9:37:19 AM

OMG LIBERAL MEDIA




Washington Times, more liberal than...Pat Robertson?

10/3/2006 10:49:10 AM

and sorry about the title

the Washington Times didn't fit in the title space

but if you live here, you get used to calling it the times and the post and you ignore NY

10/3/2006 11:21:19 AM

there's plenty of reason to ignore the washington times

10/3/2006 11:31:09 AM

10/3/2006 11:51:42 AM

10/3/2006 12:10:49 PM

Quote :

"durr a liberal newspaper calling for hastert's resignation not worth of the siren, imo "

OOPS

10/3/2006 12:19:31 PM

what are you talking about?

its ALL the LIBERAL MEDIA

the only non-liberal source is Newsmax

10/3/2006 1:02:43 PM

Fox News is the only nonbiased news source.

10/3/2006 1:09:22 PM

haha you guys spend more time putting words in others' mouths than saying things for yourselves

10/3/2006 1:25:28 PM

pot, may i introduce you to kettle?

10/3/2006 1:27:05 PM

i was well aware of the irony, if that's what you mean


but fuck you anyways

10/3/2006 1:31:19 PM