0
   

Foley Quits Amid Allegations of Email Sex Scandal

 
 
Cycloptichorn
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 04:34 pm
Oh, you see, 'ephebophilia' is a perfectly natural impulse for humans: everyone thinks that youth is sexy.

Whereas Pedophilia, why, that's deviant behavior!

Splitting hairs, is all, it's still sick

Cycloptichorn
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 04:35 pm
Having just watched the press conference given by Foley's attorney, we still don't know what he did but we know why he did whatever he did.
1. He's gay
2. He's an alcoholic
3. He was molested as a teenager.
Well, I would say he's coming up with lots of excuses for whatever he did or did not do.
0 Replies
 
ehBeth
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 04:37 pm
Cyclo, looks like President Bush agrees ...

Quote:
Speaking in California, President Bush said he was dismayed, shocked and disgusted by Foley's "unacceptable behavior" and urged a thorough and aggressive investigation



~~~~~~~~~~~


I do wonder if he's going to regret his support for "Denny". Denny/Brownie, hope it works out better for him.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 04:51 pm
dyslexia wrote:
Having just watched the press conference given by Foley's attorney, we still don't know what he did but we know why he did whatever he did.
1. He's gay
2. He's an alcoholic
3. He was molested as a teenager.
Well, I would say he's coming up with lots of excuses for whatever he did or did not do.



Gayness excuses nothing.....though I guess feeling forced to live a lie by community prejudice and current anti gay republican hysteria is problematic for healthy sexuality....


I have been wondering if he was, himself, sexually abused.


That is very sad.


All these things serve to explain, not excuse.



I think the level of political point scoring over this is disgusting, and may well backfire, as the witch hunt of Clinton did for republicans.

I also think this sort of response makes it harder for people to deal effectively and calmly with such problems.....if people can discuss their proclivities and get support for managing feelings, without the risk of a feeding frenzy should their efforts become public, then I think that is to the good for everyone. It is suppressed and unacknowledged feelings that get us into most trouble, because we tend to be too anxious to face them clearly. I think American political culture, with its expected public espousals of apple pie cloud cuckoo land fairy floss lives is especially toxic in this regard. Sadly this hypocrisy feeding goo is creeping into my country's political life, too.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 04:53 pm
Cycloptichorn wrote:
Oh, you see, 'ephebophilia' is a perfectly natural impulse for humans: everyone thinks that youth is sexy.

Whereas Pedophilia, why, that's deviant behavior!

Splitting hairs, is all, it's still sick

Cycloptichorn



Actually, who gives a fabulous flying **** as to which is "sicker".


It is not the desire, but the acting upon it, that is illegal and problematic.
0 Replies
 
dlowan
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 04:54 pm
ehBeth wrote:
Cyclo, looks like President Bush agrees ...

Quote:
Speaking in California, President Bush said he was dismayed, shocked and disgusted by Foley's "unacceptable behavior" and urged a thorough and aggressive investigation



~~~~~~~~~~~


I do wonder if he's going to regret his support for "Denny". Denny/Brownie, hope it works out better for him.



Denny?
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 04:58 pm
I see a certain blanket approach there, re the US, dlowan, though I can't argue with your generalization, just that it is one.

I'll project that a culture of 'who you are is BAD', is not condusive to wholesome growth ... that is probably true.

I lucked out, in that I'm in the whatever percentile, hetero in a culture that likes that.
0 Replies
 
Ticomaya
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:00 pm
dlowan wrote:
I would be very interested for Timber to make clear what he considers to be the ethical distinctions between "ephebophilia" and "paedophilia".


I think the main point being made is that one term means one thing and is apparently accurate in this case, while the other is not. Pedophilia denotes sex between an adult and a minor, and it does not appear that is germane to this matter.

Now, would you like to explain your ethical distinction between what Foley did and what Clinton did?
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:05 pm
OK, ok, I'll admit to ignorance of the term and recent usage of the word 'ephebophilia'.

Could one of you smarties clue in the rest of us so we can follow the arguments?
0 Replies
 
blueflame1
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:08 pm
John Boehner = Denny Hastert, at least -- Plus, key questions for Tom Reynolds

(1) The editorial in The Washington Times calling for Denny Hastert's resignation lays out the case quite persuasively, but it is worth remembering that any criticisms of Denny Hastert in the Foley scandal apply equally, at least, to the next-in-line, Majority Leader John Boehner. If Hastert has to resign, how can Boehner stay?

Not only does Boehner admit to having known about what the Washington Times calls the "red flags" raised by Foley's "suggestive and wholly inappropriate e-mail messages," Boehner, ever since this scandal emerged, has been at least as dishonest as Hastert has been (which is saying a lot, since Hastert, as the Washington Times notes, "dissembled, to put it charitably"). And it was Boehner who actively and inexcusably blocked the efforts by House Democrats on Friday to instruct the House Ethics Committee to investigate this matter.

As Brad DeLong documented, Boehner has changed his story multiple times. He first told The Washington Post, definitively, that he talked months ago to Hastert about Foley and "that Hastert assured him 'we're taking care of it.'" But then, when Boehner learned that Hastert had denied knowing about Foley's page problem at all, Beohner "contacted The Post and said he could not remember whether he talked to Hastert." Then, in Roll Call: "Boehner strongly denied media reports late Friday night that he had informed Hastert of the allegations, saying 'That is not true.'" As DeLong emphasized:


Not "I don't remember." Instead: "That is not true." You cannot read Roll Call and both versions of the Post story without concluding that Boehner was lying to somebody last night: three different stories in quick succession defeats all credulity.

And now there seems to be still another Boehner version, as The Palm Beach Post reports this morning: "Boehner told the Dayton Daily News he was '99 percent' sure he talked to Hastert about the matter, but also said he did not recall their conversation."

So: (a) Boehner told Hastert about Foley and Hastert assured him they were "taking care of it"; (b) Boehner does not remember whether he ever talked to Hastert about Foley; (c) Boehner affirmatively claims that it "is not true" that he spoke with Hastert; and now, (d) Boehner is "99 percent" sure he talked to Hastert about Foley but remembers nothing about the converstaion. Does that sound like someone qualified to be Majority Leader of the U.S. House of Representatives, let alone Denny Hastert's replacement for Speaker of the House?

And this event has gone under-noticed because it happened late afternoon last Friday. Nancy Pelosi introduced a Motion on the House floor to mandate that the House Ethics Committee investigate how Foley was able to engage in such inappropriate conduct with Congressional pages and whether the House leadership failed in its duties. Boehner blocked the motion by claiming that they only learned of it that day, and therefore introduced a motion of his own -- which the GOP majority quickly approved -- to have the question of whether there will even be an investigation decided by the House Ethics Committee, the majority 5-member GOP contingent of which (out of 10 Committee members) is composed of the most subservient GOP backbenchers selected exactly for that reason. Predictably, they still have not decided whether they will even "investigate" at all.

The GOP-controlled House is a http://glenngreenwald.blogspot.com/2006/10/john-boehner-denny-hastert-at-least.html
0 Replies
 
ossobuco
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:15 pm
Could some one summarize this conversation?
0 Replies
 
squinney
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:37 pm
Sure.

A gay pedophile senator, who is an alcoholic with behavioral problems and who was himself molested by clergy as a young boy was sending sexually explicit e-mails to a male page under the age of 18, and although the leadership knew about it, they simply asked him not to do it again and thought that was enough rather than looking into it and making sure the pages were kept safe from this creep in fear of the election fallout that may result from finding out the Republican Party has an unusual definition of family values, integrity and responsibility.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:39 pm
blueflame1 wrote:
timberlandko, pretending only Dems are angry over this is a futile delusion.

Straw man, bordering on outright lie; no such claim has been made or implied.

