They have to fight back, because Democrats are trying to smear the whole Republican party because of the actions of one man.

Why is it not worth noting the vast difference in media and Democratic reaction to the Gerry Studds situation versus the Mark Foley one? At this point, Studds is the only one known to have had sex with a minor page. Studds continued to win reelection in Massachusetts. Republicans have gotten rid of Foley.

Why don't we all just agree to stick to the important issues?

Hello! Although I find your straight talk to be somewhat interesting, your hatred toward Republicans and George Bush seems to be not only repetitive, but also compulsive. If it's not the democrats, it's the republicans and vice versa. My point is that there is just no end. Unless your interior motive is an attempt at becoming the democratic version of Bill O'reilly, maybe you should find some other angles to attack. It would not only be that much more interesting for the viewers, but enjoyable as well. Just my 2 cents!

Scott:

Respectfully said, I think you are missing the key point here...it's not really about the specifics of the Foley scandal, but about the accoutability of the Republican leadership. The Foley scandal and cover up is just another expample of the behavior that governs this Congress. For years they have tolerated scandal after scandal, have shown no interest in truly policing their own and have allowed an unprecedented culture of corruption and abuse of power to prevail.

I am not suggesting that the Democrats are or will ever be angels, but the level of corruption by this group of Republicans should make all Americans appalled, regardless of political party.

And, perhaps the biggest crime of all is their lack of oversight and investigation into the build up and execution of the war in Iraq. It is hard to justify their lack of action on the war and their refusal to hold open and honest hearings on the exponentially mounting evidence of deceit and incompetence by the Bush Administration.

So, whatever you think about the Foley scandal, let's make sure that we focus on the real issue here...accountability.

Interesting how the comentary for the Foley scandal was only strongly encouraged by Republican sided news broadcast stations like Fox and Riley. What else did you expect? They act one sided on issues of this sort. Try and get the backers for Foley on MSNBC and you'll hear the director in the background yelling to drop the call while the producer continues to push for harder comments and questions becuase the republicans are side stepping the real questions. Been there, it makes for great TV! Love this business!

Two words, my hypocritical friend: Gerry Studds.

Studds did more than send inappropriate email; he had an actual affair with a page. And unlike the Foley affair, the individual involved was legally underage, being seventeen rather than eighteen!

He was censured by the Democratic House, and continued to serve.

Bob...

Not hypocritical at all. Immediately upon learning of Studds unenthical behaviour, the Democrats censured him...and then left it up to the voters of Massachusetts to determine whether he should be reelected. Unlike the Foley affair, there was no cover up. Foley only resigned after learning that ABC was going to report on his actions. And the Republican Congress is still engaged in deception and finger pointing on this issue. As of a few days ago, the most senior people involved still had not testified before the ethics committee.