The November election was as much a mandate for a cleaner Congress as for a smarter strategy in Iraq, right? If so, what to make of Friday’s tepid official response by the House ethics committee to the Mark Foley e-mail scandal? Or Saturday’s victory in a runoff election by embattled Rep. William Jefferson, D-La., the guy alleged to have had $90,000 in bribe money in his freezer?
The ethics panel concluded that House leaders broke no rules but were negligent in dealing with complaints about then-Rep. Foley’s sexually explicit e-mails to former male pages. The inquiry didn’t even produce a reprimand — though voters did issue one last month. And the committee’s few suggestions for improving the page program don’t restore trust.
Then Saturday, Jefferson easily won his runoff, after winning endorsements from New Orleans Mayor Ray Nagin and other prominent politicians. True, he has yet to be charged with a crime related to the bribery case — and why not? — but his political survival does not serve House Democrats’ promises of an ethical Congress. And as New Orleans City Council member Oliver Thomas said: “People are watching this election all around the country, and I can only imagine what they are thinking. It will be very difficult to go back to them and ask them to trust us with the money we need here.”
Posted by Rhonda Holman
Registered?
Commenting on WE Blog now requires you to be a Kansas.com member. Use the links above to register, if you haven't already, or to log in.Contact us
Follow us
Daily Archives
-
Recent Comments
- Jed on Let immigrants run
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- Regular on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- BlueJay on Open thread 11/23
- Freebird1971 on Open thread 11/23
78 Comments
It should be pointed out that the Democratic leadership and other Dem constituent groups actively campaigned against Jefferson’s re-election. They’re embarrassed by this too, I’m sure.
It’s politics! They always give a good talk about ethics, from both Parties and they do it every congressional year.
But you’re talking about Politicans, many who are in Congress because their power hungry and rich, not because they truely want to represent their constituents.
A rare sight to see a Mr. Smith!
Very true, Joe. Regardless of what many people post here, no party has a lock on ‘ethical’ behavior in Congress. The system seems design to create corruption, without concern for political affiliation.
I recently read that Congress,or maybe it was one house, worked a whopping 103 days last year. That works out to be about 2 days/week- at whatever the the going rate is.
I don’t know these clowns have the nerve to cash their unearned paychecks, and even show up for work!
Term limits, anyone?
Um, Rhonda, the House Ethics panel that produced the Foley report / whitewash is part of the Republican-led, 103rd Congress. It has no connection to the incoming Democratic Congress. None.
The only connection between these two stories is that both have the word ‘Congress’ in them. How hard is that to understand?
I’m with cf on this one. The two stories are not related.Trying to blame the repubs for Foley was weak then and weak now. The one to blame is Foley.
The idiots in Louisiana can have who they want. They elected Nagin after his pitiful performance during Katrina and now they have Jefferson. I would also suspect that they think OJ didn’t do it.
I’m confused by Rhonda’s comments as well. This is just more of the same from the departing congress. Dems don’t take over till January.
And it was a bunch of republicans who spoke out in defense of searching a rep’s office, remember?
home I meant to say.
Whenever this subject of New Orleans or Louisianna comes around, I’m reminded to ask:
If liberalism is so great, why is New Orleans (a liberal bastion for decades) so depressed? Why is New Orleans so overrun with poverty and crime? This place should be a panacea of success and equality. This place (if you believe in liberalism) should be paradise – both pre and post Katrina.
What gives?
(With their ongoing victim mentality, I’m sure there is some group of Republicans to blame.)
Louisiana, too.
KSGoof–
What’s liberal about New Orleans? It’s in the uber-conservative United States.
If you want to look at “liberal bastions,” try Norway, the country with the highest living standards, the happiest people and the BIGGEST government.
Oh, and check the rest of Western Europe and Canada while you’re at it. If “big government” with lots of social services and protection leads to “slavery” as you CONservatives keep stating (without evidence), Sweden would be over-running our borders with refugees.
