What Did The Democrats Know And When Did They Know It?

What Mark Foley did was wrong. Trying to hide behind the tired old "I'm an alcoholic" refrain and the de rigueur stint in rehab is reprehensible. Keep in mind however, there is no evidence of any physical contact between Foley and a page. Unlike some other Congressmen and a certain President and intern.

That being said, this entire situation smacks of Democratic dirty politics. Let's face it, they can't win on ideas so they'll try any thing else they can to get into power. That is what they crave most mind you: Power. The power of hearings, and supoenas and - oh they practically drool at the thought - impeachment.

It's time to turn the tables on the Democrats. It seems they knew about these instant messages and concerns about Foley as far back as last November. If their motives are so pure, why didn't they bring up the issue then? Ha! You know the answer as well as I do, because this "bombshell" is much more effective as an "October Surprise." There's a good article on Yahoo! News called: Did Democrats Page Mark Foley? It raises some good questions that the Democrats need to answer immediately.

In 1983, then-Democratic Rep. Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was caught in a similar situation. In his case, Studds had sex with a male teenage page -- something Foley hasn't been charged with.

Did Studds express contrition? Resign? Quite the contrary. He rejected Congress' censure of him and continued to represent his district until his retirement in 1996.

In 1989, Rep. Barney Frank, also of Massachusetts, admitted he'd lived with Steve Gobie, a male prostitute who ran a gay sex-for-hire ring out of Frank's apartment. Frank, it was later discovered, used his position to fix 33 parking tickets for Gobie.

What happened to Frank? The House voted 408-18 to reprimand him -- a slap on the wrist. Today he's an honored Democratic member of Congress, much in demand as a speaker and "conscience of the party."

In 2001, President Clinton, who had his own intern problem, commuted the prison sentence of Illinois Rep. Mel Reynolds, who had sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer and pressured her to lie about it. (Reynolds also was convicted of campaign spending violations.)

You get the idea. Democrats not only seem OK with the kind of behavior for which Foley is charged, but also they protect and excuse it. Only when it's a Republican do they proclaim themselves shocked -- shocked! -- when it comes to light.

We have a lot more questions about this whole affair. The timing of the revelations, as we noted, couldn't be more propitious for the Democrats. Turns out both the Democrats and several newspapers seem to have known about Foley's problem as far back as November, according to research by several enterprising blogs.

Why didn't they come forward then? Who dredged up these e-mails -- and why did they hold them until now? This reeks of political trickery.

We're glad Foley's gone. He betrayed Congress, his party and the trust of the 33 pages who serve in Congress, and their parents. He behaved immorally, and we won't be surprised at new revelations.

That said, if this scandal is the Democrats' answer to their problems at the polls, it's pretty pathetic. It shows a base contempt for the voters.