Wednesday, October 04, 2006

News Briefs (And The Usual Opinionated Commentary)

Trying to decide what to post on can be tough sometimes, especially when there is a lot going on. So, here are few things that are happening in our world and some thoughts to go with them.

Calls For Hastert's Resignation Increasing

If you were to have told me that a Washington newspaper was calling for the resignation of Speaker Hastert, over the Foley affair, I'd have guessed WaPo without batting an eye. But this the WaTi calling for it. And you know what? Maybe it's about time. He's been worthless, you know. Maybe it's time for new blood to assume control and maybe the new Speaker will actually do his job. (De plane, de plane. Looooook boss, it's de plane!!!)

Meanwhile, ABC News is reporting that Foley's depravity may be more pronounced, than first believed.

I have no pity on this guy. The fact that he is in an alcohol rehab, won't get an ounce of sympathy from me. Not only did he dishonor himself and the people that sent him to Washington, he betrayed his family and has subjected them to what will be a long term, of shame and embarassment. But more than that, who knows how much damage he did to those kids?

Some are questioning the double standard that seems to be in play, where Democrats are concerned.

And you know what? It's a perfectly legitimate question to ask.

Why is Gerry Studds still in office? At this late point in the game, you cannot blame him. You have to ask the people of his district, they are the ones that have kept voting this guy in. It certainly doesn't say much for them, does it?

The other legitimate question to ask is, what did the Dems know and when did they know it? We all know why the GOP would have tried to cover it up. But why would the Dems?

If it is found that the Dems sat on this, to use it as their October surprise, this thing will backfire on them lightning fast. So, if there is any chance this has happened, they would do well to let this one drop and let the GOP lick their wounds. (But you know they won't. Politics is a science of opportunity.)

Sen. James Inhofe took on an interviewer on whether or not global warming is caused by man, or not. (click on the link, and then click on the link dated Oct. 3)

Sen. Inhofe turned the tables on CNN anchor Miles O’Brien and the interviewee, became the interviewer. He cleaned his clock, in my opinion. You have to see this one, for yourself.

The AP is reporting that Iran has asked France to oversee their enrichment of uranium.

I would approach this with a cautious optimism, with the operative word being "cautious". These things have a way of falling through. Iran could be trying another stall tactic and this whole ply could be a trick. One thing is for sure, the French had better not let this thing play out in the media, until there is an agreement. It will decrease the chances of this becoming a reality, if the media conducts the negotiations.

French smokers are outraged at the possibility that new laws banning smoking in public may be implemented.

To the French I say:

Welcome to the world of socialism, where the government tells private business what it can and cannot do. We actually beat you to this one. I am a smoker, but have always respected non-smokers rights. I do not mind going outside. And as long as they don't take that right away, I can live with it.

I say, get used to it and remember, it will all get better when you decide to conform to the will of Big Brother. He knows what's best for you.

7 comments:

Mary Ellen said...

Hello LA

Regarding the call for Hastert resignation...

I think he should resign and I believe if this story gets any bigger in the next 2 days or more information comes out of even more pages being stalked by Foley, he will have no choice but resign. He surely failed in his duties. This story isn't going to go away and the Republicans aren't doing such a hot job of spinning it or dealing with damage control.

As far as which Dems knew what, I'm not sure. But it has been reported that when these allegations came to light in the Spring, Hastert went only to the Republican who was in charge of the Page program with this info and did not give it to the Democrat. That shows that he put party first before the safety of the pages. IMO, that is taking politics too far.

Congressman LaHood (R) said that the page program should be scrapped. Interesting...punish the pages because they can't seem to run a small program with 80 kids in it. And you wonder why our government failed in the Katrina disaster, or in Iraq? They can't handle the safety of 80 children in their own House. We're supposed to trust them with the rest of the country? I don't think so.

I don't see a double standard. In the case of Gerry Studs, there wasn't a cover-up. He was censored by the House (I think he should have been forced to resign), but it wasn't covered up. I don't know all the details on this, but there doesn't seem to be a connection with the way the Republicans handled this.

Sorry, LA, this story can't be spun.

French smoking laws: I don't know, from what I've heard on SF's blog in the last year since I've posted there, the French don't seem to care about laws like that. Isn't it supposed to be law to pick up your dog's merde when walking them? Yet, in most cases they don't. I have to wonder if this law will even be enforced.

Mary Ellen said...

Here's one for the books! LOL!

'In 3 different cutaways, lasting over 15 seconds each, Fox News labels Mark Foley A DEMOCRAT!'

I guess if you can't blame the Democrats...just change his party affiliation! Desperate with a hint of stupid... :-D Fox News, what a joke!

LASunsett said...

ME,

//I don't see a double standard. In the case of Gerry Studs, there wasn't a cover-up. He was censored by the House (I think he should have been forced to resign), but it wasn't covered up. I don't know all the details on this, but there doesn't seem to be a connection with the way the Republicans handled this.//

Now ME, I know you oppose the war based on a specific principle. Being a devout Catholic girl, you have no doubt stood on a wide variety of principles throughout your life.

But do not let that D behind Studds' name cause you compromise your principles. Maybe he didn't cover it up, maybe the House did censure him. But if you think that what he did was any less despicable than what Foley did, you stand as a person that tosses out principle for party line.

And I know that is not you. ;)

Mary Ellen said...

LA

Excuse me, but where in my statement did I say he was less despicable? Did I not say that he should have been forced to resign? I also mentioned that I didn't know much about his case, however, I pointed out that there was not a cover-up, like the one that the Republicans did with Foley. In Studs case, it was brought out into the public eye and not hidden. I have no idea if there were legal charges brought against him, but that wasn't the point I was making.It isn't up to the Democrats to arrest and try the guy.

I take offense at being accused of tossing aside my principles in order to back my political party. That was a low blow, LA.

LASunsett said...

ME,

//I take offense at being accused of tossing aside my principles in order to back my political party. That was a low blow, LA.//


I am sorry I certainly didn't mean it as an insult. I know you don't throw away your principles, that is why I said:

And I know that is not you. ;)

ME,

You know me by now. I am not one to be mean spirited in any way. But one thing, you have to realize is, in this medium of communication, so much gets lost in the translations as compared to personal contact. You cannot see the grins, the eye winks, you cannot hear a tone of voice. So much of that is missing.

And if we are not careful, we can get very offended when someone didn't mean to do so. They are just misunderstandings.

And that is what I think we have here. So smile, cheer up. Accept my apology and always remember that I will not be mean in these exchanges. And if you ever think that I am being mean, ask me to clarify what I am saying, because many times it's nothing to get upset about.

superfrenchie said...

//French smokers are outraged at the possibility that new laws banning smoking in public may be implemented.//

Where the hell do they get that? Polls show that most Frenchies are overwhelmingly in favor of that law. Smokers and non-smokers alike.

LASunsett said...

SF, I am not sure where the article got the information from. Probably from the tobacco and bar lobby. They are the ones that fight it hardest here. I think it should be up to each business owner to decide what his/her customers want and have the freedom to choose. Non-smkoers have many non-smoking restaurants to choose from, but no one asks me. They don't even call.