Monday, October 09, 2006
Dishonesty on top of dishonesty
Here, Glenn points out that Ken Mehlman is making a blatantly false claim about Hastert's reaction to reports of Foley's behavior. Hastert is claiming that he caused Foley to resign... but as history (and news stories) recount, Hastert did not know about the extent of Foley's actions until after Foley had resigned... Foley resigned before the news was released from ABC.
Now, I don't agree with everything Glenn has to say. He thinks that the lack of action against Foley isn't the biggest part of this story. I don't agree... as far as I'm concerned, that's the whole story, so far.
Remember that, so far as we know, Foley did some obscene chat with teens. That's bad, terribly bad, but let's keep it in perspective. It's wrong, he deserves some level of punishment for it, but if he gets into counseling, I don't think he requires the same kind of mistrust that someone who engaged in improper touch, or worse, requires.
But the Republicans hid this, and were caught flat-footed by the revelations of how bad it was. They didn't investigate, didn't make sure people felt free to come forward, and make sure that every page felt safe. And that, more than anything else, shows that their talk about protecting children is just that: talk, nothing else.
The lies, well... honestly, I'm sick of the lies, but what can you expect? Can you imagine Hastert (or Boehner or Mehlman) saying "I was wrong; I should have made sure"? I can't.
But that they will tell such a cheap, ugly lie is news, and it is important. It means that you can't trust them to tell the truth about anything, if they think it might cost them votes.