On Fox, Kristol blamed "voters in Florida" for Foley debacle: "[M]aybe they should have known better"
In deflecting blame from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) for apparently failing to properly address inappropriate emails allegedly sent by former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) to an underage male congressional page, Bill Kristol said that "the voters in Florida" shared the blame for what Fox News host John Gibson called "the exposure that Republicans now have" due to the scandal, adding, "Maybe they should have known better."
On the October 3 edition of Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson, Fox News political analyst and Weekly Standard editor Bill Kristol deflected blame from House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) for apparently failing to properly address inappropriate emails allegedly sent by former Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) to an underage male congressional page when he first leaned of them. But when asked by Gibson who is responsible for "the exposure that Republicans now have" due to the scandal, "if not Hastert," Kristol replied: "Foley is responsible for it, and the voters in Florida, I guess, who elected him. Maybe they should have known better." Earlier in the segment, Kristol said it "is a kind of McCarthyism" to "tar the whole Republican Party because one Republican congressman behaved badly."
Regarding Hastert's actions after learning of Foley's emails, Kristol also claimed: "I don't really know what he could have done," adding that "[t]he speaker seems to have done what he could have done given what knowledge he had at the time. No one has really proven or even plausibly suggested what he should have done that he didn't do." But as Media Matters for America recently noted, Hastert's office appeared to have made no effort to determine the actual content of the emails -- including one in which Foley allegedly wrote of an underage male page: "[H]es [sic] in really great shape."
From the October 3 edition of Fox News' The Big Story with John Gibson:
GIBSON: With me now is Fox News political analyst Bill Kristol, who is the editor of The Weekly Standard. He actually spoke to Dennis Hastert just a short time ago. Bill, what does Dennis Hastert say about this call for him to step down?
KRISTOL: Well, first, he's really repulsed, I think, by Foley's behavior. You know, Denny Hastert was a high school teacher and a high school coach, and this kind of attempt to exploit young boys, I mean, it's just -- he seems really sickened by it. He's angry at Foley for betraying his trust, his colleagues' trust, the voters of Florida's trust, these pages' trusts. He's also angry at the Democrats for trying to make this a big political issue to divert attention from the real issues that should be debated in this congressional election, and I think he's disappointed in some of these few conservatives who, I think, foolishly have somehow lashed out at Denny Hastert.
The speaker seems to have done what he could have done, given what knowledge he had at the time. No one has really proven or even plausibly suggested what he should have done that he didn't do, and I think he's -- he says he's going to -- he's not resigning, and he's going to try to get the debate back to the issues.
GIBSON: Bill, should he have known more?
KRISTOL: I don't really know how you could. I've thought a lot about this. You know, I edit a magazine, and God forbid, if one of my colleagues somehow -- if someone called my attention to some inappropriate email that was kind of vague, which was the only one Hastert was told about several months ago, you might warn the guy, "Hey, be careful." I don't know that you can -- of course, Foley doesn't work for Hastert, so he couldn't fire him. I don't really know what he could have done. And suddenly, these instant messages show up, and it's a whole different story and they told Foley, "Quit or be expelled from the House," and he quit right away.
Look, he quit from the House. Gerry Studds, whose had sexual relations with an underage page, was permitted to remain in the House of Representatives, remained a member of the Democratic Caucus, was re-elected six times from his district in Massachusetts. The idea that Hastert -- and no one called for [former House Speaker Thomas] "Tip" O'Neill [D-MA] to resign that I know of in 1983, '84 when he was speaker of the House and Gerry Studds committed this terrible behavior.
So I think it's a little ridiculous, the attack on Hastert, and I think Hastert wants to fight back, and I think a lot of Republicans now are going to say, look, this was terrible. It's totally unacceptable. Foley is a repulsive creep, but let's not tar the whole Republican Party because one Republican congressman behaved badly. I mean, that really is a kind of McCarthyism.
