Fine Hastert, be that way

On this blog, I always try my best to write as a political science student first, activist second.  This entry is no different.

With regard to the Mark Foley scandal that has erupted into a referendum on House Speaker Dennis Hastert's secretive, ultra-partisan leadership style, just about everyone on both sides of the political spectrum is calling for his resignation.  I think he should resign because his actions of keeping the Foley emails under partisan wraps, as opposed to taking genuine action as a House leader, sets a bad precedent for politicians that are in positions of trust.

But the fact of the matter is that Speaker Hastert is resisting calls to resign.  To that, I say great!  The longer he refuses to take responsibility for his actions, the more that the media will cover it, and the greater likelihood that swing voters will show up to the polls on November 7th with an anti-Republican feeling in their stomach.

Let's face it: strategically, the Republicans need a new face.  President Bush's approval rating is at 40% or less.  I said earlier this year that if I were a GOP strategist, I would encourage Bush to get rid of Cheney and bring in a new face like John McCain (Sen-AZ) or Lindsey Graham (Sen-SC).  Replacing Tom DeLay was a step in the right direction -- although as of late, new House Majority leader John Boehner has been in hot water over comments on Hardball that Saddam had a supportive role in 9/11.  Boehner also changed his story about the Foley emails -- saying last Friday that Hastert told him about them, only to say the opposite a few days later.  But getting back to the point: other than Boehner, the GOP has had an old look for too long.  They are reluctant to change.  Voters have every reason to perceive them as arrogant and power-hungry.  Hastert's last minute lunge to maintain power only adds legitimacy to that point.

So, once again, if the Republicans were smart they would completely reorganize their leadership.  This would shift media attention away from the Foley scandal and more towards their fresh new look.  Maybe it might be too late for that.  But the longer that Hastert holds onto his position, the better it will be for the Democrats.  And if Hastert is still House Speaker on November 7th, that would be a dream come true for any Democratic House challenger.

Ultimately though, Hastert will probably use this weekend as one last attempt to win back House conservatives.  As they will likely tell him, he is hurting the party by staying.  That is why Hastert will probably not remain House Speaker through all of next week.  However, Democratic strategists are hoping he stays put.

Comments

[george]

"if the Republicans were smart"

hahaha. Not this Republican Congress. Not this Republican Administration. They are blindly leading on principle. Stay the course is not just their favorite phrase, it's the entire extent of their thinking. Which is to say they don't think.

Luckily, you can only control the world for so long without making positive progress in even one aspect of society.

[ted K]

First off, the bi line makes me roll my eyes.

Please, you are a poli-sci student first and an lefty activist second?
IS there a difference?

You are, what 23? and a poli-sci major?

90% chance you are a democratic supporter NO mattter what.

Was it you who said you considered voting Rep. after 911.
Eyes just about rolled in a 360 after that comment.

Riiiiighht.

The Dems scream for Repubs to stepdown. Please Talk about hypocrites.

1983.

Denny Stubbs gets a 17 year old male page DRUNK and then sleeps with him (this would fall under date rape law now).

He is censured- big whoop!

During his censure he turns his back on the reading in "protest" and is subsequently given a standing "O" by the Democrats 3 seperate times.

Nanci Pelosi-for brains, had recommended him 5 different times for chairing committees before his retirement
And she is screaming about Foley?

Who by the way didn't sleep with the page in question, just send nasty emails.

Foley is sick, yes, and he is now gone and rightly so.

Interesting how the page and whomever leaked the emails/IMs to the press HAD that information for 9 months before this week.

And so how exactly is that looking out for our young men in govt's care?

Oh wait, could it possibly be a politcally timed release? A couple days after it would be impossible to take Foley's name off the voting ballot in Fla?

Hypocrites.

And lets not forget your fearless leader Clinton.

Sleeps with an INTERN (sure she is of legal age) on Easter Sunday after he has a photo op with Bible under arm. And it is also known that he had phone sex with her no less then 12 times.

Then lies about it to the public.
Lies about it under oath, as an officer of the court mind you.

Tries to tamper with witness testimony.

And is IMPEACHED.

And should have stepped down, at least Foley did that!

Instead of SMEARING somebody as a right wing conspiracy.