[quote[Hastert and other ranking Republicans failed to act to protect Pages and for political reasons.[/quote]
Assumption-based assertion, usupported by facts as currently known - may prove out, may not. Reflecting on "Bush's DUI", "The 16 Words", "The Plame Game", and "The TANG Documents", I suspect it will not. I suspect also there's more dirt yet to be flung, and of course more claim of victimhood from Foley.

Quote:
Criminal negligence on their part imo.
"Citizens group says Hastert should quit"
Advocacy coalition: Foley's sex talk needed investigation at the start

© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com


An organization of conservatives says House Majority Leader Dennis Hastert and other Republican leaders who knew there was a problem with former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, but didn't thoroughly investigate, should resign.

"Speaker Hastert had knowledge of Congressman Foley's inappropriate behavior and chose to protect a potential pedophile and powerful colleague over a congressional page," said David Bossie, president of conservative advocacy group Citizens United, today.

(Story continues below)
http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/article.asp?ARTICLE_ID=52251

The "Dump Hastert Movement" you allege seems - as yet anyway - to not have any support among the Republican members of Congress - House or Senate,- nor does there seem - as yet anyway - to be prospect of it doing so. Boehner's radio talkshow commentary does not amount to a floor motion. Of course, as more develops, more may develop. I do not expect, however, that developments will trend toward Hastert's removal.


Interesting too, in context of the article you cited, is this more recent article from this evening's edition of the source you referenced, WND -

Quote:
ON CAPITOL HILL
'Gay' activist held info about Foley During campaign to 'out' lawmakers - said story would break before election


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: October 3, 2006
5:00 p.m. Eastern




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
© 2006 WorldNetDaily.com

Former Rep. Mark Foley
A radical activist on a mission to "out" conservative homosexual lawmakers and Capitol Hill staffers held on to information about Rep. Mark Foley's relationships with underage male pages, suggesting the story would break at the time of mid-term elections.

Blogger Jim Hoft of Gateway Pundit points to a campaign by two activists who had Foley on their "target list" of 20 people and shared the information with the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee.

Foley abruptly resigned Friday as reports surfaced of inappropriate e-mails with a male page. Later, ABC News released online instant messages of more salacious exchanges. Foley has issued a statement saying he checked himself into an alcohol rehabilitation program at an undisclosed location.

In July 2004, the homosexual newspaper Washington Blade reported the two activists, Mike Rogers and John Aravosis, were "loosely heading an ongoing outing campaign on the Hill" ahead of the Senate vote on the Federal Marriage Amendment, which would bar same-sex marriage.

Among nearly 20 names on the "target list" provided to the Blade were Foley and Democratic Sen. Barbara Mikulski of Maryland

The paper said a spokesman for Foley declined to comment after Aravosis asserted on his website the previous week that Foley is "gay."

"Both members of Congress have long been the subject of rumors about their sexual orientation," the paper said.

Rogers - in a March 4, 2005, post on his website BlogActive.com - declared Foley to be "gay" and, therefore, a hypocrite for voting for legislation against the homosexual agenda. The post said: "MARK FOLEY WILL BE EXPOSED FOR THE HYPOCRITE HE IS THROUGH A MAIL AND INTERNET CAMPAIGN THAT WILL REACH INTO EVERY HOME IN HIS DISTRICT."

More than a year ago, in a March 2005 post, Rogers said he had thought hard about what kind of action to take and said that while none would be taken at the moment, "When we get closer to the mid-term elections, I am sure more will surface."

Rogers did his own investigation of Foley, writing that through his recorded discussions with current and former staff members he learned how the congressman "hit on" young men at the Republican convention.

In a post Sunday, Rogers wrote about his attempt to communicate with Democrat officials, saying "the good news is that the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee is finally getting it."

Rogers said that prior to the Foley story breaking Friday, he called the DCCC's director of communications, Bill Burton, to let him know that the information about Foley - and another case - were "coming down the pike."

Burton had promised to have someone e-mail or return Rogers' call but apparently didn't follow though. Now, however, since the story broke Friday, said Rogers, "I am glad he followed up on my call and was ready on Friday to come out of the gate running."

