Both the disgraced ex-Congressman Mark Foley and the source of the information that derailed his career (and his dating life) are employing playbook public relations strategies.

When damaging information emerges about Foley, he releases other information to trump the initial damaging story. His respresentatives first came clean about his homosexuality, then announced that he was seeking treatment for alcoholism, and finally that he had allegedly been abused by a clergyman as a child. Each piece of information not only shifts the focus, but presents Foley--who preyed upon high schoolers!--as a victim too. Other than Foley being a homosexual, the public has no idea if there is any truth in the information that his public relations men have released. He may be an alcoholic. He may not be. He may have been molested. He may not have been. Even his supposed rehab stay serves a purpose. It excuses him from answering questions and makes it seem as though he's not hiding away in a bunker. Rather than get the truth out to the public, Foley's press people are perhaps more interested in obscuring the truth. In effect, they want to block each damaging revelation with a newsworthy revelation about Foley that puts him in the most sympathetic light possible.

When political operatives have damaging information, it's best not to release it all at once. Let the information drip, drip, drip. That way, not only does the story not blow over in a single news cycle, but the subject of the story is forced into either confirming the material not yet released or lying about it. Neither option is a desirable one. Notice that the least damaging information came out first. We learned that Foley offered a birthday present to a high schooler and solicited a picture of him at the beach. It's suspicious, but one could see how his staunch defenders could build a case that those text messages were innocent. But when the next round of messages are released, they've made fools of themselves as the new electronic notes show the congressman stating his desire to remove a sixteen-year-old's shorts. The congressman's people say that is the extent of the story, and then they're hit with Foley's textmessages setting up meetings and showing a willingness to provide the minor with alcohol. As the information gets progressively worse, the people who downplayed the earlier information lose credibility. Timing, too, is of import. Rather than breaking in the winter, as the Monica Lewinsky scandal did, Pagegate--which happened years ago--broke in the midst of election season. It takes one seat from the Republican column and puts it into the Democrat column, and ensures an entire week of news coverage that puts Republicans on the defensive and Democrats on the offensive. The Democrats have recovered the Big Mo.

Whoever released these textmessages likely had all of the material from the start. The idea that the source had one theoretically defensible set of messages, then sequentially obtained and released increasingly more damaging ones is highly unlikely. Ditto for the convenient timing of Foley's rehab trip, and Oprah-like revelations about himself. The public is right to be suspicious.

Few things in politics happen by accident. One can knock partisans for taking advantage. Or, one can recognize that that is just politics, and learn to better discern what's tactics and what's truth.

So which side is winning the public relations battle? There is no way to even defend, let alone positively spin, a pervert preying on high-school students for sex--particularly when the pervert in question posed as a crusader against such exploitation. The Democrats got dealt a royal flush. The Republicans got a two, a four, a seven, a nine, and a Jackass. Some hands are losers even if Stu Unger is playing them.

Someone in high places wants the Democrats to win this year.

This is no different than all the crap the dems throw out just before an election. SOP

HA.

I don't know what SOP means, but the rest of that post is a joke.

You have a the REPUBLICAN DEPUTY WHIP of the House cyberf**king SEVERAL UNDERAGE BOYS.

And you says its just typical "liberal commie bs"

Please.

Y'all are going down.

Why can't we get any normal people up there? If it isn't Foley being a freak it's Pelosi espousing ridiculous ideas. The DC set is so insulated from reality anymore that most Americans just shake their heads in wonder and go on about their day. And the world wonders why more people vote on American Idol than in presidential and congressional elections.

True.

The Democrats aren't MUCH better than the REpublicans.

But considering the choices, I'll choose the "Looney Lefty" over the CHILD MOLESTOR every time.

Less than 20 years ago, this guy would have been disgraced and essentially thrown out. Maybe even prosecuted for a crime. It's only been fairly recently that excuses for bad behavior are used to frame the perp as a victim and the public appears to buy it. And getting a "pass" as the victim is prevalent for all levels of crimes.

We got a scumbag up here in the land of Lefties who went on a killing spree where he tortured and murdered a kid and an old man for which he got life (unfortunately, in Mass., there is no death penalty). Now this piece of excrement is coming up with the obligatory, 'I was an alcoholic, previous prison sentences made me a bad man' schtick. Furthermore, his lawyer wants a re-trial based on the BS that the perp didn't know the old man that he mutilated had a heart condition (huh??) and that photos of the crime scenes were used in court the skew the jury's opinion (double-huh??).

Victim nation baby. And it seems to be working.

And we have the "Looney Lefties" to thank for it.

HeHe

SOP means "standard operating procedure". They wait until just before an election to start throwing out crap like this.
Whoever released the Foley IM's waited until just before the election, why didn't they release it earlier? Just like the DUI stuff about Bush and the fake CBS/Rather memos.
Foley deserves to be gone, it would be nice if the dems beleived the same thing when it was Studds.
No wait....Studds refused to apologize,said it was nobodies business and the dems kept relecting him until he retired.

Hehe, I recall all the democrats claiming victory long before the past two elections were held. What excuse will you use when you lose again.
The republicans cheated, or the always lovable, anyone who votes for a republican is stupid and a nazi?

ASDF: I disagree with your assessment that "Less than 20 years ago, this guy would have been disgraced and essentially thrown out. Maybe even prosecuted for a crime."