Getting a political machine to go after Ken Starr and lie and smear and try to say he was some sicko that had a vendeta against Bill the Saint.

Hasstert should not step down. He thought he had dealt with the situation by talking to Foley and telling him to stop annoying pages.
He knew nothing about these floating IMs from Foley to page boy and how would he?

All these pages saying they "said" something and I heard of this page boy having a problem and 3rd and 4th hand info.. bunch of
Drudge report has some interesting thoughts on this whole page thing.

Or keep your heads in the sand and just listen to Air ( I wanna kill myself) America.

Oh, and in regards to McCain.. we don't want him to be speaker of house, nor president. That is why he got spanked against G. W. Bush.

I am from AZ and used to like McCain until he lost it and started really caring what the liberal media said about him, somewhere in the late 90s.

Used to be a standup guy, now he is a leftward leaning republican.

[Administrator: Todd]

Were you a political science major? If so, then how long ago was that? Where did you find the figure that says 90% of political science majors are Democrats? I would be interested to find that out.

Speaking on experience alone, most of my friends in the poli-sci department at the UW are actually Republican. In every single IR (international relations) course I have taken at the UW, it's been either half-and-half Republican/Democrat, or slightly more Republican. Again, this is just from experience. Most of the liberal activists on campus are taking other majors.

And, I'm sorry to say, most of your comments in regard to the Foley scandal are almost word-for-word from the talking points of Rush Limbaugh and Michael Savage. Quite literally, word-for-word. I know because on Wednesday I listened to Limbaugh and he said almost word-for-word the same thing as what you wrote about Studds. You know that most of what they say is subjective, right?

[ted K]

Actually I listened to Laura Ingrahm last Wednesday and Larry Elder, but I like Savage as well..he pulls no punches.

I googled Studds when I heard his name and found out the articles on him and Pelosi. The Ken Star is my own analogy as I am reading the Corruption of the Clinton administration at the moment (Absolute Power)

I also sprinkle in some Air America, but talk about borrring. And the horrible outlook on life and how our country is going to pot and how EVIL Republicans are.. If I was a Dem and listened to that all day I too would want to move to France too.

Except for that lack of showering thingy..

I listened to Hastert speak on the Mike Gallagher show and like the fact that he is going to fight.

I am tired of my party, who is in charge, laying down because the Democrats call them names, or lie, like the HUGE lie saying Republicans wanted to starve school children by cutting their lunch money.
What a crock.
And instead of fighting back.. the leaders just scurried under tables instead of voicing the lie that was being told.

As to the 90% #.. I said it was 90% chance that YOU were progressively liberal. I knew it was more like 100%, but I was giving you the benefit of the doubt... you are still young.

[Judy Kratochvil]

I am a poli-sci student who is about to graduate in June. It is difficult to be in this field an not be an activist.

I agree that Hastert needs to resign because of the scandal.

I wish people would stop comparing Foley to Clinton. For one Monica was of age. There are no 16 year old White House interns. Second, Foley was appearantly confronted and did not listen. It is disgusting what he did and no excuse for the leadershi pto not lose theor power.

I am a female, 27, and republican, but it is my party that needs to remeber that it always runs on platforms like 'family values' and the 'adults are in charge.' I think the inmates are running the asylum and I know of no family value that allows for the abuse of power and of children.

I agree that it is time to throw Cheney, whom I never liked, over the side and bring in McCain as Vice President. I cannot see Lindsey Graham as vice. I see him more as Attorney General if Mccain were elected President or in the cabinet of a Democrat who wants to work with Republicans. If not AG, how about Pentagon General Counsel?

The GOP needs to reorganize its leadership from the top down: executive adn legislative. What is happeneing just isn't working.

[Administrator: Todd]

Thanks for your comment Judy. It's nice to hear from a sensible Republican. There are a lot of you out there, but many aren't speaking up. McCain would make a great presidential candidate, shifting the Republican Party more towards its root values: morality, low spending and accountability.

However, I would never see myself voting for him -- unless some far-left Democrat like Kucinich was the Democratic nominee.

An Obama - McCain match-up in the general election would be so great for the country. Think of how positive the rhetoric would be compared to the current tone in Washington.

