It's a Prank!
Yesterday I suggested that GOP partisans were running out of talking points to defend the party leadership's handling of the Mark Foley affair. I should have known better. The capacity for misdirection among the wingnut crowd is virtually limitless. I guess anything's possible when you have no shame and are unburdened by things like logic or facts.
Here's what apparently happened. Due to some sort of glitch on the ABC website, an unredacted version of one of Foley's sexually explicit IM chats was briefly visible, allowing anyone viewing the site at that moment to see the screen name of the former page who participated in the chat. An obscure rightwing blogger, who happened to see the name, then tracked down the person it belonged to and published his full name on his blog. That post was then linked to by a number of prominent rightwing blogs, including Instapundit (I'm not going to link to any of these posts because I don't want to reward such behavior).
The page who was outed--apparently a conservative Republican from Oklahoma--immediately retained a lawyer and, through friends, vehemently denied being gay. Matt Drudge then breathlessly reported--with siren blaring--that the IM conversation the page had participated in with Foley was just a prank. In other words, the outed page is apparently claiming that he was merely playing a trick on Foley, that he was never serious.
Now, that may or may not be true. It appears not to have occurred to Drudge that a 21 year old closeted gay Republican in Oklahoma who is suddenly outed as a participant in an explicitly sexual IM conversation with a 52 year old man might deny that the conversation was serious. Then again, he might be telling the truth. It's certainly not hard to imagine teenagers engaging in such a prank.
But all this is neither here nor there. As anyone with even half of a functioning brain understands, it's Foley's state of mind that matters, and he certainly thought the conversation was serious. Moreover, this kid is only one of many with whom Foley is alleged to have had improper contact. So this "revelation" has exactly zero relevance to anything.
But that didn't stop a horde of rightwing bloggers from linking to the Drudge item as if it were somehow of critical importance. To be fair, most of the bloggers who linked to the item conceded at some point in their posts (often begrudgingly in an update) that the prank allegation, even if true, didn't really change anything. Some bloggers, however, insisted that Drudge's scoop was some sort of momentous revelation. Reliable crackpot Clarice Feldman summed up the significance of the report this way:
Seriously, though, the paranoia on display here is nothing short of breathtaking. We're supposed to believe that the Democrats went to the trouble of baiting a Congressman into writing sexual emails to a teenager 3 years ago and then, in coordination with ABC (the same network that just aired Path to 9/11) timed the release of this information to damage Republicans. Oh, and did I mention that George Soros somehow funded all of this?
Just a thought: if the Democrats, the media, and various organizations and donors are really clever enough to trump up this scandal out of nowhere, why is the Democratic party entirely out of power? If this is some evil cabal, it's the most ineffective one ever.
I can't wait to see what new, crazy talking point surfaces today.
UPDATE: Well, that didn't take long. Justin Rood is reporting that the Drudge story is false:
(thanks to "crust" in comments for the tip)
Here's what apparently happened. Due to some sort of glitch on the ABC website, an unredacted version of one of Foley's sexually explicit IM chats was briefly visible, allowing anyone viewing the site at that moment to see the screen name of the former page who participated in the chat. An obscure rightwing blogger, who happened to see the name, then tracked down the person it belonged to and published his full name on his blog. That post was then linked to by a number of prominent rightwing blogs, including Instapundit (I'm not going to link to any of these posts because I don't want to reward such behavior).
The page who was outed--apparently a conservative Republican from Oklahoma--immediately retained a lawyer and, through friends, vehemently denied being gay. Matt Drudge then breathlessly reported--with siren blaring--that the IM conversation the page had participated in with Foley was just a prank. In other words, the outed page is apparently claiming that he was merely playing a trick on Foley, that he was never serious.
Now, that may or may not be true. It appears not to have occurred to Drudge that a 21 year old closeted gay Republican in Oklahoma who is suddenly outed as a participant in an explicitly sexual IM conversation with a 52 year old man might deny that the conversation was serious. Then again, he might be telling the truth. It's certainly not hard to imagine teenagers engaging in such a prank.
But all this is neither here nor there. As anyone with even half of a functioning brain understands, it's Foley's state of mind that matters, and he certainly thought the conversation was serious. Moreover, this kid is only one of many with whom Foley is alleged to have had improper contact. So this "revelation" has exactly zero relevance to anything.
But that didn't stop a horde of rightwing bloggers from linking to the Drudge item as if it were somehow of critical importance. To be fair, most of the bloggers who linked to the item conceded at some point in their posts (often begrudgingly in an update) that the prank allegation, even if true, didn't really change anything. Some bloggers, however, insisted that Drudge's scoop was some sort of momentous revelation. Reliable crackpot Clarice Feldman summed up the significance of the report this way:
They have to get up a lot earlier in the morning to pull this sort of thing off these days. The MSM may be dumb but we aren't.Amazing, isn't it? This is all an elaborate conspiracy involving CREW, the MSM, the Dems, and George Soros. What about Colonel Sanders, Clarice? Isn't he a part of this too?
