And if they were so sure it was not a problem, why not inform the Democratic member of the oversight group.

Yeah, after all Mr. Borden did buy that ax that dear Lizzie used. Of course, even with that minimal amount of information the Democrats could have launched an effective campaign to get Foley yanked. But isn’t it so much better to wait until 40 days before an election?

If the the St. Petersburg Times, hardly “Faux News”, didn’t think there was anything that could be persued what makes anyone think that the Republican Causuc could do something? Now, whomever had the IM’s in their possesion sometime in July (or sooner) could have done something. And should of.

In this case the emotion “LET’S SCREW THE REPUBLICANS!”

It’s so much more effective when you srew tehm with the truth.

Foley’s a creep and the leadership didn’t do enough to find out how much of one.

Anyone who has ever been on the receiving end of the attentions of one of these predators, and that would include me, could see from the so-called innocuos email he was hitting on this kid.

And if they were so sure it was not a problem, why not inform the Democratic member of the oversight group. No, they instead informed the National Republican committee. So Ken (I’m not gay) Mehlman has some explaining to do as well.

Heh.

I’m very happy that Democrats have now come to the Republican side, 16 year olds are children! Will this mean they will support parental notification for abortions? Advocate lessor smut on TV and in our schools. Will access to porn sites at the library be discontinued? Will condoms on cucumbers be a thing of the past. I was so pleased to see our grandmother, Congresswoman Harmon, talk about these “at risk” children. Gone will be the days of adolescents finding their sexuality, they will now be called boys and girls in need of adult supervision.

It is disingenuous of any Democrat to point their finger at the House Leadership when it has done as much and *more* to shield one of their members from investigation. And it continues to push that case up the Court system even after losing the first round. That said it is better than the *give everything away* Senate that not only wanted “amnesty” for illegals, but wanted to give gifts and presents and then tell the Executive what to do in Foreign Policy. Both are over-reaches of power and need to be seriously addressed before they get the bright idea that they really should be running *everything*.

But do tell me what you think about it all. I have one friend thinking I’m being paranoid and the other saying that she thinks it is weird that he even asks for my e-mail, much more what he said.

He doesn’t know which way to think, and his friends aren’t sure either. Like the St. Pete Times there just wasn’t enough “there” there.

But let’s not let facts get in the way of the typical Liberal tendency to make one’s decision based on raw emotion. In this case the emotion “LET’S SCREW THE REPUBLICANS!”

Mark Foley is obviously a troubled man who was following the classic stalker’s profile. What do you call the people that knew the path he was following and kept it quit for an October Surprise? What do you call people that mat have risked a child being sexually assaulted for the simple reason of wanting “their side” to win?

In this case I call them Democrats, CREW and the Left Wing Smear Machine.

However, you’re mistaken on Alice’s expectations of the creatures she encountered in Wonderland, Mr. Moran. She might have been reasonably certain they were blessed with some kind of intelligence before she met them. But after meeting the Red Queen, the Mad Hatter, Humpty Dumpty, Tweedledee and Tweedledum, she was rather quickly disabused of that notion.

Lewis Carroll’s masterpiece is actually a study in logic and language. Every encounter Alice has with a creature in Wonderland is a logic puzzle that turns on language. Thus, when Humpty Dumpty says, in a rather scornful tone, “When I use a word, it means just what I choose it to mean–neither more nor less.” Alice responds, “The question is whether you can make words mean so many different things.” To which Humpty Dumpty replies, “The question is which is to be master–that’s all.”

Here, Humpty Dumpty takes the point of view of a nominalist–the view that universal terms do not refer to objective existences but are nothing more than verbal utterances. This is a view that Carroll actually held himself, as he explains in his book Symbolic Logic: “I maintain that any writer of a book is fully authorised in attaching any meaning he likes to any word or phrase he intends to use. If I find an author saying, at the beginning of his book, “Let it be understood that by the word ‘black’ I shall always mean ‘white’, and that by the word ‘white’ I shall always mean ‘black’,” I meekly accept his ruling, however injudicious I may think it.”

Thankfully, Carroll’s position did not win out in the long run. For if we are to communicate accurately we have an obligation to avoid the practice of giving private meanings to commonly used words. If we do not, then communication is impossible. We must pay our words extra, otherwise they are the stuff propaganda is made of. Thus, we do have an obligation to past usage. So, in a sense, words are our masters; if they are not, we cannot communicate. But in another sense we are the masters of words. For if we were not, there would be no such thing as poetry.

This goes to the heart of the debate over intentionalism you have alluded to in the past. And you’re right, the left doesn’t do nuance–they simply intend to be the masters or propagandists of all. Of course, when they fall like Humpty Dumpty, and they will, all the king’s horses and all the king’s men won’t be able to put them back together again.

In Wonderland, Alice has to keep her wits about her, because nothing is as it seems. She has to carefully analyze everything said to her and use logic to arrive at the truth. In this sense, she is much like you. And the blogosphere becomes a lot like Rick Moran in Wonderland.