And why should we be surprised by the Mark Foley deal?
These were the same people that did business with Ken Lay, Jack Abramoff, Noe–that outed a CIA agent for political revenge–that gave no-bid contracts to companies that still send a paycheck to the Vice-President.
A little page fondling is nothing compared to organized graft.
Typical Rhonda spin: She quotes New Orleans City Council member Oliver Thomas’ concern about the rest of the country lacking trust regarding sending money to New Orleans that, in the wake of Katrina, is sorely needed because of Jefferson’s runoff win. Hell, that’s outrageous. It’s right there in the freezer — that’s why they call it “cold cash”, Rhonda.
Isn’t the Ethics Committee still chaired by Republicans? Of course they wanted to get the Foley scandal neatly tucked away before the Democrats got a hold of it.
As far as Jefferson winning, what are the Republicans spouting about? The Republicans still back Tom DeLay and he has been criminally charged. So the goose doesn’t like it when the gander does the same thing? Boys, you can’t have it both ways.
Why can’t we blame the Republicans for the Foley scandal? There were several high ranking Republicans that knew about Foley for several years and they did nothing about it. That is what is morally wrong – maybe nothing can be legally charged but it is still a moral issue and the Republicans stood by and did nothing about one of their own. It was a cover-up, if nothing else.
The article says that God got Jefferson to win the re-election. Everyone knows that God is a Republican so it’s just a big Republican plot to get him back into office and the $90,000 was just the Lord’s money, kinda like how Terry Fox stole from the church too.
The editorial is just absurd. The Democratic congress isn’t responsible for Jefferson’s re-election, and they aren’t responsible for Republican pedophiles. All of the actions the editor is complaining about originated from the previous congress so there really is no story here.
‘More ethical Congress off to shaky start’
Rhonda? You have to wait until next month, before trying to use that headline. It’s the same Congress (and committees) as on Nov 6.
“That is what is morally wrong – maybe nothing can be legally charged but it is still a moral issue…”Is this the same sunny who defends Bill “the rapist” Clinton?
fleettwood,
Bill Clinton isn’t a rapist. If you’ve got proof, show it. Otherwise, shut your fucking Wingnut mouth.
Fleetwood is a child molester, just like Clinton is a rapist. Have it your way Fleety.
I don’t recall Monica ever charging rapist to Bill Clinton – do you? Or perhaps in your world of ’spin it the way you want’. I never defended Clinton’s actions in the Monica case. I was delighted to hear when Hillary slapped him silly for it.
But what I do find morally wrong is when the Republicans all pointed fingers at Clinton while they themselves were doing the same thing – Gingrich, Limbaugh and others.
“using your position of authority to influence and engage subordinates sexually”
….would get you fired in any civilian job in the country. Or SHOULD get you fired.
sunny,
Indeed. Rudy Giuliani comes to mind, screwing his mistress in the mayor’s mansion while still married to Donna Hanover. Here’s a nice post from Steve Gilliard documenting Giuliani’s public infidelity and apparently deliberate efforts to humiliate his wife.
**********************************http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2006_12_01_stevegilliard_archive.html
“First, what you have to understand is that Giuliani was a serial philanderer before he was married, and that first marriage ended with some really nasty rumors of abuse. The one to his third cousin.
It is said that Donna Hanover won his election in 1993 with her familiarity to the New York viewing public. She was an anchor on the local Tribune station for several years.
Within six months of being elected, he was caught buying Lategano a skirt on Madison Avenue. If you’ve never been to New York, that’s like shopping on Rodeo Drive. Despite the reputation, 5th Avenue is far more egalitarian than Madison Avenue above 59th St. That’s where the high end boutiques, Missoni, DKNY, Vera Wang, Jimmy Choo all are. So he had to have dropped a couple of hundred bucks on the spot. Only problem, it made the front page of the Daily News.