Rogers added: "The bad new is they are still not paying enough attention. ... There are others within reach. ... If the Democrats would only fight half as hard as the Republicans."

Rogers said he posted comments about Foley on the DCCC website, but they were deleted.

In another post, Rogers admitted he had possession of the lurid Foley e-mails before they were posted on the Web.


"As people know, it's not always possible for me to disclose my role in some of the activities.
I can say this. I had the emails before they were on the net. Additionally, I had the additional emails, written by the page to a friend. The story was being written by a number of outlets and I provided additional information to reporters involved in the breaking of this story.

Was (I) the central figure in reporting on Foley's latest scandal? Never said I was. Was my work on the case important to helping make sure it came out before the election? Yes.

Did I have any idea that the GOP leadership was engaged in a cover-up? Nope. Do I love the fact that they are trying to spin this as "naughty emails?" Yup. because it shows how out of (touch) they are about queer closet cases."

Aravosis, in his AmericaBlog, shows his anger at Foley for keeping his homosexuality hidden while backing President Bush, calling the congressman "our latest closeted gay hypocrite."

Aravosis said Foley made the target list for putting politics ahead of his own community by "whoring for an anti-gay president."

Foley, who at the time was running for the Senate, responded to the "outing" by Aravosis by holding a telephone press conference with Florida media in which he called the discussion about his sexual orientation "revolting." He refused to answer any questions about the charge and later abandoned his bid for the Senate, citing concerns over his father's health.

Blogger Hoft believes, however, Foley dropped out of the Senate race "because of pressure by Aravosis and the radical gay movement to make his life hell for being a closeted homosexual."


"Things that make you go 'Hmmmm ... ' indeed"

Then again, all this could be a Rove-engineered Machiavellian plot to discredit the Dems.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:40 pm
squinney wrote:
Sure.

A gay pedophile senator, who is an alcoholic with behavioral problems and who was himself molested by clergy as a young boy was sending sexually explicit e-mails to a male page under the age of 18, and although the leadership knew about it, they simply asked him not to do it again and thought that was enough rather than looking into it and making sure the pages were kept safe from this creep in fear of the election fallout that may result from finding out the Republican Party has an unusual definition of family values, integrity and responsibility.[/quote


yup.......
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 05:56 pm
The thing about conservative republicans is that they are conservative and they are not happy.
0 Replies
 
littlek
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 06:01 pm
Is the text of those emails out? I am having a hard time with the quotes from politicians and American Joes saying that they were disgusting and such. My fear is that this will cause more hate towards gay people in general. Even though I know pedophilia is not about being gay, homophobes still tie the two.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 06:05 pm
littlek wrote:
Is the text of those emails out? I am having a hard time with the quotes from politicians and American Joes saying that they were disgusting and such. My fear is that this will cause more hate towards gay people in general. Even though I know pedophilia is not about being gay, homophobes still tie the two.


well... in this case he's a gay pedophile so the connection is hard to deny... only in this case I'm speaking of.....
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 06:05 pm
littlek wrote:
Is the text of those emails out? I am having a hard time with the quotes from politicians and American Joes saying that they were disgusting and such. My fear is that this will cause more hate towards gay people in general. Even though I know pedophilia is not about being gay, homophobes still tie the two.


well... in this case he's a gay pedophile so the connection is hard to deny... only in this case I'm speaking of.....
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 06:11 pm
Although i think your point is well taken, Lil' Kay, i also think that the people to whom you refer are never amenable to reason, and would take that point of view whether or not there were any evidenced that Foley is gay.

Frankly, i will find it amusing, in that there are conservatives who are convinced that all homosexuals are closet paedophiles, and that all paedophiles are homosexual--who are now confronted with one of their own boys being naughty. No fun for the right or for Republicans.
0 Replies
 
Bi-Polar Bear
 
  1  
Reply Tue 3 Oct, 2006 06:13 pm
but a laugh riot for we great unwashed hell bound heathen left wing disgraces to decent people everywhere....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 01/10/2025 at 03:44:16