October 4, 2006


Plus, an open secret? And a look at the GOP playbook: “Gerry Studds (D-MA) had sex with a 17-year-old male page. In 1983*, he was reprimanded. Republicans wanted to censure him. But 79 Dems voted against upgrading the condemnation. The GOP wants you to know that some in the Democratic Party, in 1983, apparently did not find Studds’s conduct to be deserving of a full censure, which carries significant penalties.”

And a look at the blog that started it all. Dirty tricks are dirty, sure — but does this really help the Republicans given that the charges seem to be true?

UPDATE: Hmm: “Meanwhile, does anyone think it is ironic that so-called progressives who excoriated eavesdropping on terrorists are feasting on the publication of supposedly confidential email and IMs? You can forget about privacy. It no longer exists, if it ever did.”

ANOTHER UPDATE: Reader Daniel Schensul emails that the Hotline blog item above is in error, and that Studds was censured, not reprimanded.

Wikipedia agrees with him, so to the extent that the difference matters it’s worth noting.

MORE: A guestblogger at TalkLeft thinks that my link to the erroneous Hotlineblog item was a “lie.” That’s setting the bar for “lying” pretty low, isn’t it? Especially given that the difference seems rather minor — who knows or cares now, anyway, about the difference between a Studds reprimand and a Studds censure, so what would be the point of such a “lie?”

Comments are closed.
InstaPundit is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com.