But then, for one Father’s Day, Hanover, wondering where her husband was, rolled down to City Hall, where she caught him dick deep in Lategano, according to widely acknowledged rumors.
Giuliani was not subtle. He would take Lategano to the Yankees games with his kids. Until the wife had enough of it. Lategano and his wife would not be in the same room again.
Even now, there are pictures of Lategano and Giuliani in restaurants across the city.
Wilson mentions the firing of Bill Bratton, but didn’t mention WHY he was fired. Part of the reason was that John Miller, now the FBI’s spokesman, was running with Lategano for a marathon. Daddy Giuliani showed up, and didn’t like Miller hanging around his woman. Toss on some jealousy, and the skids were greased.
Things got so bad that his best friend, Peter Powers, quit city government over this mess.
Then, of course, there was the time he forced everyone to attend her birthday party, despite her being as popular as a dose of the clap. Lategano was widely hated by the media for her rank incompetence and arrogance. An incident which got a lot of play in the media at the time, without the explaination that Giuliani was screwing her.
But it gets better.
Eventually, Giuliani dumped her from his life. He was taking a break between mistresses. So after a nasty public argument in a local burger joint, she went to South Carolina for a while and quickly married.
But she had to be paid off. So she got an apartment and loyalist Fran Reiter was tossed aside for Lategano, who was given the job of running the city’s Tourist and Visitor’s Bureau. A job she was totally unqualified for, but which paid $250K a year. People were horrified at the time. But he was the mayor.
Then by 1998, he was picking up with a new mistress, now his wife. He was again unsubtle and would take her to a restaurant a few blocks from the mayoral home. This close enough so his children’s friends and their parents could see him with his new woman.
By 2000 things were getting insane. He had been diagnosed with prostate cancer, which gave people’s a minute’s pause. Until he took his nurse-mistress with him to the doctor. Then to top it off, he announced his seperation without telling his wife. Which was unseemly at best. But he had been squiring Ms. Nathan around for at least a year, taking her to parades and other public events.
But if you think he disrepsected shooting victims, he didn’t know them. He would wage a savage war on his family. His wife had no idea he had prostate cancer because he was taking his mistress, Judith Nathan, to the treatment sessions with the doctor.
The then cardinal, John O’Connor, had tried to do marriage counselling with them, but in the end, Hanover was left humiliated and ignorant about her husband’s illness. She had done everything reasonable to keep their marriage together. Her husband, not so much.
Soon after the humiliating split up, broadcast live on local TV, Giuliani’s mother grew ill. When Hanover, concerned about the welfare of her children’s grandmother, showed up in the emergency room of Mount Sinai hospital, the mayor got into a nasty, public fight with her, restrained only by longtime henchman Tony Carbonetti. Giuliani was enraged that she showed up and demanded she leave, this in a public space filled with ill people.
Then, he wanted to bring his mistress into the family home, by claiming his wife wasn’t helping him through his cancer treatments. He wanted to divide the home up.His argument was that the kids should get to know Ms.Nathan, meanwhile, Ms. Nathan’s then 16 year old daughter moved back in with her father becase she couldn’t standGiuliani.
Hanover’s media friends were astonshed at his brazen behavior, and soon the tale of woe came out. But it didn’t stop Giuliani. Hanover, as Wilson says, had to go to court to declare Gracie Mansion the marital home and exclude her from it.
The judge said no to his cruel, insane request.
Eventually, he moved in with a gay couple while his wife fended off his efforts to replace her.
But like an uncaged animal, Giuliani would strike at his family like they were mortal enemies. First, for mother’s day 2000, he would parade the mistress up and down Second Avenue for pictures. So all of his kids friends would be treated to this site as they got the morning paper. His wife and kids were in California, escaping the cruel media circus surrounding their lives. The evilness of the act astonished New Yorkers. How do you ruin mother’s day like that?
