Article Surfing Archive

Every time we turn on the news we here questions ask like, 'In the wake of the Foley Scandal can the Republicans really call themselves the party of values. In realm of political power you do not judge the values of a party based on what one person does but rather you judge the values based on the actions of the majority of the members of the party in reaction to the misdeeds of one of its members. In any group of millions of people you are going to find a few perverts and people who are corrupt. The question is do the vast majority of people in the group support or protect the behavior or do they condemn it.

Congressman Foley had no choice to resign. He knew that the vast majority of Republicans in congress would not support him. More importantly he knew that that there was no chance the Republicans of his state would support him. The values of the people of his party would not allow that.

In a similar situation when it came out that a homosexual prostitution ring was being run from Democrat Congressman Barney Franks home there was no outcry. In fact all most all Democrats defended him and the Democrats of his state have re-nominated him ever since.

From the day that Bill Clinton announced that he was running for president there were rumors of his having affairs. When it came out in the media that the rumors were true the vast majority of Democrats stood behind him. When a former Miss America claimed to have been forced by Bill Clinton to have sex with him (her words were rapped) the Democrats stood in faithful support. When news article appeared documenting that He used the police men appointed to protect him to use their power to get women to be alone with him no one in the party said anything. When he had sex with an intern they rallied behind him. When he lied about it under oath they defended him. So I assume that Democratic Party values are that it is ok to use your power to seduce women and to lie before a Grand Jury. At least that is what the vast majority of both elected and non-elected Democrats proved.

When Sandy Berger who was Democrat the National Security Advisor during the Clinton Administration. Sandy Berger became the focus of a criminal investigation after he was caught removing highly classified terrorism documents and handwritten notes from the National Archives during preparations for the Sept. 11 commission hearings. Again there was no outcry from Democrats. How can it be that virtually no Democrats voiced out rage at stealing classified documents to cover the actions of the administration that you had belong to? I guess that Democrat values are that it is ok to steel and participate in political cover up.

On Sunday, the June 18, 2000, the headline of the Washington Post read, "Political Dirty Tricks Alleged in Alabama Trial. Two Democrats are on trial in Alabama for bribing a prostitute to claim that Republican Gubernatorial candidate Steve Windom raped her. Steve Windom was elected Governor of Alabama when she confessed. Again in 1998 when this happened there was no outcry from Alabama Democrats or Democrats anywhere else. Seams that the values of the Democrat Party find this acceptable.

On May 16th, 2000 delegates of the New York Democrat convention spat upon the Honor Guard and called them Nazis as the carried the Flag into the convention. No one in the crowd of delegates tried to stop them. Note that these were not anarchists out side, these were Democrat delegates on the floor of the convention. This story was all over the New York Media. Senator Clinton was nominated at this convention. Did she speak out against this? No! Neither did any prominent Democrats. It seams that spitting on New York Policemen and calling them Nazis while they carry the American Flag is an acceptable value in the Democrat party.

There was not out cry among Democrats when the Clinton administration collected over 1200 FBI files of Republicans. They worked in unison to hinder the investigation and defended the Clinton administration vigorously. The Democrats are supposed to be the party that wants to protect privacy. I guess the acceptation is when members of their party break the law and collect private FBI files. The Democrat values must be we respect the privacy of our friends and no one else.

The Democrat Governor of New Jersey, James McGreevey admitted to having a gay affair. Resigned after allegations of sexual harassment, rumors of being blackmailed on top of fundraising investigations and indictments. While he did resign there was a lack of public outrage expressed by fellow Democrats.

In the mid 1990s Democrat Congressman from Illinois, Melvin Reynolds was indited on 17 federal charges and plead guilty to two counts of misuse of public funds. Democrat congressman from Michigan, Charles Diggs JR. was convicted of sexual misconduct and Obstruction of Justice. Again the while the Democrats did not endorse their actions they did not stand up and publicly condemn them either.

As you read this you may not remember many of these stories. The made the news but they got very little coverage. The Media Research Center researched two of these stories. In the three weeks after the Foley story broke the three major networks (CBS, NBC and ABC) had broadcast 153 stories about the Foley Story. Above I mentioned the Melvin Reynolds story. Between the 1994 indictment and 1995 conviction of Melvin Reynolds the tree major networks broadcast a total of 19. Could the difference of 192 stories in three weeks and the 19 stories in a year and half which include both indictments, the trial and the conviction have anything to do with the myriad of surveys that show that 4 of 5 people in the media are registered Democrats.

Another example of the difference between the values of the parties is how they react to domestic terror. There are two major areas of domestic terrorism. One is those acts committed by radical prolife members against abortion clinics and the other are those committed by radical environmentalists and animal rights groups.

Most prolife members belong to or vote for Republicans. Whenever there is an act of violence committed by a prolife extremist there is an instant outcry from Republicans both among the leadership and the rank in files members. The leaders of the prolife movement and all the conservative churches stand up and condemn the actions.

Most members of the environmentalist and animal rights groups belong to or vote for Democrats. Yet when you hear of buildings on college campuses being burned or people assaulted by radical members of these groups you do not hear Democrats coming out and condemning the actions. Neither does the leaders of the environmentalist and animal rights movements.

Another thing to mention in this area is the difference in the amount of extremist between the two groups. Over the past twenty years there have only been a few dozen bombings and fires at abortion clinics and a few doctors assaulted. On the other hand last year alone there was over 100 fires and vandalism on college campuses against buildings where animal research is done and other types of research that these movements oppose. There were thousands of SUVs vandalized and thousands of people assaulted for either driving an SUV or wearing real or fake fur. All of this in only one a year time.

I am happy that everyone I know that considers them selves Republican and all most all Republican leaders condemn Congressman Foleys actions. I think it is ironic that the Democrats suddenly find the values to condemn Congressman Foley. But as you can see from their history this is political maneuvering. Because history shows that if Congressman Foley was a Democrat they would either stand behind him or be silent.

So Yes I do see a major difference in the values of the two parties.