I guess when you don't have a clear message to run on, just expoit a scandal for all it's worth:

October 02, 2006
Foley: The Democratic Playbook

It may not be as smooth as the Republicans' Stirling engine, but the Democrats' party committees are hitting on all cylinders today. They want candidates in each and every House and Senate race to push the Foley scandal to its hilt.

(Sample DSCC release: “Foley Sex Scandal Hits DeWine.” Sample WI Dem party release: “Foley Scandal: What Did Green Know and When Did He Know it?”)

Here's Dems' playbook:

1. Pay no heed to the distinction between the e-mails and IMs. There's no evidence (yet) that any Republican leaders knew about Foley's cybersex IMs. There's plenty of evidence that they knew how uncomfortable the "overly friendly" e-mails made at least one page. So the Dems will press the GOP on what they knew about the former and will constantly, in their press releases, refer to the "GOP's knowledge of the sexually explicit e-mails."

2. Enlarge the wedge between House leaders. The tension this weekend between Speaker Dennis Hastert and NRCC chair Tom Reynolds was thick. Dems want it to suffocate the party and throw the Republicans even further off their game.

3. Be aggressive about how Dems will -- and are -- protecting children. Dems want to keep the issue poisonous in a way that's clear and direct to middle America. (In other words: this ain't a hullabaloo over earmarks.)

4. Choose unimpeachable spokespeople to be their public faces. The DCCC has enlisted Patty Wetterling, its candidate for MN 06, to call for "a thorough investigation" of the House leadership over Foley. Wetterling's son, Jacob, was kidnapped in 1989.

5. Deride the Republicans for incompetence. How can you possibly trust them with national security if you can't trust them with your own children?

6. Bring up Terri Schiavo's case and compare the heated GOP attention back then to their allegedly lax attention to the welfare of their pages.

7. Compare what the GOP leadership says about Foley with what Republicans said about Jack Abramoff.

8. Use the Foley cash. Already, the DSCC wonders why George Allen didn't immediately return the Foley contributions. The quotable Phil Singer: “It is more than a little disturbing that Allen apparently sees nothing wrong with holding on to contributions he got from an adult who has been caught sending sexually explicit email to children." Allen and Rep. Heather Wilson (R-NM) will return the cash. But the NRCC already spent the $550K and won't.

Here's what the Democrats hope to accomplish:

1. Republicans will flinch before they try and use "values" as a cudgel. Can this NRCC ad against Brad Ellsworth be run in this environment?

2. Democrats now have a new way to respond to the Republicans when they go negative: "They're just trying to distract you from the scandal."

3. GOP candidates will be thrown on the defensive, generally.

4. Link House candidates -- and not just Tom Reynolds -- to the sense (fair or not) that that the GOP was hesitant to investigate or even poke around into Foley's life because they didn't want to jeopardize their majority. That is, they craved power to the point where they ignored or suppressed warnings. [MARC AMBINDER]
Oh, remember Rep. Gerry Studds (D) the first Congressman to openly admit to being gay? Also, the ONLY Congressman to confess to having sex with a 17 year old Page? Well, not that anyone is interested, but he died today.

I didn't post this to defend Rep. Foley, because if he did actually have sex with an underaged Page - I hope he gets the worse he can get. As for over-friendly Email and IMs - it's a good thing he resigned. I do think it is ridiculous that the Democrats are attempting to ride this scandal to the hilt though, especially considering that they actually had a confessed sexual predator that held his seat. Studds was censored, but he kept his seat in the U.S. Congress - now that's ludicrous!!