Republican Congressman Sends Sex Messages to Underage Boys

What's wacked is, as I understand it, he could have sex with a 17YO, but he just couldn't send them an email or a PM expressing the desire to do the same.

 

Apparently this is one of those mis-deeds that is better to actually just do than to PM or email expressions of desire. I find that odd.

 

I think the reason why it's outlawed because its one of the tools sexual predators use to get what they want.. do you think its just expressions of desire? its invitations for actual physical contact..

 

again its not just an expression of desire.. have you read his messages? its basically asking the teen when and where will they meet, and what they're gonna do..

 

I've tried to stay out of D&D lately but I don't want anyone to think that the absence of opinion on this is tantamount to excusing the behavior.

I find what Foley did to be pretty loathesome. He shouldn't be in rehab but should be in jail. I also don't buy his "I was molested" gag. Cheap cop out.

Again, not ground breaking on my part but everyone on here says that some are mysteriously absent on certain issues implying that they ignore problems from people on their "side" of the aisle. I don't.

So if I do a search I'll find a Gerry Studds thread detailing the same responses?

I wish people would quit with the holier than thou arguments. Neither side is better than the other no matter how warm it makes you when you think so.

 

In my opinion, he should be able to do both, openly. However, the problem is, those are the ones pretending to be the righteous ones, who wanted to regulate other people's sex life and marriage. They are the ones who label themselves as faithful to God, family and people, and their opponents as evils. Those are the ones to use value and all the other touchy words to attract supports. Isn't that ironic?

 

The problem with that is that the democrats don't go around proclaiming to be the party of family values. Do the democrarts have a history? Sure. But they don't chair the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus.

Thats the difference.

 

No, I understand and agree fully with what you said here.

My response was in a post claiming that no Democrat would think of doing something like this and that there would be a huge outcry from Democrats if they did. That part of my post was pointing out that this particular opinion just isn't true.

 

Before you **** a 17-year-old, you really should talk to them in person. This bill encourages that vital aspect of adult-teen sexual relations. Face-to-face meeting is undervalued in a society full of blackberries and IMs.

 

That's one talking point shot to hell...


Longtime Republican was source of e-mails

The source who in July gave news media Rep. Mark Foley’s (R-Fla.) suspect e-mails to a former House page says the documents came to him from a House GOP aide.

That aide has been a registered Republican since becoming eligible to vote, said the source, who showed The Hill public records supporting his claim.

The same source, who acted as an intermediary between the aide-turned-whistleblower and several news outlets, says the person who shared the documents is no longer employed in the House.

But the whistleblower was a paid GOP staffer when the documents were first given to the media.

The source bolstered the claim by sharing un-redacted e-mails in which the former page first alerted his congressional sponsor’s office of Foley’s attentions. The copies of these e-mails, now available to the public, have the names of senders and recipients blotted out.

These revelations mean that Republicans who are calling for probes to discover what Democratic leaders and staff knew about Foley’s improper exchanges with under-age pages will likely be unable to show that the opposition party orchestrated the scandal now roiling the GOP just a month away from the midterm elections.
http://www.hillnews.com/thehill/export/TheHill/News/Frontpage/100506/news2.html

 

halfbreed, I suggest you look at my post on the previous page, where that is discussed in some detail, as well as the very large differences in how those instances were handled. Then you can come back here and go, "whoops!" Or not.

I certainly don't think the absence of some members in the discussion implies that they somehow excuse the behavior. Not at all. I think they are disturbed by what is happening to their party, which is busy imploding.... literally destroying itself from the top down. I think those not posting are highly embarrassed by the incident and the pathetic attempts to cover it up, followed by equally pathetic attempts to spin the story, blame Democrats (I've seen this on Fox), and parse the whole sick affair. Then you have what giddy is doing, which I find astounding.

Let me show you something. This appeared on the GOP talk show, the O'Reilly Factor, three times, and wasn't corrected publically. MSNBC had it on Countdown:



http://www.newshounds.us/2006/10/03/fox_uses_subliminal_ploy_on_foley_head_shot.php


Completely and totally shameless, sick, disgusting... they should be fined by the FCC. By this Administration?? Oh, sure.

 

How long ago was the Studds affair? The fact that it never even became an issue until now is the type of think I'm talking about. I never claimed to be holier than anyone else unlike some in the thread. I merely brought this up as a refutation of the point that Democrats would be all over it if it were one of their own. The facts are far different including the fact that Democrats tried to portray it as an "anit-gay witch hunt."

With regards to the mislabeling of Foley as a Democrat, that's been done before in the reverse with not so much of a peep out of anyone from your side. To tell you the truth, most people don't pay attention to what the TV says and I'm sure he wasn't identified via voice as Democrat Mark Foley.

Your indignation is (as has sadly become the case lately) extremely exaggerated a la Keith Olbermann. You used to be a voice of reason and moderation on the board but you've let your hatred cloud your better judgment. I explain that I'm coming to let you guys know that I don't excuse the behavior and you attempt to spin my absence from the thread as shame when I made it clear that I wasn't here in the thread because the forum as a whole has become equivalent to the Democratic Underground.

