Reason.com
New at Reason
Mark Foley could wreck the GOP majority, whether the Republican leadership made protecting their man a priority, and Bob Woodward challenges the Bush administration's authory... in the new Reason Express.
Most Popular Stories
- 5 Classic Teen Sex-and-Drug Freakouts: Rainbow Parties, Butt-Chugging, And So Much More (By Which We Mean Less) (5.27)
- Government Beneficiaries and Other Fairy Tales (5.26)
- Are We Headed for a Fight with China? (5.28)
- Lessons From the United Fruit Company (5.28)
- Do Organic Consumers Shop Exclusively at the Jerk Store? (5.26)
Reason RUPE: Public Opinion Survey
- Reason-Rupe: Wisconsinites Favor Increasing Public Union Retirement Contributions to Address Budget Deficit (5.25)
- Reason-Rupe Poll Finds Support for Public Union Reforms (5.25)
- New Poll: Obama Leads Romney In Wisconsin, But Gary Johnson Could Impact the Race (5.24)
- Wisconsin Recall: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42 Among Likely Voters (5.24)
- Reason-Rupe Poll: Walker Leads Barrett 50-42, Obama Leads Romney 46-36 (5.24)
advertisements
Reason on Facebook
Reason on Twitter
Reason on YouTube
Reason RSSGet Reason E-mail Updates!
Manage your Reason e-mail list subscriptionsSite comments/questions:
Media Inquiries and Reprint Permissions:
(310) 367-6109
Editorial & Production Offices:
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
Larry A|10.3.06 @ 1:12AM|#
In some ways, the most immediately interesting thing about the Foley affair is that one newspaper uncovered a chunk of the story last November and sat on it. The St. Petersburg Times talked to a Louisiana page about the emails he received from Foley. Scott Montgomery, the paper's government and politics editor, says the emails involved "friendly chit-chat."...If an editor is uncomfortable leaving readers to draw their own conclusions about murky events and motives, maybe he should find another line of work.
Or we can get out our tinfoil hats and suggest that the editor might think the story would have a lot longer legs in the rundown to elections.
Ayn_Randian|10.3.06 @ 1:30AM|#
Bob Woodward challenges the Bush administration's authory
Authory?
Please, I just quit smoking...does it have to come to this?
|10.3.06 @ 2:37AM|#
Drudge says:
So yeah, I'm going to go with Larry A's theory that the editor might think the story would have a lot longer legs in the rundown to elections.
|10.3.06 @ 2:48AM|#
Larry: the editor of the St Petersburg Times apparently thought it was interesting enough that he put two reporters on it. But they couldn't get two sources to agree on any one point and reluctantly killed it. It's pretty explosive stuff and they weren't going to run it without unambiguous confirmation.
ABCNews got pretty much the same lead the Times did and almost immediately smoked out the second, and far more damning, set of emails. It could be luck or the advantage of being a larger institution. They could shake a lot more trees. That editor is probably kicking himself for not staying with the story, and his decision is probably open to debate, but he did have solid grounds for dropping it. In no way is the Times better off for allowing ABCNews to scoop them.
What's astonishing here is the House leadership's actions. They were handed a stick of dynamite with the fuse lit and they stuck it under their chair for safekeeping. Certainly if they had polled the pages they would have found that Foley had a questionable reputation. They likely would have turned up the same emails ABCNews did. Granted, all politicians are at least partly evil and mostly incompetent but they usually have some skill at politics at least. What the hell were they thinking?
|10.3.06 @ 5:22AM|#
"Certainly if they had polled the pages they would have found that Foley had a questionable reputation."
I thought "pol(l)ing the pages" was the problem.
|10.3.06 @ 7:34AM|#
As much as I would enjoy seeing evidence of nefarious motives on the part of the House Republican leadership for failing to investigate the Foley affair, I suspect the truth is more banal. The current Congress has been so incredibly disfunctional in performing basic legislative duties (at least on legislation I have monitored), the lack of effective response to the Foley revelations is hardly surprising.
|10.3.06 @ 8:56AM|#
Larry A's theory would make sense if the St. Pete Times had broken the story themselves a couple weeks ago, but instead they sat on it, and then kept sitting on it, as someone else scooped them.
|10.3.06 @ 9:20AM|#
Washington Post reporting this morning that the transcript's of George Tenet's testimony to th 9/11 Commission includes his description of the July 10 meeting, when he warned Rice about an impending attack.
Repeat: they have the transcripts of Tenet's testimony to the 9/11 Commission, and this meeting is in the transcripts. Woodward's charge has been proven correct.