Ah, but the savage nature of Giuliani knew no bounds. He cut his wife’s security detail, he gave one to his mistress. He cut his wife’s security detail. Think about that. He felt that she could get by with less. Of course, this placed his kids in danger as well, but nothing was too petty or savage for Giuliani. Nothing.
And in an act of truly petty revenge, he wouldn’t let Hanover’s father stay in Gracie Mansion, the mayoral home.
He had served on the Intrepid, and they were commemorating the ship’s survival from an attack off Okinawa which nearly sank the ship. Now, Giuliani’s father was an ex-con racist mob enforcer who ducked the draft, but he couldn’t extend this small courtesy to her.
And this was a major even in the city, with the Intrepid now a floating museum. But he showed less compassion to his own family than shooting victims. Less.
Then, of course, his lawyer, Raoul Felder, called her a pig outside court. Before the media. Why? Because she wanted some of that post-9/11 windfall. Now, understand something, New York does not have no fault divorce. You have to have grounds, it can be ugly. And Hanover and her lawyers had the dirt ready to go.
Just short of the part where Hanover would drag his mistresses into court, she had a special hatred for Lategano, Giuliani, flush from recent success, paid her eight million dollars.
I know you could go on about his racist, imperialistic ways, but it was his family where his most cruel and vicious actions were unleashed. It is amazing that he had more contempt for the mother of his children than he did for any politicial opponent, including Al Sharpton.
Which is saying something. He made war on his family like most men make war on enemies.”
And yet the Republicans actually think that Guiliani would make a good presidential candidate in 2008? That’s what I mean about the party of the “family morals”.
doug & cf (mr potty mouth):Re: Clinton rapistTell Juanita Broderick he didn’t rape her. She will disagree.”Better put some ice on that”.
Guillani would make as lousy as a candidate as Hillary or Obama.
Then perhaps Ms. Broderick should bring charges or keep her mouth shut?
Barack Obama is sure scaring the Hell out of the Republicans, isn’t he?
Guillani would make as lousy as a candidate as Hillary or Obama.
The answer is we hope he is nominated.
sunny-One shouldn’t be mean to rape victims. We have learned that through the years, haven’t we?
you are making an unproven assumption fleettwood
“The answer is we hope he is nominated” – fleetenema
Obama would give the Repubs a chance to further utilize their not-so-subtle strategy of luring in dimwitted racists. Unfortunately for them, by that time Bush and his fascist brethren in the GOP will be even less popular than they are now (granted, this will be no small feat), and whoever the Dems run will win.
And BTW, it WILL be Obama. Wingnuts, prepare for electoral apocalypse – losing to a black man! Oh what happy times that will be
I’m not buying it. The first person of color (African American) to win the Presidency will have to be a conservative.The African American vote will follow, which is largely Democrat, because that is the most important issue to them.Conservatives will vote for the conservative no matter their color.I really wish JC Watts had stuck around personally.
Paula Zahn will be doing an expose of Race in America.
I suggest ya’ll watch it.
I’ll watch it just for you Mom :-)
She was either raped or should get an Oscar award.”Better get some ice on that”
Who was it throwing Oreo cookies at the conservative Black candidate?Answer- racist Libs
Thanks Kia lol.
HEY who is FREAKING SICK of the jbxkl sign in verifications on this site? OMG! I can hardly read the letters.
If they can do that to combat ad bots, why can’t they just put a sign-in that works?
Amen pol_mom
fleettwood – so nominate her for that Oscar. She had good coaching; I hope she gives them credit.
“Who was it throwing Oreo cookies at the conservative Black candidate?”
NOBODY. Paul Schurick, a spokesman for the Ehrlich campaign, started that lie FIVE days after the event. Numerous people at the event denied it happened
fleettwood = gullible, anti-liberal, RW myth believer
Mr KIA says
“The first person of color (African American) to win the Presidency will have to be a conservative.The African American vote will follow, which is largely Democrat, because that is the most important issue to them.”
Translation: blacks vote for other blacks. It’s all “they” care about.