There are so many people not interested in any form of debate or discussion. It's all about MY side is right and YOUR side is wrong. In any thread in here, there's one post about an issue and 30 more congratulating the guy on what he said. There's no form of debate when you close your mind to the other side. I'm almost anxious for the November elections to come and for the inevitable Democrat victory so you guys can see that they're just as bad as the Republicans.

Do I think Mark Foley is sick? Yes.
Do I think he should go to jail? Yes.
Do I think it's disgusting that he was in the position of power he was in? Yes.

Do I think some of the Democrat voters on this board would have tried using the exact same excuses as some of the Republican voters are if Foley were a Democrat? Absolutely and it would be just as wrong as it is now.

 

With all due respect, halfbreed, that's a bunch of crap. Did you even read the column I posted about the Democratic and Republican scandals of the early 1980's? Did you even read my ****ing post above yours? Show me an example of what Fox did in the graphic I showed that was done by Democrats on a national news program. Show me how the scandals of '82/'83 were handled the same way as the crap going on now. And show me where I tried to "spin your absence" from this thread in any way.

My friend, you are losing it.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

Actually depending on where it happened it could still have been a crime to do that as well.

But because in one state it may have been legal, that doesn't mean it is whacked for him to get in trouble for what he did. I certainly don't call that getting hung up on something. I call it justice.

 

The word you are looking for Deckard is "PWNED!"

 

OK. I read the column again and I still have yet to see how it has anything to do with what I am talking about. I stated that if this were the opposite way, Democrats on this board would be acting in the exact same way as the Republicans on this board are acting. I do not see how that article or your "****ing post above mine" refute that.

I had no argument with anyone claiming that this was a disgusting show by the Republicans in power. If you read my posts, I don't think I ever claimed that Foley was right or that the leadership was right.

Yeah, because Hastert told Fox News to put that label on there. There have been numerous occasions of mislabeling of representatives on both sides. Granted, most haven't occured on national news programs but I doubt that anyone who is alive hasn't heard about the Republican who likes to have sex with 16 year old boys.

Again, I have said nothing but bad things about the way this was handled by leadership. I have no idea what you're talking about.

What about this:

That may be, indeed. I just wish you would at least attempt to see that you no longer seem to engage in debate but rather the same type of rhetoric that big_texx and t_j were famous for. It's not about discussing the issues, anymore. For most of the people in here, it's just like politics in that it's all about winning. The issue is secondary to the attempts to "pwn3" your opponent.

Like I said, I anxiously await the post election threads about corruption in the newly elected Democratic congress. I just have a feeling that whichever party wins, the situation in here will be the EXACT same. The only difference if the Democrats win will be who's starting the corruption threads and who's defending congress.

 

halfbreed, I'm not going to break everything into quotes. I'll say this, though... you're posting in this thread, so obviously I wasn't referring to you. The graphic was shown on two separate segments of O'Rielly's show, and was hardly a mistake, IMO. You have repeatedly brought up Studds, in two threads that I know of, without mentioning how different the affairs were handled, or that there was also a GOP Congressman involved in the scandal. That was 23-24 years ago. This is today, a few weeks before the election. It is a catastrophe for the Republican Party, and I don't blame you for being upset. If I were a Republican, I'd be upset. Hell, I'm a Democrat and it upsets me. Yes, politically it's great, but I would much rather that it had never happened. We're talking about 16 year boys serving as congressional pages, living away from home, in most cases, and having their care intrusted to the members of Congress. It's sickening. Why would anyone welcome this?

Heck, we were going to take the House anyway. With this mess, we're just going to get more seats. I'd rather not have teenagers sexually abused by Congressmen of any party. I have a 15 year old son.



Keep D&D Civil.

 

I'm not upset the Republicans are losing seats. I'm glad. They've gone from the party of small government to being just as big-government as the Democrats. They deserve to lose. Maybe this will send a message that they just can't pander to the Christian Right and expect the rest of us to allow their expansions of government.

My main point is that there's an arrogance among many of the Democratic posters on this board which seems to imply that they think they have a monopoly on truth and I just can't agree that anyone who thinks that way is open to honest debate and discussion. There seems to be a belief that anything done by a Democrat by definition can't be wrong. I don't understand this frame of thought.

 

Uh Deckard.. remember when I suggested it might not be a good idea to post while suffering from painful headaches. I'm not saying this to take a cheap shot but this does seem far far beyond the Deckard who posts "Keep D&D Civil" that I suspect some extenuating aggravation or that you've been replaced by a replicant.

Few Democrats came to the defense of James Trafficant, who was kicked out by the Democrats when he was indicted, or William Jefferson. In fact some of William Jefferson's biggest defenders were Republicans. This isn't to say that Democrats aren't guilty of hypocrasy but I don't think you can claim that its a fact that Democrats will defend their own when the fact is that Congressional Democrats have taken to task fellow Congressional Democrats for unethical behavior.

Finally even with this even I'm still not makin gany predictions regarding the Democrats taking the house. There's still more than a month till the election and a lot can happen between now and then.

 

Oh, and I feel dirty right now because it seems like I'm trying to defend Foley, which I'm not. The guy's a disgrace.