Since our last check, Senator John McCain has called for an independent investigation of the House leadership's failures to protect underage pages from disgraced predator Mark Foley. Senator George Allen stays silent. He's accepted Foley fundraising, but continues to dodge serious questions engulfing his party in Congress and his own connection to it all: What money did Allen get from Foley's fundraising (as seen in the picture)? Will he keep this money? Is Allen going to use the money Foley donated to the NRCC? What does he think about the leadership's behavior in the House of Representatives? Should Hastert resign as Speaker? Should Hastert run again to lead the House?
Still no answers from Allen. The Allen Dodge Watch continues!
How can you even post this??
Were you not listening during the debate? Allen slammed Foley. He has also given the money that Foley gave him to charity. To post the above is to ignore the facts.
Regardless, the second issue, which is almost as bad as the initial act, is that Hastert and Republican party appear to have covered up Foley's criminal activity for political gain.
This puts Allen in a tough situation - party loyalty vs. doing the right thing. And it's these trying situations that reveal one's true character.
So far he's come up empty: zero upstanding character, all blind loyalty in the name of power.
With character like that Allen doesn't even qualify to lead a Boy Scout troop, much less be a U.S. Senator.
Allen has given away his connection to Foley. He has no say on the Speaker of the HOUSE. What more should he do?
Keep trying to make this an issue.
And George Allen is a major figure in the Republican Congress. He doesn't have any relevant thoughts on how the congressional leadership should've handled this? McCain recognizes the relevance. Allen is just dodging.
It's easy to give back the measly few grand that Foley's checks created. It's a lot harder to give up the thousands and thousands more that Foley raised for him and the NRCC. Does Allen think it's okay to use that Foley-tainted money?
Until he answers that question and what he thinks about the House leadership (esp. whether Hastert should resign), he's just plain ol' dodging the whole thing.
Or just the same empty rhetoric that what Foley did was wrong? (no kidding!)
Rep. Christopher Shays, R-Conn., defended House Speaker Dennis Hastert's handling of the congressional page scandal by saying no one died like at Chappaquiddick in 1969 when Democratic Sen. Edward Kennedy was involved.
It seems Shays is trying to imply that predatory behavior towards a minor is to be viewed in a positive light because no one has died, whereas an incident involving someone's death is then negative.
Since Shays recently voted for the approval of waterboarding, I guess it would seem contradictory to think that he would disapprove of sexual predators.
What is most disturbing though, is that a sitting congressman would even dig up crap like this to use as a defense.
Molestation or murder?
Hmmmmm...
Even if you did think Kennedy was guilty, does that mean all the Senators get one shot at a terrible crime? I thought the Right was all about personal responsibility.
Unless you're a corporate officer or a Congressman?