RJ Eskow, HuffPo: The Real Difference Between "Foley and Studds" in 9 Statements (Plus 3 About "Ethics" And 2 About Clinton)
1. As far as we know Studds was not forcing his unwelcome attentions on a series of pages, one after the other.
2. No page went to the Democratic leadership asking for protection from Studds, only to be rebuffed and ignored.
3. The Democratic Party did not run on a platform of "righteousness" and anti-homosexuality, while behaving hypocritically in private.
4. The Democratic Speaker of the House did not make statements about the incident that were immediately revealed to be outright lies ... by fellow Democrats.
5. The Democrats did not then begin an orchestrated media campaign to blame the entire problem on ... the Republicans (or the young man, for that matter).
6. Democrats did not take to the airwaves with talking points that were transparent lies.
7. Pro-Democratic writers (there weren't any bloggers then, remember?) didn't violate the privacy of the young man involved and give his name out to the press. They didn't call the young man a "beast" or blame him for Studds' behavior, either. (Have you heard any Republican leaders criticize the bloggers who gave out the young victims' names?)
8. How many times does this need to be said? It's the cover-up, stupid.
9. The Democratic leadership did not protect a predator, conceal his wrongdoing, and allow him to continue his activities in secret.. The Republicans did.
Let me repeat that last point, because it's getting overlooked:
The Democratic leadership did not protect a predator, conceal his wrongdoing, or allow him to continue his activities in secret. The Republicans did.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment