« DFL CANDIDATE WHO SAID GOVERNOR PAWLENTY NEEDED BLOWJOB HAS THE NERVE TO CALL FOR ETHICS PLEDGE | Home | DEMOCRATS FURIOUS WITH SABO OVER PICTURE WITH INDEPENDENCE PARTY CANDIDATE TAMMY LEE »
MEDIA EXPERTS AGREE: WETTERLING AD STRETCHES THE TRUTH; OPEN THREAD: SOURCE THIS STATEMENT FROM WETTERLING’S AD #2
By Michael Brodkorb | October 6, 2006
WCCO-TV: "Patty Wetterling Is The First Candidate In The Nation To Use The Congressional Page Scandal As A Campaign Ad, But She Stretches The Facts About What Is Known, Creating A Misleading Impression." (Pat Kessler, "Reality Check: Wetterling Ad On Page Scandal," WCCO-TV Website, October 5, 2006)
Star Tribune: "Patty Wetterling's Latest TV Ad, In Which She Calls For 'The Immediate Expulsion Of Any Congressman Involved In A Crime Or Coverup' In The Mark Foley Congressional Page Scandal Exaggerates The Known Facts In The Case." (Eric Black, “Wetterling Ad Overstates Facts,” Star Tribune Website, October 5, 2006)
##
I tried yesterday to get somone to source the names of the "congressional leaders" who admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children. Nobody could do it.
I'll give the liberal blogosphere another chance today. Please source this statement from Wetterling's ad:
"It shocks the conscience. Congressional leaders have admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children." Source: Patty Wetterling for Congress
I'm looking for the names of the "congressional leaders" who admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children.
Please provide a direct link to the statements of "congressional leaders" admitting they covered up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children.
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 24 Comments »
24 Responses to “MEDIA EXPERTS AGREE: WETTERLING AD STRETCHES THE TRUTH; OPEN THREAD: SOURCE THIS STATEMENT FROM WETTERLING’S AD #2”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 6th, 2006 at 10:16 AM
I’m still not quite clear what Wetterling is trying to say about Bachmann. As Bachmann has said recently, she has raised 23 foster children, some of those coming from abusive situation.
October 6th, 2006 at 10:25 AM
I love how the StarTrib and WCCO are tools of the left until it suits your Colgate commercial headline. “Four out of Five X-perts say Patty ate her own child!”
So what if there is no source? What’s worse, misstating a throwaway line in a political ad (no higher taxes from ‘Pawlenty of property taxing’) or preying on boys from your position of respect and power?
I guess I’ll give Pawlenty a pass on this one.
I think this blog would be doing everyone a service to shut up about Foley; not every politician is a predator, but most every politician uses their commercials to portray themselves as one of a ‘thousand points of light’, even when they’re anything but.
That said, plenty of people on the Hill knew about this. Congress is like the smallest town, except with worse and poorly kept secrets.
I know a couple people in Washington, one of whom told me about the Jeff/Scott thing months before anything on the news.
Same deal here. Don’t pretend nobody knew. That’s intellectually dishonest, and wrong.
October 6th, 2006 at 10:51 AM
“Two high-ranking House Republicans — Majority Leader John A. Boehner (Ohio) and Reynolds, the House GOP campaign chairman — said they spoke to Hastert about the Louisiana e-mails earlier this year. Hastert says he does not recall such conversations, and he says his staff never told him about the matters raised by Alexander’s aides.”
Thats from the washington post. Do you not read the news?
October 6th, 2006 at 10:57 AM
Yo Dougie boy, I see that Kessler still gave Wetterling a pass on a few things like claiming Hastert knew about the instant messages.
Kessler also allowed Wetterling to get away with saying kids were molested and allowed the use of Wetterling’s false definition of what molested means.
Kessler is still a DFL pawn. His reality checks are totally biased.
October 6th, 2006 at 11:05 AM
I can name a woman involved in the cover-up but has yet to admit it. That woman is none other than Nancy Pelosi who refuses to give testimony under oath.
The truth will come out before the election and it’s going to HURT alot!
October 6th, 2006 at 11:09 AM
“That said, plenty of people on the Hill knew about this. Congress is like the smallest town, except with worse and poorly kept secrets.”
So you think Democrats likely knew too?
October 6th, 2006 at 11:19 AM
I just posted this on my http://soliah.com
Political campaign stuff, Minnesota style by Patty Wetterling, running for a different seat in the US House of Representatives will be the democratic response to President Bush’s Saturday radio address. She was chosen because her child Jacob Wetterling was abducted and never found here in Minnesota. The case quickly went national because it was a “clean abduction” with no one connected to the child being a suspect. At the time of the abduction there were claims of “2 million children are missing every year, don’t talk to strangers.” statements. According to the pre-internet source of factual information, the “World Almanac and Book of Facts” there were 3.6 million live births in the US. A simple “reality check” would show that 60% of children in the US had not been abducted by strangers. The FBI put the number of these “clean abductions” at between, 50 to 60 per year. A number that had been consistent for decades. This is obviously lower that two million and to her credit Patty Wetterling has avoided associating with those in the missing children movement who tend to embellish the facts typically for fundraising.