And you call ME the racist. Please. You’re such a racist, everybody sees it but you.
“If they can do that to combat ad bots, why can’t they just put a sign-in that works?”
DITTO
http://www.washtimes.com/metro/20051101-104932-4054r.htm
http://wbal.com/news/story.asp?articleid=49040
Here are two articles about racist Libs and Steele (the conservative Black candidate)
“MoonieTimes? WBAL?You people like to link tocrap crap crap and crap”
Should be only two craps.
perhaps, but crap nonetheless
But, they did throw oreos at a conservative Black candidate.Not nice.
Agreed; if it happened it was bad. Apparently someone got canned for whatever it was ..
“led to the firing of a staffer in the Ben Cardin for Senate campaign.”
But Barack Obama is a mixed race – his mother was from Kansas.
So last week all you Republicans were falling all over yourselves about Robert Gates being a Kansas native. Why not the same enthusiasm for Obama?
I seem to recall the GOP party was the one that played the race card in Tennessee against Harold Ford. The more the GOP shows their “family morals” to Americans, the more the Americans will reject your party and your hypocrisy.
The Eagle likes to play the former/one time Kansan. It seems if you ever drove through Kansas, the Eagle pees their pants.What race card was played with Ford?
“But, they did throw oreos at a conservative Black candidate.”
NOT according to the black candidate, Steele.
“It was raining Oreos,” Schurick said. “They were thick in the air like locusts.
http://www.newsline.umd.edu/politics/specialreports/elections02/strongsteele112202.htm“Paulson denied the incident happened and said the only documented accusation came from Ehrlich spokesman Paul Schurick.
Steele, however, said an Oreo cookie rolled to his feet during the debate.” “Maybe it was just someone having their snack, but it was there,” Steele said.—-More details,http://www.dailyhowler.com/dh111505.htmlhttp://americablog.blogspot.com/2005/11/gov-ehrlich-and-lt-gov-steele-in.htmlhttp://mediamatters.org/items/200511210004http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_S._Steele#Oreo_cookie_incident
fleettwood = blindly believes bogus RW myths
“Steele, however, said an Oreo cookie rolled to his feet during the debate.” “Maybe it was just someone having their snack, but it was there,” Steele said.”
Enough said.
Ben,
The Cardin staffer was canned for posting “… staffers should pose holding Oreo brand cookies under the caption ‘devouring the competition.’”
Anyone think a neocon may have done it to make it look like a liberal did it?
It’s not very likely a liberal would make a racist overture like that. I know a lot of libs, and none of us are racist at all.
Now that’s not to say there aren’t racist DEMOCRATS, I know there are a few. Which baffles me to no end.
cosmos-That makes it all right?Sounds like Lib racism to me.
as well he should be …
fleettwood – one rolling is hardly many flying. Looks to me like one idiot rather than any sort of organized thing.
The whole thing is idiotic.
Is it racist to think that Black people can’t decide to get a “Pay-Day” loan or not?Libs = pandering, but that’s not racist.
Idiotic is right. Why not say that it happened instead of defending it?
“It was raining Oreos,” Schurick said. “They were thick in the air like locusts.”
Seems to be a slight (sarcasm) discrepancy between what Schurick said and EVERYBODY else’s version.
Reprint of Baltimore Sun column,http://stevegilliard.blogspot.com/2005/11/another-day-another-lie.htmlBut in your one-sided RW delusion, that does not matter.
Jefferson is only he tip of the iceberg when it comes to corruption in America’s sewer. The true level of corruption is hidden behind he fear of being labled racist if it is exposed by any non african american.
“Why not say that it happened instead of defending it?”
I’m not defending it so your question is a non-sequiter. I’m questioning whether it happened.
fleettwood = believes in myths
Witnesses say no cookies.
“”There were a lot of things, disturbances, by this group of outsiders who were bent on disrupting the debate,” Coleman said. “But I never actually saw Oreo cookies being thrown at him.”