Gerry Studds did worse. He actually had sex with a high-schooler serving as a Congressional page. When the story came out in the early '80s, he acted as his colleagues were persecuting him for consensual sex. When they voted to censure him, he turned his back. He wasn't prosecuted. In fact, he was re-elected six times after that.

Foley has resigned in disgrace. He may be prosecuted--under the internet provisions that he helped usher into law.

Things aren't always getting worse. The Studds scandal and the Foley scandal have glaring similarities. One key difference is outcome: Studds went unpunished; Foley resigned in disgrace.

Who do you mean by Y'all?

HeHe,
With the "mainstream"media feeding on this story
like hungry sharks, it makes me sick that people
like Ted "Chapaquidick" Kennedy and Robert "kkk"
Byrd are never Questioned or even mentioned in the MSM for things that they've done in the past.
I wonder why that is. Could it be that the sins of Republicans are waved like a flag in a parade while the sins of Democrats are swept under the rug or are spun with misleading headlines somewhere near page 38 of the New York Times?
What do you think about that? Does the left leaning bias of the mainstream media affect the
the psyche of our country in such a way as to undermine our elections? Are the people who now get their news from Fox News Channel and The Drudge Report just a bunch of right wing, church going, flag waving, trailer park living, sister marrying Hillbillies?

Sincerely,

Ross

Opus, welcome to politics.

I'm sure ABC News wanted to release the information before the election.

I don't see that as a consipracy, that's politics. This information is gold for the network.

Look, I'm not saying we'll win the election. I was very pessemistic the last two cycles too. (politiiing 911 gave the Repubs a HUGE avantage that most dems didn't understand.) All I'm saying is that the House leadership is going down. The Christian Riech will loose its speaker and god willing we'll get someone like Chris Shays or John Shadegg in the leadership.

Ross, Chapaquiqitck was a little before my time. But I seem to remember that it was SO overcovered it made its way into mainstream pop culture. I remember it mentioned in episodes of Sienfield, referenced on tv chat shows, and featured in several cable documentaries.

I don't think the MSM ignored that one.

On Robert Byrd, the media gave him the same treatment as Jessie Helms. They were both ugly racists from another era, and the media largely gave them a pass becausr they were so old.

BTW at least Byrd repudiates his racisim. Jessie Helms never really did.

As for the sins of the Democrats, come forward with the smoking gun on the Dem who cybermolested a child and you can talk about Democrats.

As for media bias, its an interesing point. I do think the MSM is biased against Republicans THIS CYCLE. They want change. Its a better story.

I do not buy into the FOXNEWS marketing line that the news media is continually biased against all conservatives. Just likeI don't think that the WSJ's crazy editorial line interferes with its coverage, I don't think the NYT's does either. The most biased newspaper in the country is The Washington Times, owned by that Korean nutcase.

As for the sterotypes, I don't know. I certainly don't think Repubs are hillbillies. Bush was a sliver spooner from CT, Clinton was a hillbilly.

I do think that getting all your news from Faux News Channel and DrudgePacker is a little closed-minded and scary really. In the same way I think that getting all your life lessons from one book (the bible) is.

Don't get me wrong there is a link beteween the closed-mindedness of most evi christians about their faith and their inability to think critically about their leaders.

There is a link between somone who- rather than think for himself- has a preacher or a minister think for him in matters of faith, and someone who lets Rush and Hannity think for him in matters of politics.

I think the Christian Riech is the most dangerous threat facing America today, and your reaction to the Mark Foley scandal proves my point to a tee. A Republican Congressman resigns because he cyberscrewed little boys, and your regimented minds are so programmed that you instictively blame Democrats and the Media, rather than the people responsible.

Don't you think that there is a link between that kind of UnCritical thinking, that kind of excuse making for our leaders that allowed Iraq to get so bad? Don't you think that if the American people stood up and said "excuse me Mr. President I support your war but I don't support your strategy" that he would have to listen and change it? Don't you think you can do BETTER than flag-waving? That you can make a difference in your government? Don't you think this BLIND FAITH is better left in the pews where it belongs, and not brought into the voting both?

Absoulutly I oppose the Christan Riech. They are running this country into the ground, and what's worse- they are so delusional they think they're saving it.

And might I add the Reich is giving a bad name to respectable conservative causes like low taxes, bussiness friendy regulation, property rights, and a Pat Buchanan/Ron Paul foriegn policy.

Hehe

The reporter who had the story claims he had it back in August, but didn't "have time" to follow the story until now. That's a joke.
But who gave him the story? Why did they wait until now to put it out?
I have yet to see any republican defending Foley, or blaming the democrats for his actions.
The democrats are blamed for they're hypocricy in the way they treat republicans compared to how they treat their own, especially in this type of matter.
We have democrats the likes of Studds who was only censured and (Reynolds) who actually went to jail but was pardoned by our last president, as examples of men who actually did physically molest minors.
Democrats are blamed for being the most likely source for the information about Foley, for it being with held until a time when they thought it would do the most damage to republicans,never mind the fact that they were leaving a child predator in a position where he could do more damage.
Regarding your remark about Byrd repudiating his past beliefs, he used the word "nigger" on national television about four years ago, doesn't sound very much like a man who has changed his beliefs.
Finally, when you start refering to christians as the "Reich" does it matter to you that people, who might otherwise listen to a point you're making will just tune you out?

We don't know who gave him up.

But does it really matter? Itsn't it better that he came out now?

And maybe people will tune out the Reich comment. But I think it gets the point accross. The Religious Right is the most dangerous, anti-democratic movement to invade this country since the Communist Party.