Comments on: It’s Only A Scandal When It’s A Republican

By: Doug Payton

Doug Payton — Fri, 24 Oct 2008 15:49:20 +0000

The “strong” and “b” tags are equivalent. The end tag for any HTML tag starts with a slash; “strong” and “/strong”. Italics uses “i” or “em” (meaning “emphasized”). I fixed the tags for you. No prob.

If we work with your definition of hypocrisy, then Mahoney is just as hypocritical as Foley. Mahoney campaigned on family values to show a distinction with Foley, and then had multiple affairs. Neither were true to their words, but one got weeks of national media and the other got none.

The big issue here is that Mahoney got no coverage at all. Not less, none. If hypocrisy is a story, Mahoney should have been one. Larry Craig made what appeared to be a sign related to homosexuality, but nothing actually happened. (Not saying whether or not he’s done anything in the past, just that the story was about the sign.) He, too, got way more coverage than Mahoney. Hypocrisy was the story for Craig, but Mahoney is ignored.

The press can’t possibly ignore all the stories about Democrats, and your example of McGreevy is well taken. But given the same Congressional seat, the Democrat got a pass. Not less coverage; a complete pass. And given a Republican with a lesser charge, the Democrat got a pass.

By: DelbertPGH

DelbertPGH — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:32:26 +0000

How do you italicize text? I used the “strong” tag, trying to put an effect on “uninformed”, but got bold face instead.

Just as importantly, how do you turn OFF the tag?

By: DelbertPGH

DelbertPGH — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 16:29:42 +0000

I can well imagine (if you will tolerate a flight of fancy, speculating on the psychology of a public figure whom I’ve never met and barely read about) that Mr. Foley was a deeply conflicted many, probably convinced homosexuality was bad, and unable to explain why he could be aroused by boys. It’s evidently something that had been rumored about for years, if I can believe local press reports, much the same with Larry Craig. I don’t doubt that he hated himself, though I am without proof. People can tie themselves in knots over sexuality; it is impossible to make yourself desire what you think you ought, if you really don’t; and impossible to not act upon, eventually. Never the less, it seems like that fits well under the definition of hypocrisy, as I know it, and that you allow compassion to stretch the too far the exculpatory rubric of “bad judgment.” Foley’s dislike of homosexuality was not only unaltered by his behavior; it was uninformed by his behavior, by the intimate knowledge of the soul of the homosexual he knew better than anyone else… his own.

I’m afraid that mere adultery of a minor political figure doesn’t warrant the national TV coverage you feel was lacking, so I can’t attribute that to pro-Democrat bias. When Jim McGreevy (governor of NJ) resigned because he placed his boyfriend in a choice state job, the networks picked that up. And when he was falling out of the news cycle, going through a quiet, humiliating divorce, it got all fired up again because his (male) chauffeur started blabbing about how he and the gov and the first lady did three-ways together. Apparently he felt that the first lady was being a hypocrite, complaining about dear Jim that way, and he had to be there to defend Jim. Bang, straight to the top of the news shows again. Only problem for the networks was, this news was so dirty it was hard to describe fully over the air, even if it was fun to tell.

So, I think your complaint is without grounds. Mahoney sinned, and made the local news, but he just wasn’t sexy enough for the big time.

In parting, I share one last saucy detail from the McGreevy Wikipedia file: Jim now teaches ethics, law, and leadership at Kean University. That’s hypocrisy or irony; take your pick.

By: Doug Payton

Doug Payton — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 23:46:14 +0000

First off, you, as do many other, don’t understand the meaning of the word “hypocrisy”. Doing something you truly believe is wrong is not hypocrisy; it’s bad judgment or making a mistake. Saying you believe something is wrong when you truly don’t is hypocrisy. Foley’s view of homosexuality, as far as I know, was not altered by his behavior. He still believes it to be wrong; he just did the thing he believed to be wrong.

Secondly, you’re essentially admitting that the TV “news” networks have sunk to the level of the National Enquirer, and their claim to objective journalism has tanked along with it. It didn’t even get “a snort and a smirk” from the national TV news. It got nothing. If it’s a Democrat, it’s apparently not news at all. That is liberal media bias and pathetically low standards from organizations that many liberals hold in high esteem. They criticize Fox News or the Washington Times for bias, but the lack of realization of bias here, or the handwaving away of it as you’re doing, displays a huge blind spot for true bias.

By: DelbertPGH

DelbertPGH — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 18:47:56 +0000

Three points of distinction between the sins of Foley and Mahoney:
1. Foley went after underage pages; Mahoney (apparently) chased adults.
2. Foley went after boys; Mahoney, women.
3. Foley conspicuously deplored homosexuality in his political life, as a sign of the values he shared with Christians and conservatives.

I read about Mahoney in major newspapers, but you must agree, his transgressions just don’t have the star quality front-page appeal of Foley’s. Mahoney apparently apologized to his wife about the first affair, which nearly upset his election, before getting caught going at it again, which was good for a snort and a smirk, but Foley’s hypocrisy was world-class.