GIBSON: But, Bill, there -- you know, aside from what Hastert didn't know about Foley and the whole issue of protecting children, there's the exposure that Republicans now have from this scandal, and who is responsible for that, if not Hastert?
KRISTOL: Well, Foley is responsible for it, and the voters in Florida, I guess, who elected him. Maybe they should have known better. But, of course, no one knows. These things happen. People turn out to be creeps, and they conceal it pretty well, and then they turn out to be creeps and you act against them.
The other right-wing media mogul you should worry about
Palin's book and Obama's bow: a media week to forget
Media Matters: The Palin chronicles
Kristol isn't "blaming" Florida voters, hardly where his scorn lies with respect to who is responsible. It is clearly Foley and possibly the House leadership who failed to act.
This headline takes almost an afterthought from Kristol, a well, "I guess", and make it look like he's blaming the voters for not knowing about this and keeping Foley out of Congress.
Weak thread alert.
I agree with that. However, that's not what Kristol was saying. Instead, he defends Hastert et al. His reference to FL voters may not have been particularly definite. However, it was clearly an attempt to deflect blame.
He clearly blames the voters. You can parse words, but they're not that complicated in this case.
But the bigger point is that he's blaming everyone except those that are due blame: Republican leadership. We're seeing already, and are possibly going to be learning more and more, about how Hastert and others buried this for political reasons.
You seem like you wanna be a reasonable person, Tommy. Don't be an apologist for this crap. It doesn't serve your cause.
...but, it's there. And, it is rampant among all these right-wingers. Their achilles heel (I pray) will ultimately be this insane loyalism. All it takes is a few of these right-wingers to vehemently denounce this guy -- he's a well-known pedophile. Yet, they just ... can't ... do it. Blame firing off in every direction. It's just sick.
Tommy's got a point, but it doesn't mean that what he said wasn't ambiguous.
Kristol may not have been blaming the voters of Florida for putting Foley in office (blame them for putting a Republican in office), but it would sound pretty odd for him to blame voters for the exposure of the scandal while he's commenting on it on FOX News.
"foley is responsible , and the voters in florida, i guess, who elected him." what part of "responsible" don't you understand? and if he wants to claim that, ok. foley's district is very much red state. it voted overwhelminly for bush.
I mean, it was right there in Foley's campaign materials! "Lower taxes, strong national defense, hot young studs."
"And if elected I will not miss any floor votes like my opponent............(unless he's got those cute little running shorts on, then just vote without me)
FL voters should have known better . . . just like CA voters should have known better about Ney and Cunningham . . . TX voters should have known better about DeLay . . . VA voters should have known better about Allen . . . And WE ALL should have known better in 2004 {well, at least fifty-five percent of us should} . . .
They should have know about Dubya. Oh. It seems they did, both in 2000 and 2004.
Hmmm...
... set to Reverse Translation Mode, I typed in "Maybe they should have know better", pressed GO and the result was:
After all, everyone knew he was gay
That's how I heard it as well. Of course with that permanent smirk on his face, everything Kristol says seems like it's code for something.
If that was what Kristol meant, well, that is the gay equivalent to playing the race card. And loathsome to boot. I wouldn't defend him on that front. I was giving him the benefit of the doubt as an off the cuff remark to add a little innocent conjecture, of his, at the end of the interview.
Who knows for sure, "I guess".
...sets the gay-bashing trap for Dems to walk into. Fortunately, nobody will buy it. Its not like gay voters everywhere will suddenly say, 'Hey, they're knocking Foley down for wanting to have sex with underage proteges.' Besides, the truly anti-gay evangelical conservative core isn't dumb.
Just like me blaming the voters for electing "the moron" Bush. Now Mr. Kristol sounds like he regreted saying that at the last minute, but there is is.
If Hastert couldn't have known better, how could the FL voters have known better?
Because he's a Republic Party lawmaker. There must be corruption somewhere! ----; - )
I would like to see him on the ballot.
I think negative favorability numbers a possible. -99% unfavorable???
Couldn't get elected poop scooper at the Gay Pride Parade in a heat wave.
Happy Thoughts;
Dan Grady
"poop scooper at the Gay Pride Parade in a heat wave" was an elected office.
If only there was some large, pervasive source of information beamed directly into our TV sets informing us. They could use public airwaves to spread factual information and inform voters about the real opinions and behaviors of politicians and educate us on their policies and the possible repercussions.
If only there was some sort of "media" that could help us to make educated votes based on facts and truth. We could have avoided not just this Foley situation but pretty much every scandal and the political situation of smears and divisiveness we currently find ourselves in.
Maybe one day.
State run media where the government controls the content of our airwaves on what it believes is the proper and necessary information for you and I to know.
Ahhhh, no thanks. I would rather let dozens, even thousands of media outlets knock around their ideas with freedom and let us decide and figure it out for ourselves.
We become informed because we actively seek out differing opinions and make up our own minds, while those that choose to either remain apathetic or blindly partisan is totally their choice as well.
You are obviously not referring to FOX-viewing Republicans.
You'd have to ask Fox viewing Republicans about that.
I know enough of them to have validated my observation.
I don't hang around nearly as many as you do apparently, so I defer to your knowledge.
In the part of the country where I live they're EVERYWHERE. You can't even go into a doctor's office without the waiting room television tuned to FOX. What's comical is that the people actually think they are politically well-informed BECAUSE they watch FOX. When my daughter corrected another student (a FOX viewer) at her college and informed him that Saddam was NOT behind 9/11 he replied, "Where did you hear that, CNN?"
actually the canadian broadcasting network and to a lesser extent the british broadcasting network are some of the best media sources out there, and probably are the best televised sources of info. the american equivalent of "public" broadcasting is unfortunately far too beholden to its corporate funders to provide objective and dispassionate reportage. just because it is publicly funded doesn't mean it's communism, nor does it mean that you are not "free" to search out different opinions. in fact, not having such a source---by your own calculus---would seem to make you less "free". it's all about consumer choice, and unfortunately as far as the media is concerned, publicly accountable government agencies provide far better journalism then corporate-owned media. the latter tend to have vested interests in self-censorship.
There have been some criticisms of BBC, but there have also been documentaries on that network that would NEVER make it through the corporate whore that is the US media. I assume the same of Canada.
no tommy-boy, he was in fact refering to the regretable trend away from TV news as a service as opposed to the 'for profit' model we have now which promotes infotainment, at best, and government (republic party produce no less) propagand paid for by our tax money. But hey, you have never gotten a point so far, so it's not like we can expect you to start now.
I agree that Republican voters are dumb as dirt. ;>)
This could be good for the Rebubs. Keep the focus on one black sheep and off the Iraq issue.
Yea, I thought something similar. The Foley scandal is taking attention away from Bob Woodward's book.
Perhaps you should start with the editors at this website. If you look at the last four or five days I would say they have joined in the Foley scandal drumbeat quite loudly.
This is a media watchdog website. They report on what the media is reporting on. Are you new here or something?
This ain't my first time 'round this rodeo here.
And in case you missed it, I was commenting on the frequency of Foley threads here vs. anything else recently as a response to some who claimed this was some "media conspiracy" to divert attention away from Iraq. The reason it is all over the news, and here frankly, is because it's tangible, juicy, and oh yeah, it's about sex.
'media conspiracy' in quotes? Who, in this thread, were you quoting?
I'm not sure what the rest of your argument was supposed to mean. It was said that the media's coverage of the Foley scandal was displacing coverage of Woodward's book. You said that MMFA was doing the same. I questioned why you would make such an odd observation about a website doing exactly what its objective states. Are you suggesting that the media should report on Foleygate coverage?
You are reading way too much into a casual observation on my part. I believe my statements are very clear, if you are unsure of their meaning, well, there is no hidden one if that's your assertion. It's there to read again, if you'd like.
