Anyone else wonder why Republicans have been dragging up Gerry Studds?

[Judi Lynn]

I had never HEARD of the guy, and in the last two nights have heard right-wingdings toss off "Gerry Studds" like they were throwing grenades on tv shows, and radio shows, as if they were POSITIVE that name itself would blow us all up.

Well, I just looked him up, and discovered he had an affair with a 17 year old page in 1973. That's right, 1973.

It's as if time stood still while they all dived into their huddle to see if there was a Democrat they could point at, during this time of sorrow for Republicans, just to cheer themselves up.

Don't know about you, but it seems downright shabby having no one closer than THIRTY YEARS AGO they can haul out to attempt to flog Democrats, yet they still go for it.

Wednesday night on cable was hilarious: almost every single right-wing speaker feverishly worked "Gerry Studds" into his/her moment in front of the camera, even at times when it looked downright clumsy, conspicuous to reach for it. They just can't help themselves. It's all they've got.

[Greybnk48]

1. I believe it was 1983, but nonetheless

that's 23 years ago. And in those 23 years have we not become more enlightened regarding this issue? Also, from what I've read, Gerry Studds was not an habitual child predator, which Mark Foley is...and they knew it and covered for him.

on edit: In a more direct answer to your question, it's the main GOP talking point whenever anything is uncovered. "They do it too; the Dems are just as bad!!" Which is bullshit. As far as corruption is going, the comparison is apples to oranges.

[Tanuki]

5. No, it happened in 1973

although it didn't come to light until 1983, at which time Studds was censured.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds

[soothsayer]

13. lol! So it only came to light when a repuke was caught in 1983!

Even then they were dredging up stuff decades old.

[WCGreen]

19. That is when he was brought before the Ethics Committee....

[Greybnk48]

17. I have heard SEVERAL commentators on the tube say 1983

the bastards. Along with (Hannity) saying that Monica was a 19 year old intern, as opposed to 22 and working at the Pentagon. Sorry. Thanks for the correction.

[Judi Lynn]

21. Any time they can lie to promote their side, they WILL.

You may remember how the media continued to claim the 14 year old child who was raped before being murdered and set on fire in Mahmoudiya, Iraq, was a WOMAN. Yes, the child was called "the woman" forever before they ever relented and admitted the child Abeer was only 14 years old at the time of her slaughter.

(You may also remember seeing idiots claiming things like that can be expected to happen in the "fog of war." You can definitely expect right-wingers to lie in the "fog of life.")

[Judi Lynn]

6. I forgot to post a reference for Studds' personal information.

Even though this is only wikipedia, the dates can be noted in other sources. It actually was 1973.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

I finally found out what the 1983 date means:

On July 20, 1983, Studds was censured for having an affair 10 years earlier with a male page.
(snip)

http://www.sfphblog.com/serendipity/index.php?/archives/1024-Down-the-memory-hole-Studds-dKosopedia-entry.html

[Skidmore]

2. They point to Studds as someone who got away with it on the other

side. Studds basically told everyone that it was none of their business. Well, these are different times, and people view the treatment of minors and abuse by authority figures quite differently now--down to the fact that there are laws and codes of ethics addressing these issues today. That is the point to be made.

[Cassandra]

12. The ex-page also told the press to mind their own...

business, while standing next to Studds. Studds was censured but his constituents liked what else he was doing and kept voting for him. :shrug: I don't know what else the Dems could have done if he didn't want to resign.

[RebelOne]

3. I think it's because slime like Sean Insannnity

kept hanging like a pit bull on the Studds story.

[Crabby Appleton]

4. More recent would be Mel Reynolds

I haven't been checking the "news" much recently, but I suspect his name has been brought up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mel_Reynolds

[Judi Lynn]

8. Yep, you bet. I've heard it, as well, but not with the same frequency. n/t

[Solly Mack]

7. I don't wonder. It's the "they did it too!" diversionary tactic

Facts have little to do with this tactic...all is required is a situation similar enough and a pointing finger. Most people won't go digging for the actual facts and they will only hear "they did it too" and run with it.

It's a first stage defensive tactic. If that fails...then you obfuscate, deny and distance yourself by blaming others

[babylonsister]

9. It's called 'the blame game'. The only problem with that in this

instance is that they have to get into their way-back machine to do so. I guess dirt is dirt.

[Epiphany4z]

10. Guilty people always do this

b..b...but the other side is doing this or that....a couple of points I make I was not old enough to vote when this happened i wouldn't have voted for the guy...its what 20 yrs ago?

nothing the other side has ever done changes the fact that what they have done and are doing is wrong. Folly was sexing up kids...and Haster either hid it or was negligent in dealing with the complaints for political reason. this Studd guy may not have been hauled of jail but Dems didn't rush to cover it up .... what other people do or did does not make what Folly , and Haster did any less wrong.

I do think it is great they are having to reach back 20 yrs. This means they got nothing.

They messed up this one on there own..party of values my ars...party of family..hahahahaha...moral party, party of accountablity....this has sheered the wool from the sheepels eyes. War, economy, taxes ect..thats all confusing and after all the gov may know something we don't know is how many see those things ...but this....people understand ...not a lot of gray area to this...even the sheepel get this one.

[Cooley Hurd]

11. The page involved in the Studds scandal was of legal age in 1973...

...(which was 17 years old in 1973) although it still shows poor judgement on Studds' part, since the page was a subordinate.

On the other hand, the pages in the Foley scandal were all under age at the time of Foley's pursuit of them.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

20. The Age Of Some Of Foley's Victims Is In Dispute Too...

Because different jurisdictions define the age of majority differently...

I think eighteen is a good age...

Studds should have left politics... Tip O'Neil wanted him to resign...


A prohibition on adult-minor sex is a pretty easy prohibition to defend imho.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Studds Should Have Left Politics Too

What two or more consenting adults do behind closed doors is nobody's business with the operative word being adults...

Adults shouldn't have sex with minors...


And congressmen are acting in loco parentis...

[dysfunctional press]

15. Studds was re-elected THREE TIMES after that too.

that's GOTTA bug the shit out of the pukes.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. I Wouldn't Have Voted For Him. I Would Have Not Voted For The Pug Either.

And I would feel the same way if it was a seventeen year old young woman.

[KharmaTrain]

18. Plausible Deniablity - They Did It Too

Look at the mindset of a Hannity...somewhere around an 11 year old who is just a little bigger than the other kids to kick 'em around, but not big enough to take on the adults. They live in a selfish, arrogant world where they can only do good things, and when bad things happen, it's someone else who made it happen. Every evil has a face, every issue is black and white. When this "worldview" is challenged the need is to find someone else to cast the blame on...and they've gotten away with it for all of their lives. In the case of a Hannity, he's been rewarded.

Clinton is a cartoon now...most of it fiction based on a decade of rumors and lies...that is their ultimate "shelter". It's where they can hide when things get tough...and even if they sound like morons to the majority of the world, it all makes sense and serves as comfort in their coven.

Two important facts about the 1983 censures of Stubbs and Repugnican Daniel Crane. Stubbs had an inappropriate affair that continued after his censure and he had no other relationship. Crane RAPED a page...denied it happened until her parents pushed the issue. Crane was married at the time...and to my knowledge there was no further relationship with the girl (thank goodness).

Hannity and the Rove machine is desperate to turn this thing into gay bashing and then tag Democrats as being guily by association...the game that worked in 2004. The difference is it's one thing to scare people with Democrat Gays wanting to get married vs. a Repugnican Gay who was preying on young boys in the halls of the House. They can't deny that part away....as much as they are trying.