The Democrats think they have found their smoking gun. A little-known Republican congressman has resigned in a cloud of immorality, and the left and their media minions are sounding the midterm election victory bell.Hurray for them. Of course, they can only succeed with this strategy – one that conveniently doesn’t require them to offer an alternate platform or one single idea to the electorate – if enough conservatives buy into the clarion call, and stay home on November 7.Cynically, this is what the Democrats are counting on, and intelligent voters across the country must not fall prey to this charade. Instead, people must recognize that Nancy Pelosi as Speaker of the House certainly doesn’t represent an improvement in morality on Capitol Hill and across the fruited plain.Far from it.In reality, that is the sole issue facing the nation in four weeks. This isn’t about what Congressman Foley did or didn’t do with pages. In fact, it’s not important whether Foley broke any laws, or that the age of consent in Washington, D.C., at sixteen suggests he didn’t. That’s irrelevant. And, it should be irrelevant to all who are indeed repulsed by his behavior. Frankly, everybody in America should be so repulsed.But, that’s really not the case, is it? Many of those crying foul would be defending Foley’s actions if there was a “D” after his name instead of an “R”.Let’s be honest.Those who really are offended shouldn’t place their trust in those who are pretending to be, and shouldn’t think the solution to this problem is to allow the secular left to take over the country. But that is what is at stake on November 7. And, as tough as it might be for folks that actually have principles to believe, their best interests are served by those currently in power and not by those willing to do and say anything to regain it. After all, Nancy Pelosi suggesting that she is the bastion of virtue and morality is akin to Ramses telling the Jews that they’re better off with him than Moses. The right fightThe fact is that people bothered by this incident should compare the voting records of those seeking to use this scandal to take over the Congress to those currently in control. It’s quite simple, really. For example, Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert, R-Illinois:
• Voted twice in 2003 for a bill outlawing partial birth abortions • Has consistently voted in favor of outlawing flag-burning • Voted for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 • Voted against funding the National Endowment for the Arts in 1992 and 1998• Voted for all four articles of impeachment of President Bill Clinton in 1998 • Voted for the Child Custody Protection Act in 2006 • Voted for the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill in 2003 • Voted for the Border Security Bill in 2005 • Voted for the Terry Schiavo Incapacitated Persons Bill in 2005 • Voted against stem cell research in 2005 and 2006 • Voted for the Same Sex Marriage Resolution (stating that marriage is a union between a man and a woman) in 2006 • Voted for the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 1995, the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 twice, and the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 2003 • Voted for the President’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts • Voted for the Patriot Act in 2001, and its reauthorization in 2005.
By contrast, House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-California, has virtually the exact opposite voting record:
• She has consistently voted against any restrictions to abortion, including partial-births • She has consistently voted against laws that would ban flag-burning • Voted against the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996 • Voted against all four articles of impeachment in 1998 • Voted against the Medicare Prescription Drug Bill in 2003• Voted against the Child Custody Protection Act in 2006 • Voted against the Secure Fence Act of 2005 and the Border Security Bill in 2005 • Voted against reauthorizing the Patriot Act in 2005 and 2006 • Voted for stem cell research in 2005 and 2006 • Voted against the Same Sex Marriage Resolution in 2006 • Voted against the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 1995, against the Welfare Reform Act of 1996 twice, and against the Welfare Reform Bill twice in 2003 • Voted against the President’s 2001 and 2003 tax cuts.
The glaring differences between the current House Speaker and the person who wants his job should make it easy for voters across the country to determine which candidate better represents their core beliefs regardless of what Foley has done. And, this same principle should apply to candidates in states and congressional districts across the country.It’s really that simple. In the end, it is likely that every race this November has the same disparate positions between the two candidates on the ballot as these two Congressional leaders.Wake up, America. One virtually unknown congressman’s sexual indiscretions don’t trump all the other issues facing the nation at this critical juncture in history.