Present state of play--the Dems and CREW are implicated; ABC's Brian Ross has his own Rathergate, the FBI and Ethics Committee are going to find out which Dems were involved and CREW will probably lose their tax exempt status. The Dems have shown themselves to be perfectly willing to use homophobia to win when they have no saleable platform or issues; the Republican base is charged up and once again Soros turned his gold into Dem dross.
Foley will become a living example of the Dems' willingness to smear a homosexual for gain and will write a book, go on Oprah and make a mint. He will be this year's wronged victim. Mark my words. A fit ending to a sordid smear.
Seriously, though, the paranoia on display here is nothing short of breathtaking. We're supposed to believe that the Democrats went to the trouble of baiting a Congressman into writing sexual emails to a teenager 3 years ago and then, in coordination with ABC (the same network that just aired Path to 9/11) timed the release of this information to damage Republicans. Oh, and did I mention that George Soros somehow funded all of this?
Just a thought: if the Democrats, the media, and various organizations and donors are really clever enough to trump up this scandal out of nowhere, why is the Democratic party entirely out of power? If this is some evil cabal, it's the most ineffective one ever.
I can't wait to see what new, crazy talking point surfaces today.
UPDATE: Well, that didn't take long. Justin Rood is reporting that the Drudge story is false:
[T]he lawyer for the former page in question . . . says the Drudge Report article is false. Calling the story "a piece of fiction," Stephen Jones told the Daily Oklahoman that "there is not any aspect of this matter that is a practical joke nor should anyone treat it that way."
(thanks to "crust" in comments for the tip)
posted by A.L. at 11:55 PM
8 Comments:
Methinks the Reich wingnuts give the Dumbocraps a wee bit too much credit.
Just a thought: if the Democrats, the media, and various organizations and donors are really clever enough to trump up this scandal out of nowhere, why is the Democratic party entirely out of power? If this is some evil cabal, it's the most ineffective one ever.
This has always driven me crazy as well... how can you seriously believe there's an all-powerful left-wing conspiracy out there that can execute "plans" like this, but is apparently unable to control any branch of government or even speak clearly on any number of issues? Not that logic really enters into the picture for these people.
What a great strategy - stolen elections, the chimp's fiscal policy, the economy, war on terror, Iraq, plamegate, katrina, domestic spying, torture, signing statements, unity executive...
ITS ALL A PRANK!!!!!!!!!!! Yeah that's it - just the repug/neocon verion of Comedy Central! Makes ya feel a lot better, doesn't it!
In other words, the outed page is apparently claiming that he was merely playing a trick on Foley, that he was never serious. Now, that may or may not be true.
Well, we're talking about Drudge whose reliability has been compared unfavorably to a bathroom wall (libertarian blogger John Coles' line if memory serves). So it should come as no surprise that Drudge's "Prank" Story "A Piece of Fiction", at least according to the former page's attorney.
AL, I don't know if you watch comments on old threads so I thought I'd mention that I've left a comment I feel strongly about on your Great Unmentionable thread.
Since I'm already OT, let me add a general comment that I'm very impressed by your writing. You clearly have a genuine commitment to quality of discourse that I admire. I read your posts in the past at Glenn Greenwald's Unclaimed Territory and happened to come here after a hat tip from the Daily Howler. Keep up the great work.
Actually, the page in question is from California but is only in Oklahoma working for the doomed gubernatorial campaign of Republican Ernest Istook. I still think my favorite attempt at spin was when Illinois Rep. Ron LaHood a few days ago tried to claim that Hastert was too preoccupied by 9/11 to notice when someone told him about a child predator in their ranks.
Crust, thank you. I just finished reading your comment on the other thread, and it's excellent. This really is THE issue, i.e., what, if anything, can we do to improve the quality of political discourse in this country. As I observed before, we really do seem to be descending into an age of informational anarchy where even the facts are relative. There's certainly no quick fix to this problem, though I do think there are strategies we can pursue that might improve the situation, at least at the margins. I hope to lay out some of those strategies in future articles and posts.
AL, I just read your "informational anarchy" post which is excellent. That is to say, it is exactly my view ;) and written with far more eloquence than I could muster.
One little step we can all take is to follow John Cole's fine example and whenever we quote a Drudge exclusive
say something like "According to the Drudge Report (which on some days is a step below the bathroom wall in terms of reliability)..." Even on the odd time Drudge turns out to get something right, I think the correct reaction is to say something about stopped clocks.
Part of fighting informational anarchy is, frankly, bashing reputations that deserve to be bashed (and Drudge is one of the more prominent examples of this).
Post a Comment
Links to this post:
Create a Link
<< Home