If he knew about the Foley situation with the young male interns should he resign? I think so. Politics have nothing to do with my opinion on this. If he knew there was even the slightest possibility of something like this going on he should step down immediately, as should anyone who knew and didn't speak up. Thoughts?

IF and it is a big IF, he sat on it, he should resign. The same holds true for any others, including Democrats that held off. Where it is going to get harder to call is the question of how explicit were the e-maols. The leadership had a duty to smell smoke and look for fire. The others I'm more inclined to believe just had a duty to report the smoke. Let me also add that if it is dicovered that anyone found out about it and called the media, I don't have a problem, as long as they didn't let it sit.

If it is worse case scenario, yes.

 

Unfortunately in today's world of politics, we will probably never know the truth.

If he knew about it he certainly should resign or be kicked out. This would be beyond explaination or justification of any type.

What type of resignation are we talking about? Resigning his seat in the House or resigning as Speaker of the House?

 

If he knew what was really going on and gave Foley a pass, he should resign his seat.

 

Otherwise, I have mixed feelings about him resigning as Speaker. It's a purely political position and his stepping down could either hurt or help the GOP. I'm not sure of which.

No, I don't think he should.

I think Michael Barone had a really good piece on the entire matter. Were there mistakes, yes. Should it cost Hastert his position? No.

What is interesting is how did the IM's become public? The Soros-funded CREW has had them since July and held onto much of their info. CREW is a tax exempt entity.

Good read and fair.

http://www.usnews.com/usnews/opinion/baroneblog/archives/061006/the_foley_inves.htm#more

If that is the case then the Soros-Funded CREW should lose their tax exempt status and should be investigated for withholding information in a potential criminal activity.

No, he should not step down under any circumstance. As long as he is there voters will have their doubts.

No, he should not step down under any circumstance. As long as he is there voters will have their doubts.

But won't they have as many if not more doubts if he steps down?

But won't they have as many if not more doubts if he steps down?

 

Out of sight, out of mind by Nov 7. Unless they wait until mid to late Oct, then it stays in the news cycle. Otherwise the Dems would have to bring it up.

No, he should not step down under any circumstance. As long as he is there voters will have their doubts.

Do you honestly think that the Conservative base is unsettled by this? Foley is the creep. He has resigned.

It has had very little impact.

Matter of fact, the two closest districts next to Foley's in Florida has seen each respective conservative running get a slight bump.

If anything, this will likely energize the GOP base because soon it is going to be the GOP fighting the media and that is what really energizes the base.

When this first hit, it was gay bashing in an attempt to chip away at the conservative base. Not going to work.

Essentially, the Dems are running nothing more than an anti-Bush agenda in these mid-term elections.

They are trying to sell a cover-up but ABC has overreached and ultimately could end up exposing CREW.

They have very little to run on. Many Dems are out there promoting tax hikes or rollbacks of the Bush Tax-cut, which is a little scary. The economy is cruising right along, Bush pigeon-holed them on the detainee bill, the Dems let the McCain's and Grahams of the world fight it out and then they cave to the administration and now they are left holding the bag on the detainee issue.

They fall back on Iraq with nothing more than anti-Bush rhetoric there.

This has not had the effect that many Dems are hoping for.

Do you honestly think that the Conservative base is unsettled by this? Foley is the creep. He has resigned.

It has had very little impact.

Matter of fact, the two closest districts next to Foley's in Florida has seen each respective conservative running get a slight bump.

If anything, this will likely energize the GOP base because soon it is going to be the GOP fighting the media and that is what really energizes the base.

When this first hit, it was gay bashing in an attempt to chip away at the conservative base. Not going to work.

Essentially, the Dems are running nothing more than an anti-Bush agenda in these mid-term elections.

They are trying to sell a cover-up but ABC has overreached and ultimately could end up exposing CREW.

They have very little to run on. Many Dems are out there promoting tax hikes or rollbacks of the Bush Tax-cut, which is a little scary. The economy is cruising right along, Bush pigeon-holed them on the detainee bill, the Dems let the McCain's and Grahams of the world fight it out and then they cave to the administration and now they are left holding the bag on the detainee issue.

They fall back on Iraq with nothing more than anti-Bush rhetoric there.

This has not had the effect that many Dems are hoping for.

 

If you say so. But I don't understand why Hastret had to cancel all his campaign stops because the canidates don't want to be seen standing beside him if it has no effect. Whatever decission is made it will be stictly political, not weather Hastert was wrong or right.

Looks like a decent bipartisan collection of people will be investigating it.

This isn't a national election, it is still being fought district by district, in state after state.

Locally it will be the issues that drive the dialogue and whatnot in these districts not this scandal.

This will die out soon unless more revelations come out.

I guess there has to be a whipping boy in every situation. The fact is that the focus should be on Foley and what he did. The sad part is that I heard a report on TV the other day about another Page scandal that happened in 1983. Another elected official (I cannot remember if it was a senator or congressman) in Washington was involved in a Page scandal. He actually had sexual relations with a Page. How inappropriate is that? Well, not only did that person not step down from office, .. they served another 13 years in Washington. The difference in these scandals? Not the fact that the congressman in 1983 was a Democrat as there exist scumbags in both parties, ... but the reason he kept his seat and continued to serve was that it wasn't an election year.

 

The fact is that the focus should be on Foley and his actions. If ANY person in Washington, regardless of party or position, was aware of his actions and did nothing, then they should resign. If not, let's focus on how to keep sicko's like Foley out of Washington. If the shoe were on the other foot, I would bet that the Republicans would be asking for the head of of the Democratic leadership just as the Dems are doing now. The bottom line is that both sides of the aisle will do whatever it takes to hold onto or regain power in our country. They are the reason that most Americans don't trust politicians.

Looks like a decent bipartisan collection of people will be investigating it.

This isn't a national election, it is still being fought district by district, in state after state.

Locally it will be the issues that drive the dialogue and whatnot in these districts not this scandal.

This will die out soon unless more revelations come out.

 

:thumb: