Blitzer's list of recent Washington sex scandals included only Democrats
On the May 3 edition of CNN's The Situation Room, host Wolf Blitzer observed that Washington is "no stranger to sex scandals," then provided viewers with examples of scandals involving only Democrats. During the segment, Blitzer was discussing the "DC Madam" scandal that has already led to the resignation of Deputy Secretary of State Randall L. Tobias, the first director of U.S. Foreign Assistance and administrator of the U.S. Agency for International Development.
Blitzer listed three sex scandals: former President Bill Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky (1998), former Sen. Gary Hart's (D-CO) liaison with Donna Rice (1987), and former House Ways and Means Committee Chairman Wilbur Mills' (D-AR) involvement with Fanne Foxe (1974). But there have also been numerous -- and more recent -- sex scandals involving Republicans. For example:
- On September 29, 2006, then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) resigned after ABC News asked him about sexually explicit instant messages to underage former congressional pages. The messages, according to ABC News, were "provided by former male pages who said the congressman, under the AOL Instant Messenger screen name Maf54, made repeated references to sexual organs and acts." The House Ethics Committee later decided not to take any disciplinary action against members of the House leadership who had known of emails sent by Foley to former pages, as these were found to be not quite as explicit as the instant messages. One former page, however, described those emails as "sick sick sick sick sick."
- In 1999, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich's (R-GA) "long-term" affair with congressional aide Callista Bisek -- whom he later married -- was revealed while he was seeking a divorce from his second wife. In March 2007, Gingrich confessed to the affair.
- In December 1998, during impeachment proceedings against Clinton stemming from the Lewinsky affair, then-House Speaker-designate Bob Livingston (R-LA) admitted to having an extramarital affair. Two days later, Livingston announced he would not seek the speakership and that he would resign from the House in mid-1999. He resigned in March 1999.
- In a November 22, 1992, article, The Washington Post reported that then-Sen. Robert Packwood (R-OR) had made numerous "uninvited sexual advances to women who have worked for him or with him." Investigations revealed more incidents of sexual harassment and also exposed Packwood's secret personal diaries. Packwood eventually resigned from the Senate on October 1, 1995, after the Senate Ethics Committee voted unanimously to expel him.
- In September 1998, Salon.com reported that then-House Judiciary Committee Chairman Henry Hyde (R-IL) had engaged in an extramarital affair with Cherie Snodgrass from 1965 to 1969. According to Hyde, the affair ended when Snodgrass' husband, Fred, told Hyde's wife about it. Hyde purported to explain the affair -- which came out amid the Lewinsky controversy -- as a "youthful indiscretion," even though he was reportedly 41 when the affair started. Hyde, as Judiciary Committee chairman, led the successful push to impeach Clinton.
Former Nixon White House Counsel John W. Dean has compiled a list of congressional sex scandals.
From the 5 p.m. ET hour of the May 3 edition of The Situation Room:
BLITZER: Washington, of course, no stranger to sex scandals. Here's a look at some of the ones that grabbed headlines over the years.
Back in 1998, Bill Clinton, impeached after his affair with the White House intern, Monica Lewinsky, became public; 1987, there was the yacht, Monkey Business, picture of Gary Hart on that boat with Donna Rice, ended his run for the White House.
And back in 1974, many of you will remember a powerful Democrat named Wilbur Mills was caught with a stripper, Fanne Foxe. The relationship became public after a cop pulled Mills' limo over late one night and Foxe tried to flee by jumping into some nearby water [The Tidal Basin in Washington, D.C.]. He resigned as chairman of the House Ways and Means Committee. She continued stripping.
And now let's bring in our Jeff Gannon...
And Gannon was a government official?? In looking through Dean's list, in the recent past Congressional Rs have been doing all they can to cut into the big lead built up by the Ds. Should Blitzer have mentioned some of those? But he didn't and the world has continued to revolve on its axis.
With television coverage this fair and balanced we can all bet that we will have another four years of Republican control of the White House, likely Rotten Rudy Giuliani. Folks, the simple fact is, the Zionists primarily running the media, along with their various filthy rich Gentile backers, are very subtly and subliminally reinforcing anti-Democratic messages throughout the mainstream media. Blitzer and most all the other talking head correspondents report almost nothing of political news about Progressives and Democrats unless it has a negative spin, or they downplay Democratic news if there isn't some immediate negative spin that can be attached to it. Emailing Blitzer or NPR or ABC or any of the fascist corporate media conglomerates simply gives them a data list on who in the country is willing to try and speak out against their propaganda, but it doesn't make them change their ways. Yeah, yeah...paranoia. With what's happened in the last six years it ain't paranoia!The only way coverage will likely change is when the progressives and couch potato Democrats start protesting in front of the headquarters of CBS, ABC, CNN, Fox, NPR etc. DEMANDING TRULY FAIR AND BALANCED COVERAGE. Until then, bend over, lube up and get ready for four more years of Jeff Gannonesque Republican Rule in the White House.BTW, does anyone else think the media are hyping Barack Obama so he can be matched up against Rotten Giuliani in '08? If the media masters succeed in doing that, YOU KNOW America is going to elect America's Mayor over a guy whose name is Hussein! They smeared Howard Dean out of existence and gave us John Kerry for that same reason, so it was easier to say Bush won fair and square!
"Zionists running the media"? Wow, I thought only cons were the racists. So it's the "jewish" media hm? Better make sure your robe is pressed before your clan rally dude.
Zionism and Judaism are different, at least in the sense that there is no Zionism without Judaism, but there can be Judaism without Zionism. It is just like how there is no jihad without Islam, but there can be Islam without the jihad. Now, Zionsim can apply to anyone non Jewish, although I don't think that I contracticted my earlier statement of no Zionsim without Judaism.
Now, all that schtuff aside, I don't "Laissezfairesucks" was being anti-semetic. But I think that it should also be noted that many Jews have always and still vote Democrat. Even Rush Limbaugh acknowledged that.
I meant to say "I don't think" laissezfairesucks was being anti-semetic.
Exactly what, pray tell, is "racist" about stating the obvious, a fact that even Ben Stein and a number of other Jewsih writers have pointed out: Zionists are running the media? Actually, they have pointed out that Jews are running the media. To avoid accusations exactly such as yours I have modified that to mean Zionists. Not all Jews are Zionists, but it seems all Jews will call you anti-Semitic if you are critical of Zionism. If one starts with the premise "Give me the photographs, and I will give you a war," in other words, he who controls the media controls warfare and most all else, then one must look to who is running the image media to blame for this catastrophe in Iraq...and that would be the Zionists, not exactly Dubya, although as figurehead he's have to take the fall.
It IS racist if only because you're implying that that's what causes the problem. But even if most of the media where owned by Jews/zionists/whatever group, that wouldn't cause a problem, would it? Besides, Amahdinejad is also blaming the Zionists...
Laissez faire economic policies are doing great damage. They sound good in theory but the results have been disasterous for 99% of us.
The "government official" in the Gannon case was whomever Jeffie was "visiting" during his many, many trips to the White House.
oscar, this is not "the world continues to revolve on it's axis" thread. it is about the fact that blitzer mentions only democratic scandals and has to go back for 1974 for one of those, when there are plenty of juicy gop scandals to bring up. especially since they are the "family values" party. oh well, at least rudy makes the grade. family number three for him. and i don't know if his son has changed his mind, but he previously said he would not campaign for rudy.
"Former" being the key operative here. This is nothing more than right wingers whining about someone else doing it too. Y'all should move to wisconsin, they have plenty of cheese there to go with that whine...
(Corrections Made) They smeared Howard Dean out of existence and gave us John Kerry for that same reason, so it was easier to say Bush won fair and square!- laissezfairesucks / Friday May 4, 2007 09:11:03 PM
I agree with what you noted 100%. I have thought about taking the active role like you suggested. For now, I am stuck with the keyboard and I just don't feel like that is enough. Something more must be don't to stop the likes of Fox, CNN, MSNBC, and CSPAN from their unfair right slanted news they create, not report, but create.
I kind of disagree with the pessimistic outlook you have for our faith with Republicans. We have the internet and truth on our side. It is something about slanging what is real that carries once you push the rally call buttons. In any event, doing something is better than doing nothing.
I know this is off subject but it bares attention. We are being ripped off for billions of dollars, and the oil companies are making record profits.
After many refinery fires, the oil companies still make profits.Does that tell you anything? What happens when your house or business catches fire? You take a loss. Not the oil companies; they make record profits. Again, something is wrong with this picture. Somehow we have to force this problem to the "front of the line," so we can make the legislators earn their money in our interest.
Keeping it simple, you don't make record profits after you have a fire. I would gather we would see refinery fires across this USA if we believe the lies about refinery fires being the reason for high prices. This does not fit any logical explanation. Tell your representatives you want answers and rebates directly from the billions the oil companies have made from the secret deals made by VP Chaney and their so-called refinery fires.
Joseph
"...then-House Speaker-designate Bob Livingston (R-LA) admitted">[link to www.cnn.com] to having an extramarital affair."
Ahem... allow me to correct you, MMFA. Ultimately, Bob Livingston admitted to having multiple affairs while in Congress.
And let us not forget how Henry Hyde amended his marriage.
I wrote the following to CNN this morning:
Wolf is usually pretty fair, but he slipped on Thursday when he mentioned Washington sex scandals and only saw it fit to mention three Democrats from 1974 to 1998. He chose to ignore the Mark Foley scandal that likely cost Republicans seats in last year's election, and did the same with Bob Packwood, Henry Hyde, Newt Gingrich and Bob Livingston. I'd think those examples would be more recent and at least worth mentioning in the same breath as what happened with Gary Hart 20 years ago. Why is Blitzer protecting Republicans when Foley got us thinking about sex scandals and Bush appointee Randall Tobias was the first to resign over Washington madam accusations?
You mean the same kinda thing that happened when ex-democrat operative Chris Matthews (worked for Tip O'neil) dug up the "culture of corruption" slogan during the Republican debate but the dems were never asked about William Jefferson frozen money, dianne feinstein's husband's comany being given many contracts from a commitee she sat on? Hillary Clinton's travelgate past, Burger's stolen documents, Clinton not going to jail for perjury but libby behind bars, should I continue? Where is this "most ethical regime" Pelosi promised?
So today's Democratic Congress is accountable for the past indiscretions of fellow Democrats.
Makes sense to me. The sins of the father are always conferred upon the son.
So, by that math, today's GOP is damned for all time by George W. Bush's immoral actions today.
Finally, a conservative who speaks the truth.
Randy
There is no such thing as a Democrat operative that would be DemocratIC operative. The ReNAMBLAcans have patented the culture of corruption. Court TV could be all GOP all the time. Clinton didnt commit perjury that is just a lie propaganda parrots are compelled to tell as soon as you are finished with the obligatory dont look at the man behind the curtain quick look over there or whatever it takes to distract from the fact your ReNAMBLAcan butt covering journalists have been exposed AGAIN.
MR. WOLF HAS NEVER BEEN FAIR WHEN IT COMES TO THE DNC PARTY.
Dude, your childish attempt to assemble a grocery list of so-called Democratic transgressions is as misguided as it is inaccurate. If you can't stay on topic and discuss the Blitzer's glaring omission of Republican sex scandals when discussing sex scandals in Washington in general, then I think it's time you went back to reading your X-Men comic books, Mr. Hellfire Club.
Hey, lindenbully, glad you're hear. Aside from avoiding my above question you also never answered my question regarding the alternative techniques of etracting information we could use on terrorists instead of our current techniques which you call "torture".
And speaking of comic books -
Avengers assemble!!
I belive YOU posted this a few days ago....just like a lib to poke fun at someone for something you must be familiar with as well.
No one here is under any obligation to allow you to derail the topic or change the subjet troll.
LB, we lefties who love our graphic novels hereby express our offense at using our honored hobby of collecting serial art as a way to slur someone who loves to speak out of his rear.
I demand satisfaction!*throws down gauntlet*
Your above question is off topic Sebastion. The subject of the thread concerns the glaring failure to mention ANY Republican sex scandals when talking about Washington sex scandals. Post about that, if you can. I will not be distracted by the usual litany of alleged Democratic transgressions. That's the subject of another post. Basically, it seems to me that you are defending one-sided coverage of the history of sex scandals in Washington D.C. Prove it to me otherwise if you aren't. What continually amuses me is that almost without fail, conservative posters such as yourself never address the subject of MMFA threads head-on. You always change the subject and demand answers concerning unrelated matters, while you ignore the substance of the MMFA threads. Then, when posters refuse to be distracted and drawn in by your arguments, you claim (a little hysterically) that we can't answer your questions. Well, we can. When they're valid. And on-topic. Until then, save the breathless, off-topic claims for NewsBusters. That's where they belong. Understand? Oh and by the way, yes I still read comic books from time to time, although I used to be a collector. I was just noting that you picked a villian for your screen name. Bummer. :(
I picked the name for a few reasons, including the fact that I knew I'd be villified by most people on this site as is obviously the case. Anyway, my point is valid the media reapeted over, and over, and over again that the republican congress was steeped in the "culture of corruption" while leading up to the election last year but hardly ever mentioned the dems trangressions on the same regularity. Did blitzer not mention repubs? yes. But that doesn't take away from the unbalanced way the press hammered the "culture of corruption" tagline and then brought it up again in the most recent debate. I guess what I'm saying is that yes it's probably unfair that blitzer only mentioned dems but it goes both ways, get over it. Secondly, the reason cons like to point out that libs usually don't. I've been waiting two days for someone to answer my question about a more humane way to extract info from terrorists and all I've gotten is "be nicer to them" as if illogical people would gladly give up their compatriots if we just killed them with kindness. The statement is relevant, I'm sure you'll probably divert to insults or try to get me kicked off for being "off-topic" but the point I made that a former aid to tip o'neil brought up the "culture of corruption" at a republican debate when it's been out of the news for what, 7 months but no one at the dem debate bring up Patrick Kennedy's rehab stint, the above mentioned trangressions, etc, basically he just did it to remind people of the allelegedly "corupt" republican congress. Funny thing is, at least Foley resigned, Jefferson, Feingold, Kennedy and every other democrat would never think of such a thing. I'll ask again, where is this "most ethical" congress?
Are you kidding?
What country were you in during that time?
From where I was sitting, it was a constant uphill battle to get the mainstream press/tv to even mention the phrase "culture of corruption".
It was certainly harder for us than it was for the GOP to get "cut and run" inserted into every single news report.
Despite that, are you actually trying to argue that the Dems show signs of GOP-scale corruption on as regular a basis as the Republicans do?
Really?
What's the weather like on your planet?
Funny thing is, at least Foley resigned
----------------------------------------
Foley is a typical Republican. Disgusting.
"no one at the dem debate bring up Patrick Kennedy's rehab stint"
My guess is that's because drinking and driving is generally seen as less of an immediate problem (or rather, a more acceptable problem) than is chasing the skirts of teenage pages in DC.
Travelgate? How did firing employees in the White House travel office rate the "gate" suffix? You haven't got much if if have to bring up this tempest in a teapot. Bill Clinton certainly lied in the Jones civil suit but it was not perjury as the Monica Lewinsky affair was not material to the case.
I'll nibble at the corner of your baloney sandwich of baseless claims by answering a few choice questions.
Torture: Nearly universally agreed upon that torture does NOT produce reliable information. It invites other nations to mistreat American servicemen captured abroad. It damages American image and undermines American efforts when dealing with other nations. It is used on many who are not guilty of the crimes of which they have been accused. Face it, only a fraction of prisoners and detainees are guilty as charged. That's common knowledge. Therefore America has tortured and will torture innocent people. That's a crime, and you KNOW it.
Your scandal claims dating back TWO Presidential Terms: Products of partisan investigation that have been rehashed ad nauseum. Give it a rest already. You don't want to go there. Watergate, Iran-Contra, Rumsfeld/Saddam love-in, WMD intelligence falsehoods etc. etc. The current regime has been involved in so many scandals dating back to over thirty years, that even William Randolph Hearst would blush. And you're whining about Berger's briefcase gaffe? Please.
Culture of corruption: Its valid question because these Republicans are running for the next election. The culture of corruption (Folery scandal notwithstanding) was a major cause for the Republican loss of Congress in '06. Ney, Abramoff, Duke Cunningham, DeLay, these were all casualties of the Reublican culture of corruption. Like it or not, that's the image of the Republican party. It's a completely fair question.
As far as your compliants about Patrick Kennedy, you're being MORE than a little disingenuous. If every politician resigned over their personal flaws, (real or imagined) then there would be no one in government. Patrick Kennedy is in rehab for problem, a correctable problem. He hurt no one but himself due to his car accident. If here were guilty of manslaughter like Bill Janklow, the former Republican congressman of South Dakota who killed a man while running stop sign, resignation would be the obvious consequence. But it's not even close.
So there you have it, your torture claims debunked, Republican culture of corruption upheld and Patrick Kennedy nonsense dismissed.
FYI, I agree that William Jefferson should not be in there. Unfortunately I don't live in his district to vote against him. Tough luck, huh? kinda like Florida in 2000.
Can we please get back on topic now?
Whattya wanna bet he comes back with, "Yeah but, CHAPPAQUICICK!"?
Sad but true... if Republicans lie, cheat and even kill tens of thousands in in misbegotten wars, that's not a big issue. Racy scandals involving Democrats and sex, drummed up by the press and amplified by the media echo chamber -- now yer talkin!!
I rule your post a TKO of Sebastian Shaw. Ding Ding Ding the fight is over.
ROFLMAO
"Can we please get back on topic now?" - lindenbully
That depends: can anyone remember what the topic was, before the hijack? Oh, yeah: Blitzer's recounting of two full decades of Dem sex scandals in Washington, while omitting any of the Repugnant scandals?
"It goes without saying . . ." Perhaps it was simply the tendency we all have, to omit in conversation, formal reference to that which is notably the foremost characteristic of common things - one thinks "Republican", one automatically thinks venal, lying, greedy, promiscuous hypocrite. Why would one clutter the sentence with excess verbiage to recite those universal characteristics with the current candidates, despite the unfairness of exploring the potential for associating them with the Dems? C'mon, even without the headlines that appear each time BILL Clinton is in the same nation as an unrelated female, it is pretty clear that only Mitt from the leading Republicans' universe, has been faithful; so why belabor (or even report - ever) any of the basic "givens" of the political scene?
</irony> </sarcasm> </despise blitzer>
Is anyone going to question Blitzer about why he handled the story this way, leaving out all of the republican scandals?
Seems to be a good question for the dems to ask.
Go right ahead. The contact information for both CNN and Wolf Blitzer is at the top right portion of this page.
Jon & everybody,
Let's face it, the Dems "sex scandels" are infinitly more um, for lack of a better word or words, comical or entertaining.
Bill Clinton, young, good-looking, charamatic, somewhat randy President, [think JFK], & an intern fooling around in the Oval Office of all places. Only in the movies kind of plot.
Gary Hart, charamatic, young, good-looking, somewhat randy candidate for President dares/challenges the press to try and catch him "fooling around". Then they do [thanks to photos]. Ah tabloid heavan.
Old coot Wilbur Mills caught with a stripper named Fannie Foxx who dives into the Tidel Basin to try and get away. Perfect Saturday Night Live skit material.
Then look at the boring Republican scandels. Well boring by comparison anyway. Face it the media has been more amused by the Dems ;-)
But seriously, Wolf is not, nor has he even been someone I'd call impartial. He just proved it once again. Guess all MMFA can do is keep calling him on it. Wolf's best days are long behind him. His shining moment was back during the Gulf War as a correspondent.
As opposed to ones like Newt dumping his cancer-riddled first wife so he could marry his soon to be 2nd ex-wife while 'fooling around' himself while blaming Bill for Newt's own short-comings? And inviting a male internet hooker to WH press conferences (and the over night stays) was pretty 'juicy' for me. And of course it was just pathetic with mark Foley chasing interns. of course he was not the only one, not even the only reNAMBLAcan to take advantage of the power they hold over those kids.
Yeah it would be nice if reNAMBLAcan's scandel's didn't normally involve violence and degradation of their partners, and of themselves.
It's the subtly of such bias that is most unnerving. Just omit what you don't want people to think about and IT DOESN"T EXIST. Unless you are sharp enough to notice the omission OR WANT TO...does it even seem odd at all.
The believers who watch Faux News and read FrontPage Magazine, Newsmax and the like, don't want to hear about Republican sex scandals because it gets in the way of them feeling the way they want to feel....namely that Democrats are all corrupt and the GOP is a bunch of patriotic saints. "Facts" and "data" and the "truth" are real setbacks to a cultists selfish and often adolescent worldview.
More and more CNN North America gives in to the opinion dominated bs news because that is what Americans are buying in mass. Only in an insane world would Glen Beck have his own tv show. I watch BBC news on tv so I can get nostalgic about how straight forward news used to be.
"and often adolescent worldview"
You're degrading adolescents... they can be pretty smart, actually.
you missed the best one!!! jon hinson back in the early 80's was caught performing oral sex on another man in a House restroom!!
Still, nothing compares to the disgraceful, unethical actions of a President of this United States who sneaks barely legal interns underneath the desk of the oval office. Then the snake slithers even lower and perjures himself to those he is supposed to be serving. Hillary wasn't kidding when she proclaimed that she doesn't know what she will find if she lifts up the rug of the oval office.
When was Clinton convicted of perjury again? Thats right he wasnt. A lie has to be material to the case to rise to the level of perjury, that is just a lie that wingnuts feel compelled to tell over and over again. Personally I think these are worse.
Nothing compares, eh? You have a very odd values system if consensual sodomy with an adult is worse than child molestation, or assisting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of people. Lemme guess - it's the Wurst Thing EvaRRRRR!! as long as it was done by someone with a (D) behind their name?