[Judy Kratochvil]

You are so welcome Todd. I feel it is my duty as an informed and educated citizen to speak up when something is going wrong. Silence is a betrayal of the oath I took in order to enter an honor society when I was in ROTC. THe oath I took is the same as the one the military officers take when they are commisssioned.

I agree that McCain would bring the party back to its root values that you eloquently state above. I will vote for McCain becasue I think he is the best candidate and I supported him in 2000. I must disclose that I am an admireer of Lindsey Graham.

I do not see Obama running for president in 2008 because I think it would alienate mant voters in Illinois. McCain-Obama would be nice but not likely to happen.

I would love to change not only the tone in Washington, but also the tone of our campaigns so we can return to a discussion of issues and solutions rather than personal attacks.

[Administrator: Todd]

Yeah, you are right, Obama would have to do a good job of explaining to Illinois voters why he would not serve out his entire term. I just would like a positive campaign for a change, as you have expressed. Of course, we can't get too optimistic about that happening, since the big donors on both sides of the political spectrum will be funding negative attack ads. I just think that McCain and Obama have so much integrity that such a race like that would be good for the country. If not Obama, then Governor Richardson, John Edwards or even Evan Bayh. That's why I'm not a fan of Hillary -- she's the exact opposite.

I might think McCain is dead wrong on a lot of issues, as you probably think the same about Obama and other Democrats. If we can debate those issues, as opposed to debating the personalities of the individuals behind those issues, we will set an excellent precedent for future elections to follow. For example, those attacks against John Kerry's war record took time away that could have been spent on REAL issues. The 527 groups on the left that went after Bush's National Guard record -- that was a waste as well. If a campaign is going to be won, it will be won on ISSUES, not ad hominems without meaning.

Conservatives and progressives will debate one another until the world freezes over, and those spirited debates bring out the best in our political system. And in the end, I hope Democrats win. I just hope that progressive, as is true with conservatives, can do that in an atmosphere where the power of debating the issues trumps the power of fear and smear.

[Judy]

Unfortunately, you are correct about the large donors that will create the negative tone. I also agree about the integrity of McCain and Obama. If it were between Edwards, Richardson, and Bayh; than it has to be Edwards. I am no fan of Hillary either because of her lack of integrity.

I am with McCain on some issues but not others. I agree with Obama on some issues as well. I am use I look for the positives in both arguments and try to fashion a compromise that would work and be good policy. I think we can be fiscally responsible while caring for those in the most need: .the poro, elderly, and veterans.

It would set a good precedent for future elections if we could debate issues over personalities. However, 527s will never let that happen. The other thing that all campaigns do to puff themselves up is to claim that someone voted agansit something when they did not. They take advantage of the fact that most people will not look up the voting record and claim that someone voted against something when they voted on a procedurla motion and not the issue. For example, a vote to sustain a budget point of order is not a vote against the underlying amendment it is a fiscally responsible vote to not break the budget cap. Althoug it is fair to argue that there are certain things that should trigger either a vote to not sustain the point of order or a reanalysis of what is in the budget to find the money for the amendment. I am not using a specific situation becasue it doesn't really help in explaining the process.

I digress, back to the 527s. These groups as well as some 501cs like the Club for Growth make electoral politics a mess. They sully the reputations of people or advocate clearly unsound policy. The Club for Growth has candidates who want their endorsement sign a pledge that they will never vote for or suggest a tax increase. They went after one Senator for suggesting an increase in the amount of payroll taxable for Social Security in order to pay for the reforms. This senator was making a legitimate policy and budget point that we need to pay for the reform, but because he suggested a tax increase to do it he became persona non grata for a while. He just the suggestion again while speaking to a Rotary Club in South Carolina. My point in mentioning this is to illustrate how we eat our own for speaking truth and being sensible. I think it is wrong to make candidates sign pledges to get your support because it restricts the actions they can take in the furtherance of responsible government.

Exactly, spirited debated about issues among all sides brings out the best in our political system. In the end, I hope the best candidate wins weather they be a republican or a democrat. I will vote for Democrats and have in the past (John Edwards in 2004, Dan Hynes in 2006 primary). I also have hope that our ability to debate issues will trump fear and smear.