I’m wondering why Foley wasn’t asked to resign earlier, too. The republicans would’ve had plenty of time to recover if this was addressed last year.
So far, this explanation looks interesting to me – from “Connecting the I.M.s – Foleygate from inside Gay underworld”, Wertz’s DKos Diary

Indeed, given the breadth of the cover-up, the fact that the House has never treated this as anything but something to be covered up tells me that they knew this was (and remains) about something bigger.

If the issue had been simply to throw Foley under the bus a few months ago, why wouldn’t Hastart and co have done it?

There’s only one reason and it’s a tacit admission that the problem wasn’t Foley or Foley alone. That to toss Foley would only stir a hornet’s nest leaving it best to just stonewall those overly friendly e-mails.

For the young man comfortable enough to afford Foley and company more than IM access, there would be rewards. Indeed, provided one could keep it secret enough, it could be very profitable. (Hence you take the boy least likely to “snitch” – a gay one – pressure him into inappropriate situations and then reward him, turning him into a prostitute, a willing accomplice, overnight.)

When we look closer, we do begin to wonder if Foley shared his conquests, if willing enablers up and down the chain, also received access and dispensed largess. If the trade in “willing” young teens is just another side dish on the corruption buffet that is the modern Republican party.

At any rate, the question remains why wasn’t Foley just slapped into line at the outset? As I’ve said the first thought is that the pattern and network was broad enough that any attempt to discipline Foley might open a bigger can of worms. The Foley matter was hushed up, therefore, not only to protect Foley, but, more importantly, to protect other, even more prominet members of the party. Of the many reasons why they covered up, that’s the only one that makes real sense in damage limitation terms.

(Still no word from Ken Mehlman?)

What are some thoughts on this ? // I’D LIKE TO BRING UP THESE ASTOUNDING HISTORICALS. Please look up :THE FRANKLIN COVERUP and http://www.rense.com /// NO GRAPHICS, BUT ADULT LANGUAGE IN THE FRANKLIN VIDEO. ADDITIONALLY WANT TO ADD, theres a loop back to the JEFF GANNON MATTER AS WELL. IF I WERE THE PAGES’ DAD, FOLEY’S BRAINS WOULD BE ON A WALL SOMEWHERE NEAR THE HIS FRONT DOOR. AFTER I WAS PAID HIS HUSH MONEY — OF COURSE. LOL. REPUBLICANS OPERATE ON THAT CASH FLOW. WHY NOT FOLEY AND THE CONGRESS PERSONS SO AFFLICTED. THIS SWAMP HAS NO BOTTOM, BUT YOU CAN BET ROVE IS AS BUSY AS A ONE LEGGED MAN IN AN ASS KICKING CONTEST — or, A ONE ARMED PAPER HANGER. // JUST SAYIN’

no s*%2t it’s about rape. it also goes hand in hand with homophobes who seek to dehumanize and desensitize homosexuality to nothing but an act of self-destructive violence. that’s why, already concerned that the foley matter would quickly devolve into broader homophobic-tinged rhetoric, the squeal squeal comment gave me pause.

ABC – Breaking News
FOLEY BOMBSHELL COMING … FORMER CONGRESSMAN’S ATTORNEY TO HOLD NEWS CONFERENCE IN WEST PALM BEACH, FLA.

http://abcnews.go.com/

Pssst…don’t tell Dick that this is my own idea or he won’t like it.

I’m surprised that you, as a self-proclaimed gay man, would somehow find a reference you misinterpreted as being to a cinematic rape scene as “homophobic”.

And if you don’t like the focus on same-sex page predation, why not talk about Dan Crane’s censure for sex with a female page?

Why? The scenario in the movie is of a violent rape. Surely Pooch’s ConcernTroll wasn’t meaning to suggest that violent rape is synonymous with gay sex, was it?

Oh no — you trol-labeled me!!!! what an orignial way to criticize.

Concern Troll??? What, I can’t read a joking comment about torture and raising the squeal like a pig specter and get a little ticked off that such comment carries some homophobic weight?

give me a break

Yeah, well, I didn’t intend to suggest that Denny should be violently raped or for that to be a subtext of the joke — because, violent rape? Not funny.

Although, now that I think about it, there really is every reason to suspect that shoving things up peoples’ asses is one of the coercive interrogation techniques approved by the Bush administration. It seems like just the kind of thing they’d think of, and want to keep covered up.

.