Republican Congressman Sends Sex Messages to Underage Boys

I may be setting myself up to get clobbered, but when did I not? I thought there was plenty of reason to impeach Clinton-- at least out the full truth if nothing else.

If we weren't involved in a critical conflict, I wouldn't object to an impeachment of Bush, but of course if we werent' involved in a critical conflict there would be no reason to impeach Bush...

And secondly, I thought that Dems did no wrong?!

 

WOW!!!!

How much longer can Hastert maintain that he only found out about Foley in September of last year?

An excerpt --


Fordham isn't the only witness who will testify about earlier, unsuccessful attempts to stop Foley, although the timelines differ.

Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill., scheduled to appear Friday, has said he confronted Foley last fall, after he was told by Hastert's office of an overly friendly -- but not sexually explicit -- e-mail to a page from Louisiana.

Shimkus is chairman of the House Page Board, a group of three lawmakers and two House officers who set policy for the program that brings teenagers to Congress to attend school and perform errands in the chamber during sessions.

Shimkus has said that he and then-House clerk Jeff Trandahl confronted Foley in his office last fall after hearing from Hastert's aides about the e-mail. Shimkus said he told Foley to cease all contact with the Louisiana teenager.

The lawmaker did not tell the two other House members of the page board about the meeting -- Dale Kildee, D-Mich., and Shelley Moore Capito, R-W.Va.

Shimkus said he was following the wishes of the boy's parents.

''I think Congressman Shimkus acted in an expedited manner to find out what happened,'' while respecting the wishes of the family, Hastert said in support of Shimkus' decision to keep the two other lawmakers out of the loop.

Another Republican House member, Rep. Jim Kolbe of Arizona, has pushed the timeline on GOP knowledge of Foley's conduct back to 2001.

http://www.nytimes.com/aponline/us/...&en=83914463d1c0e019&ei=5094&partner=homepage

 

In Bizarro world:

Majority leader: Democrats endangered pages

DES MOINES, IA - House Majority Leader John Boehner today accused Democrats of endangering House pages for political gain.

Boehner, speaking at a campaign event for 3rd District Republican candidate Jeff Lamberti, said Democratic operatives have known about inappropriate e-mails sent by former Rep. Mark Foley, a Florida Republican, to young male pages for some time. He said Democrats had been shopping the information around Washington as a political ploy.

"Someone who had this information allowed those 16-year-old pages to be at risk while they were playing their political games," said Boehner, R-Ohio. "I do not believe thus far that Republicans knew about these sexually explicit instant messages."

http://www.crgazette.com/2006/10/13/Home/housepages.htm

 

"Someone who had this information allowed those 16-year-old pages to be at risk while they were playing their political games," said Boehner, R-Ohio. "I do not believe thus far that Republicans knew about these sexually explicit instant messages."

It is really quite simple. It is all BILL CLINTON's fault. We don't know how, but we do know it in our gut.

Fox Newsworthy.

 

The new conspiracy theory is that there is an undercover republican cabal that are secret double agent democrats infiltrating the republican leadership that is perpetrating the whole kurfuffle on the American voters to influence the election.

I kid you not

Republican Gays are Closeted Dems

http://www.aim.org/aim_column/4931_0_3_0_C/

 

This just in, Bill Clinton was responsible for the fall of the Roman Empire.

 

If only Mark Foley had been a Democrat in the 80's:



I mean the guy had sex with his male pages. Granted, he wasn't in charge of legislation to protect from predators but calling the guy a political pioneer? WTF?

 

Why the hell are they calling him a pioneer ~ particularly after the Foley saga?

Dumb.

 

How old is he?

 

If he had been a Democrat in the 80's then both parties would have acted to censure him just as the did to Studs.

Instead Foley's party attempted to cover for him, and took no action. I wish Foley had been a Democrat in the 80's then his predatory actions would not have gone on for near as long, because the Dems wouldn't have covered for him.

 

I won't argue the point you're making because it doesn't really deal with what I'm talking about.

MSNBC is calling a guy who had sex with male pages a pioneer. This strikes me as being in poor taste especially given the current political climate.

 

I see the point. I don't think they are calling him a pioneer because he had sex with pages, but because served many years in congress as an openly gay person.

 

Now I wasn't exactly cognizant of much of the 80's political environment so I may be wrong on this issue but from my understanding he was only openly gay because he was caught having sex with male pages.

Is this correct or have I been misinformed?

 

http://www.capitolhillblue.com/Aug1999/082099/criminalclass5-082099.htm

"Yet Gary Studds of Massachusetts seduced a young male House page, defied the House when it censured him and was re-elected several times."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds

"Studds received two standing ovations from supporters in his home district at his first town meeting following his congressional censure."

"Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal, when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors – in Studds's case, a 1973 relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional page who was of the age of legal consent. The relationship was consensual, though very unprofessional of a politician, presenting ethical concerns relating to working relationships with subordinates."

Ah, is this the virtuous hand of the Dems? It only took 10 years for this wrong-doing to bubble to the surface.

http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Gerry_Studds

"On July 20, 1983, Gerry was censured for having an affair 10 years earlier with a male page."

At least Foley resigned...immediately.

 

69

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds

 

Giddy really...

Do you really think he made that decision on his own?

 

Well... at least Studds got himself some consensual congressional page sex.

Foley's effort in "seduction" yielded as much results as Bush's effort to rebuild Iraq. He was just flat-out harassing a kid who has no interest in him.

It's clear that Studds is a much more charming lover than the pathetic Foley. People need to get beyond political correctness and realize all adult-teen sexual advances are not the same.

 

mc mark.. . no, but the facts are that Foley resigned and Studds did not. Are you going to dispute that?

What's more Studds evaded detection for a full decade. Do you really think that no one knew about his seduction? To top it off, he was re-elected and he was greeted back in MA with a rousing, supportive crowd.

What are the differences in these two pictures?

 

The difference in the two pictures are that the Dems didn't cover up STudds, but acted to Censure him.

The standing ovation and re-election all happened from the people he represented and not Democratic officials.

Foley did not resign immediately. This was going on as far back as '98.

Yes I see a huge difference in the two pictures. The Democrats did not act to cover up Studds' actions, the GOP leadership did act to cover up Foley's actions.

 

Giddyup doesn't notice things like this -- he bases his opinion whatever letter is in front of their name.

D --> Bad

R --> Good