As for the "media conspiracy" comment, there was nobody that used that particular phrase. I was using it as a cumulative term to loosely define the overriding point of the previous posters. Once again, a casual comment not worthy of the raised eyebrows you apparently have given it.
Regardless of my opinion, apparently the Foley scandal has got some traction. Why else would Rush Limbaugh be telling his listeners that people are sick and tired of hearing about the Foley matter?
BTW, Rush predicted that the Republicans will not only not lose Congress but that they will PICK UP 30 or 40 seats in the House. Woohooo... get me some of what he's smoking. ;>)
I'm sure he's rolling it in all the paper ballots that Diebold made obsolete.
Not only are they passing the blame on living Democratic Party Officials, like Clinton, but now they're trying to pin a rap on a dead guy, who's been dead since January of 1994.
Hastert is suspected of knowing and covering the "overly friendly" behavior of Rep. Foley. I don't remember Tip being accused of knowing or coving up for Studds.
And speaking of creeps, Kristol is one of the biggest.
This is one of the architects of the New American Century- a neo conservative founder. The man who mocked those who pointed out shia-sunni hatreds as "pop-sociologists". An amateur geopolitician that should have rethought his entire outlook. Lets see where the initiatives that Kristol championed lead to. We have afghanistan the #1 producer of opium, parts of it ruled by Taleban and warlords, we have Iraq producing no oil for US- producing half what it did pre-war, Iraq ruled by militias that even Sadr cant control (dont those terrorists love the failed state), Iran stronger than ever, Saudi threatened by new shia organizations, Hezbollah at all time popular high after humiliating Israeli army, I cant go on. Sorry to go off topic.
thats why you're all pissed off
Nah... we just hate Republicans. ;>)
gay Republicans. ;^}
thought you guys didn't believe in hate speech...
We HATE hate speech... and I hate hate speakers too, especially gay Republican hate speakers. Otherwise, I get along with everybody. ;>)
Right. Who the heck is he? The fifth Beatle?
Paul is dead, remember?
Sorry....
Conservatives have now blamed Mark Foley's disgraceful behavior on the following: Alcohol, Catholocism, Homosexuality, Diversity, the page, "liberal" values, Democrats, and now, Democracy itself. Is there anything the GOP won't do to try to protect one of their own? At what point do you think Americans will stand up and say they have had enough of this? One would expect the conservatives to be backpedaling with this issue, and be on the defensive. It now seems that they belive they have healed their initial wounds and are ready to go on the OFFENSIVE. What a disgrace! You guys are defending a sexual predator! And you registered Republicans are all ready to vote for people who are defending a SEXUAL PREDATOR!!! That fact that conservatives are trying to pull a 180 and make this Foley story a story about the liberals and breakdown of American values is an absolute disgrace, and anyone who is perpetrating this nonsense and anyone buying into it should be deeply ashamed.
we certainly should have known better in 2000...
All right. Anyone sane knows that Faux news is a farce, and in an honest, educated society, such a joke would last a week on the air and bill o'leilly, Kristol and their ilk would be flippin' burgers.
But what saddens me is that anyone takes this 'orse's arse Billy Kristol seriously. Now it's the voters' fault? No, it's not Foley's lying, etc. And, oh, of course, the Dems are a bunch of child abusing sexists, right?
Billy, I remind you: it was a partisan board that spent a quarter a billion of the taxpayers money to spend months finding out that Bill Clinton had an affair with a consenting adult. So, who got into the "issues" then? Who, Billy? You? The GOP? NO! You avoided the issues so you and your Stalinist think tank could continue on your merry way.
I plead again: let's use every legal means we can go get the Murdock machine in the toilet where it belongs. And let's get this moron Kristol teaching ethics at some fundamentalist institution, some off-beat place where he can preach to the choir and get out of the hair of the rest of us.
May be he is right. They should have known better to put this party of incompetent GOP scammers and criminals as in charge. I wonder if this war monger is going campaign against the GOP.