I’ve been following this story on Hot Air and MSNBC on and off. It’s disgusting. Pathetic. Despicable. Inexcusable. I could go on for a while.

Besides the fact that a “Congressional Page Program” just sounds like a lawsuit waiting to happen - who in their right mind pairs up young teens with corrupted old men? - the politicizing of this whole story is really starting to annoy me. I mean, it really shouldn’t matter whether or not this guy is a Republican or a Democrat. But obviously, it does matter.

The Democrats would be crazy to let this election leverage pass them by. And, since they have chosen to take the road of making it a political issue instead of a moral issue - because they have no morals, that would probably not work out so well for them - I have no choice but to take a brief step down to their level and stroll down memory lane. Well, not my memory… I wasn’t around back in 1983.

This stuck out to me in the MSNBC article:

In 1983, the House censured two lawmakers — Daniel Crane of Illinois and Gerry Studds of Massachusetts — for having improper relationships with pages.

When I read that little blip, I thought to myself, “Now who are these lawmakers and why are we not hearing more about what happened to them?”

Now, I’ll admit straight out that my main source here is Stupidpedia, but their information seems to match everything else I find on Google. I also LexisNexised (can I make that a verb?) both Crane and Studds, but found very little. Not sure if those links will work since I only have access through Cornell. Both articles are admittedly sparse, hence the reliance on Stupidpedia. If anyone can find more accurate sources or more detailed information, let me know. I really am curious, but I can’t devote too much time to this with 2 papers and a midterm looming on my horizon.

So here are the links for Wikipedia’s articles on Crane and Studds. Read through them. Note the similarities and pay close attention to the differences. (Wow, did I just sound like my govt prof or what?) Both pervs admitted to being guilty and the House punished both of them… sort of. It is unfortunate that neither stepped down from their positions. I give Rep. Foley some credit for at least knowing when to call it quits. One of the Lexis articles brings up the difference in media, and I think that probably does have a lot to do with it. Maybe Foley would not have stepped down in 1983 when there were only three news networks and they were all pretty incompetent, but that’s irrelevant.

After the House Ethics Committee decided to censure them both, Crane (the Republican)

“plead guilty to the charge and issued profuse, tearful apologies“

while Studds (the Democrat)

“turned his back and ignored them. Later, at a press conference with the former page standing beside him, the two stated that what had happened between them was nobody’s business but their own.“

Inexplicably, both Crane and Studds then ran for re-election (stupid on so many levels). Crane lost to a Democrat and what do you know, Studds continued to serve his district for another five terms.

Now, all three of these men are perverted freaks that ought to be castrated. (That’s my no-nonsense stance on issues of perversion.) But I can’t get over that one interesting twist. Did anyone notice that the two Republicans are the ones who were condemned by their national party? (Although Crane did win his local primary before losing in the general.) They are out. Foley may get a heck of a book deal, but he won’t be getting any more checks from the good ole’ U.S. The only winner here was Studds. He came out as a gay perv, unashamed of having sex with a minor, and like a pat on the back got re-elected five more times by the Democrats.

Give me a break. Like I said before, ultimately the party does not matter to me. I think they are all losers. But, since the Democrats are making this out to be yet another example of Republican corruption, why is no one bringing up Studds?