All the Foley nonsense...

centex · 10-03-2006, 09:29 PM

It is really beginning to piss me off that he tried to be this supporter of tougher legislation against kiddie diddlers and it turns out he has been caught being a pervert...and now that he has been caught, he is trotting out all of the "poor me" defenses. First he checks into rehab, then he comes clean as being gay and is also claiming he was molested by clergy. How many more cliches will that idiot trot out before he finally gets charged with criminal conduct?

At least it seems like when a democrat gets wrapped up in a sex scandal, it has been with an age-appropriate person who could consent to the activities...

jlynn · 10-03-2006, 10:08 PM

What are you babbling about? Department store? Catheter? A politician somewhere?

Pale Rider · 10-03-2006, 10:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by centex

At least it seems like when a democrat gets wrapped up in a sex scandal, it has been with an age-appropriate person who could consent to the activities...

Not so fast my friend. Did he actually have sex, or just write about it.

The D's are not innocent bystanders.

Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.) had engaged in sexual relationships with minors, specifically 17-year-old congressional pages.

centex · 10-03-2006, 10:49 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jlynn

What are you babbling about? Department store? Catheter? A politician somewhere?

Spend a little time reading about the Florida congress-weasel...its been all over the front pages of the paper this week.

And Pale...at 17, Gerry's page was legal...an abuse of power, yes...but still of legal age.

roybean · 10-03-2006, 11:08 PM

It's been so much stuff with politicians lately, sometimes I can't keep up. Who was the one in NJ that came clean on TV with his wife standing next to him because a young man said he would go public unless he paid him? Wasn't it in NJ?

Pale Rider · 10-04-2006, 12:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by centex

And Pale...at 17, Gerry's page was legal...an abuse of power, yes...but still of legal age.

Possibly, depending on the state. Still, it is disturbing, and a shame that some think writing about sex somehow is worse than the act. Didn't we decide recently that double standards were ridiculous. The D's are out for blood even after this guy resigned and has ruined his career. Yet the D's go on voting in the sexual perverts, the KKK members, and people like Ted Kennedy who got away with murder (or at least manslaughter).

kaxmaII3 · 10-04-2006, 01:15 PM

Rep. Studds, also (not to defend his actions in ANY way), wasn't representing himself as head as the task force of missing or abused children, and being a paragon of morality, as Foley trepresented himself.

Both were wrong.

centex · 10-04-2006, 01:25 PM

Pale, what makes Foley's writings so egregious, beyond the fact that they were to minors working as pages, is that he was heading up one of the committees dealing with the exploitation of children via the internet (ie. email).

The subsequent cover-up information that is coming to light involving Hastert is equally of concern. I don't recall that Clinton's blowjob was the subject of such an effort.

The real irony in all of this is that Foley apparently has known for some time that he was gay yet was a member of a party that has effectively said he has no rights...

And as a disclaimer...I do not belong to any political party. My donations are based on individual candidate qualifications.