As for “raining Oreos,” Coleman said, “I can tell you that did not happen.”
Neil Duke, who moderated the event for the NAACP, said last week that he didn’t see any cookies.”
The white republican running against Harold Ford in Tennessee ran those television ads with the white girl at a Playboy party telling Harold to ‘call her’. That wasn’t playing the race card? Especially in the deep South.
I think Americans are more open to the prospect of having a minority president than ever, especially if the alternative choice is another Compassionate Christian Conservative. We have all seen what they did for the country – made wealthy more wealthy and the poor more poor with the middle class disappearing.
I just skimmed quickly but I saw no mention of the fact that the ethics committee found that Democrat party operatives “shopped” the Foley scandal to numerous media. So Democrats knew about Foley and did nothing to “protect the children”.
Hmmmm…..
$ Heckler was not political until he got his first big paycheck $………
“Why not say that it happened…”
What DID happen? Assuming Steele’s (UNCONFIRMED) version is accurate, did a conservative drop an Oreo that she/he bought from a nearby vending machine? Did it roll downhill, toward the stage?
Steele even admits that he doesn’t even know: “MAYBE it was just someone having their snack…”
NOBODY credible saw Oreos thrown at Steele, yet you posted 2x: “Who was it throwing Oreo cookies …?” and “But, they did throw oreos…”
fleettwood = sad, pathetic, and desperate RW myth believer
“Fact?” Heckler? I know you and yours have made the claim but I don’t know that it has even been established as “fact”. I am certain that if there were credible evidence to support your claim the GOP-dominated ethics committee would have been shouting it from th rooftops.
Wait til the Mayoral campaign.If what I’m hearing there is correct, you might be in for a surprise :)
Sigh. . . I was going to let this one go, but. . .get back to the subject. . .
1) On one hand we have a creepy guy who abused his position for years with the indulgence of the Republican leadership, got caught, basically admitted it, and resigned. Then the ethics committee–which is 50/50, but chaired by a Republican with a Republican staff, concluded that the outgoing Republican leadership broke no rules.
2) On the other hand, we have a Democratic pol who’s in legal trouble but denies the charges, and has yet to be convicted of anything. The VOTERS in the runoff election–the PEOPLE–chose to return him to office, perhaps having more respect for the presumption of innocence than most.
How can anyone see any similarity between the two events, let alone regard EITHER as an indictment of the next Congress?
That’s just nuts.
“Steele even admits that he doesn’t even know: “MAYBE it was just someone having their snack…”"Steele was being polite.The chances that it happened on purpose is much more likely than it happened by accident.Somebody bought an Oreo and it rolled toward Steele? Humbug.You people have developed the habit of defending the indefensible. Doesn’t it make you tired?
fleettwood,
What makes me tired is your inability to objectively analyze facts.
1 person claimed “It was raining Oreos, they were thick in the air like locusts.”1 person said ONE cookie rolled to his feet.
MANY others at the debate (including one of the cleanup crew after the debate) said they did NOT see ANY cookies.
The first person was exaggerating,the second person was telling the truth.There were Oreos at a rally with a conservative Black man on the stage.Stop defending it.
“There were Oreos at a rally with a conservative Black man on the stage.”
Gee, I also heard there were malomars at a rally with a liberal white man on the stage.
You people do love to defend that which cannot be defended.
Why did the first person exaggerate a falsehood? To start a RW myth that people like you would spread.
Prove that the 2nd person told the truth. If true, prove the cookie wasn’t accidently dropped.Why didn’t others, including cleanup, see ANY cookies?
I’m not “defending it” — I don’t think it happened I’m asking you to PROVE your claim: “they did THROW oreos”.
You love to claim things happened that you cannot prove.
There’s alot of new talk about an independent oversight ethics committee, something I called for a very long time ago. Only was to get the skunks to behave. Would never happen under Repug. leadership, may well happen under dems.