At least until now. With here new ad and Democratic Party choice for the radio rebuttal Patty Wetterling appears to be used as a pawn of the National Democratic Party in regard to the the Congressman Foley who resigned after sending sexually inappropriate emails to a House page. It’s too complicated for here but there was no sexual contact. The add says that Patty Wetterling has been championing the cause for seventeen years but I don’t recall Patty Wetterling condemning Bill Clinton and asking for him to leave office after actual physical proof was found of Clinton having sexual contact with an intern (the blue dress.)
Anyway, my connection with this. For more than a year I worked with, on my night shift, one of the 20 or so people who were in the convenience store when the generic middle aged balding white guy came into this store. He had him imprinted in his mind. We tried to locate this perp but no luck.
I’ve casually followed the Wetterling case since then, Some observations. First off it was one of the rare “clean abductions” . There was nothing suspicious by the family or friends of Jacob Wetterling. My suspicions and those of my witness co-worker focused on the “Pine curtain”. My co-worker said that they didn’t have viewable pictures of those in the St. John’s Abbey near the site of the abduction. I don’t know if this has been resolved but the Catholic Church had a pattern of “warehousing” pedophile priests at places like this.
Next off, I don’t recall Patty Wetterling condemning President Clinton and calling for his resignation after forensic proof was found of President Clinton having sexual contact with an intern. In the Foley case where Foley resigned, the page was over the age of consent at the time and there was apparently no sexual contact Patty Wetterling is suddenly outraged. Go figure!
October 6th, 2006 at 11:32 AM
In reverse order:
MoN – Yup.
annie rice – Didn’t the prez refuse to be put under oath? Oh, yeah except it was in regards to his mishandling of 9/11 rather than (mishandling) little boy wieners.
FD – what definition is that?
October 6th, 2006 at 11:36 AM
I don’t have a direct link, but I do have an MSM news story:
http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/05/hastert.foley/index.html
Key line: Hastert said he heard allegations before Friday that Foley had sent an inappropriate “Katrina e-mail.”
Second key line: “I’m sorry…the bottom line is that we’re taking responsibility…the buck stops here.”
It’s an interpretation, maybe even a stretch that they’re admitting to a cover up, but it’s not a ridiculous assertion. Guess what? It’s a political ad, and those occasionally make a leap. God knows that Patty Wetterling could never, ever stretch the truth as much as you do, MDE.
October 6th, 2006 at 11:41 AM
well dave, at least you’re on track…too bad ya skimmed when you should have read- the emails are not the im’s….remember? they were insipid but innocuous according to msm. and nobody’s claimed molestation yet that i’ve seen. except wetterling that is.
christ…here we go again. there will be 75 comments before this runs out and the topic of wetterling lying for a cheap campaign trick won’t even be touched. this post is about only one thing: WETTERLING, her AD and her SOURCES. jeez, you guys act like you’re such acutely intelligent politcal activists. you can’t even follow a subject thread. what a f***ing waste of time.
like i said last night at 1am, you lefties are doing nothing but dancing around the subject of this post which indicates to me that on this one you’re as busted as a post-pubescent page diddler wannabe.
October 6th, 2006 at 11:51 AM
Hastert seemed to blow off suggestive emails that a gay congressman sent out to 17 and 18 year old boys. That is different then a cover-up. Hastert is not Foley’s dad and he is not the sex police (that would be a good job for Polosi).
October 6th, 2006 at 12:06 PM
hey north star, you paid political hack…
don’t try to compare a congressional candidate to a blogger for crying out loud. the standards are just a tad different. frankly, wetterling’s behavior here puts her on level under the blogger in question.
“interpretion”? “stretch”? “leap”? “assertion”?
“Congressional leaders have admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children.”
if you had to work for a living, you’d be out of a job, pal.
October 6th, 2006 at 12:23 PM
Doug, it was your Grandma Pelosi who asked for a full investigation and then she won’t cooperate!!
October 6th, 2006 at 12:30 PM
[...] Minnesota Democrats Exposed [...]
October 6th, 2006 at 12:31 PM
MON asked “So you think Democrats likely knew too?”
doug reply “Yup”
So why did the Democrats cover for Foley for so long? Didn’t have anything to do with the upcoming elections, did it?
October 6th, 2006 at 12:48 PM
Hey, Michael, after reading the dance of the left, I believe the answer to your request for a source is a simple as this – There is no source that gives the names of the “congressional leaders” who admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children- none-notta-nothing- end of story.
October 6th, 2006 at 1:20 PM
I agree. You win the semantic battle. Foley sexually harassed a number of kids, the republicans have turned on each other showing that there was a cover up, and while this was a known problem for many years, the Speaker of the House still allowed him to serve as the chair of the missing and exploited children caucus.
But, at least you can use semantics to slightly weaken the ad that will move Wetterling to the top of the leaderboard in the sixth by election day.
So, BRAVO! The republican mantra of, “Stand by your pedophile” is heartwarming to all of us who have grown tired of a republican majority.
October 6th, 2006 at 5:14 PM
annie rice – now you’re getting all Dennis Miller on us…seriously, step back for a second and read that.
MoN – As I stated above is that everyone there has some kind of dirt on them, known by some set of others within and outside. Rather than pulling out the wrong Jenga piece, causing a domino effect, and destroying their house of cards, they have an unspoken agreement to keep their poker faces on, and all hope that they can make it to Free Parking before anyone notices that they landed on Boardwalk without paying up.
I think I’m metaphored out. There was a lot more stuff I was going to say, but I’ll just post it on my own blog. Maybe you guys’ll find it someday, and troll me up goooood.
But to pre-empt anyone: Yes. They’re all dirty. Even yours.
October 6th, 2006 at 8:03 PM
[...] others doing it better than me Flopping Aces Michelle MalkinCheat Seeking MissilesPolitical MavensA Blog For AllThe American ThinkerMinnesota Democrats ExposedHot AirRiehl World ViewDarleen’s PlaceWizbangSay AnythingPoint FiveWeblogginWake Up AmericaThe Wide Awake CafeIowa VoicePlus + UltraMary Katherine HamJoust The Facts [...]
October 6th, 2006 at 8:03 PM
[...] others doing it better than me Flopping Aces Michelle MalkinCheat Seeking MissilesPolitical MavensA Blog For AllThe American ThinkerMinnesota Democrats ExposedHot AirRiehl World ViewDarleen’s PlaceWizbangSay AnythingPoint FiveWeblogginWake Up AmericaThe Wide Awake CafeIowa VoicePlus + UltraMary Katherine HamJoust The Facts [...]
October 6th, 2006 at 10:10 PM
Doug, Do you run a meth lab?
October 6th, 2006 at 10:32 PM
I would love to have the opportunity to ask Patty Wetterling why 10 years ago when I called her regarding a book containing pedophilic stories purchased by and in the library of Mpls. schools, her organization responded, “We don’t get involved in these issues.” The gentleman also said that “there is no correlation between gays and pedophilia”. The name of the book is AM I BLUE?
Why is it that now Patty Wetterling takes such an interest ? I would think her old organization would have been interested in trying to prevent early indoctrination .
My daughter learned more about “how to hate America and worship mother nature, sexual deviancy , racism and drugs than she did about reading or math. She’s attended only private and highly academic schools since that experience. If we could not afford private education, I would have home schooled . It is not for lack of public school funding that our kids are turning into illiterate thrill seekers, it is the education agenda to create these kind of kids and they’re winning.
October 7th, 2006 at 1:00 AM
annie rice – no, but I’m sure if you ask some of your pals they’ll hook you up. In the future, could you get your fix before you post? Your simple blatherings are occasionally amusing, but so repetitive when you’re jonesin’.
I’m sure your daughter learned all she needed to know about ‘how to hate America and worship mother nature, sexual deviancy, racism and drugs ‘ from you, the very best teacher in the world.
Now go burn some books.
October 7th, 2006 at 8:35 AM
I would like to point out that the patterns in the behaviors of pedophiles is easily distinfuished by professionals in that field.
Foley was very involved with the Pages during the time that they were Pages.
He represented a fun, caring, and supportive person in authority to them.
Next,
Foley was approaching them in a most non-threatening manner with emails. Then the emails became sexual in content. Those he stirred the curiosity of continued to email.
Nex,
Now he has penetrated their private world and remained a source of caring and fun and still an authority figure to them.
We have no idea who he had sexual contact with at this point. That is for the FBI to investigate now.
No one has filed a comp;aint against Foley at this time. Parents and Pages have actually asked to be left alone regarding this matter.
No Page has been identified as being ‘under the age of consent’.
Having said that;
there is the issue of predator pattern behavior here with FOley. However, they are at ages where consent is from an adult, not a child.
There are no charges of unwanted or molestestaion conduct by FOley.
He clearly drew from the pool of Pages…after they became of age. In a predator manner.
We are not presently informed of the sexual preferrence of the young men that he approached. He could have approached men he presumed or knew to be gay or bisecual.
I am most surprised that the Gay Community has no spokesperson addressing these facts publically yet.
Patty Wetterling was wrong to jump to the conclusion that Foley was meeitng and onvolved with minor boys. Her strident claims and actions misled the public and I would beleive set herself up for a law suit with Foley when the dust settles. She flagrantly convicted Foley of crimes he did not commit in a public forum…and sponsored and encouraged by the DFL Party. Poor form.
She should have been mpre forward thinking on this matter. It wasn’t going away in a week. She should have known that. And she could have called for resignations when the facts were in and gotten more enduring bang for her buck…but no….she didn’t listen to Michelle and ‘rushed to judgement’ with this one.
We all sympathize with Wetterling about the abduction of her son. But when looking for a leadership role in our nation, she should have a more steady hand if she expects us to allow her near the Senatorial Vote button on our behalf.
Her efforts here simply served to confuse and t polarize people further. She still needs grooming and to find a balance between her patience and her passions.