Party Before Predators: Why Didn't GOP Leaders Stop Foley?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Is there anything these Republicans won't cover up? Duke Cunningham took millions of dollars in bribes. The people who were buying him off bought him a yacht called the Duke-Stir. He had a bribe menu on Congressional letter head. How many ethics investigations? Zero. Zilch. Nada.

Bob Ney took gifts and favors from Jack Abramoff.

He has confessed and is about to go to prison. How many ethics investigations? Zero. None. Not one.

Then there is Hastert's shady land deal. Bill Frist's insider trading. Tom DeLay's money laundering. The list goes on and on. Every one of them had their ### covered by the rest of their Republican colleagues, crooks, whatever you want to call them.

When Joel Hefley, a conservative Republican from Colorado, had the temerity to actually do an ethics investigation of Tom DeLay -- he was removed. Can't have it. You can't have any ethics investigations in a place with no ethics. The house will fall in.

Well, now it has. Because they've gone too far. This time they covered for a sexual predator. Mark Foley, Republican of Florida, was caught sending very explicit sexual messages to 16 and 17 year old boys who worked as pages for Congress.

Actually, he was caught by a fellow Republican, Rodney Alexander, because one of the pages worked for Rep. Alexander and turned Foley in. So, what did the Republicans do about it? Absolutely nothing. Zero. Zilch. Nada.

They covered it up. Because it's what they do.

The Republican Protection Racket stepped in and made the story go away. There was no public apology to the boys that were sexually harassed. No criminal investigation. No ethics investigation. Not a word.

The Republican leadership knew for most of the year. In all that time, while other kids could have been exposed, while they knew of several instances of sexual advances toward underage boys -- they did nothing!

Now, they feign outrage. Why weren't they outraged when they first found out about it? They're not outraged because young boys were jeopardized. They're outraged now because they're jeopardized.

But it gets worse. They left Foley in charge of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus. Come on!

If you put it in a movie about a corrupt Congress, I wouldn't believe it. It's too over the top. You'd walk out of the theater saying, "That's too much. No one would do that." Apparently they would and they did.

Remember this is the same Republicans who spent 140 hours investigating Bill Clinton's Christmas card list. I'm not kidding. They even started an investigation into his cat. If you put it in a movie, no one would believe it.

Not one investigation into what's gone wrong with the war in Iraq, the $9 billion dollars missing in Iraq, why a CIA agent's name was leaked, why Osama bin Laden hasn't been caught or any of the corruption scandals. But they spent 140 hours on the Clinton Christmas list (it turns out they were just Christmas cards, in case you were wondering). They're not even trying to appear fair. They think there's nothing you won't let them do. They're in charge and they can get away with anything.

Now in this case, I think sex scandals are a dime a dozen. Mark Foley resigned. I'm not that interested in that story. He could have been a Democrat, a Republican or a Federalist. Every party has people that do terrible things. This isn't about that.

This is about a Republican Party so corrupt there's nothing they wouldn't cover up to protect their own. If that means your money is misspent or stolen, fine. If that means some Congressmen commit illegal acts to get rich off your back, fine.

Apparently, it also means if your kids are exposed to a sexual predator while they are supposed to be learning about our government, even that's fine.

But it's not fine. Not by a long shot. Read what the Congressman wrote to an underage boy that was working in the House of Representatives (the Congressman is Maf54):

Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:04 PM): normal clothes

Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:09 PM): tshirt and shorts

Maf54 (8:04:17 PM): um so a big buldge

Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:35 PM): ya

Maf54 (8:04:45 PM): um

Maf54 (8:04:58 PM): love to slip them off of you

Xxxxxxxxx (8:05:08 PM): haha

Maf54 (8:05:53 PM): and gram the one eyed snake

Maf54 (8:06:13 PM): grab

Xxxxxxxxx (8:06:53 PM): not tonight...dont get to excited

Maf54 (8:07:12 PM): well your hard

Xxxxxxxxx (8:07:45 PM): that is true

Maf54 (8:08:03 PM): and a little horny

Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:11 PM): and also tru

Maf54 (8:08:31 PM): get a ruler and measure it for me

Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:38 PM): ive already told you that

Maf54 (8:08:47 PM): tell me again

Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:49 PM): 7 and 1/2

Maf54 (8:09:04 PM): ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm

Maf54 (8:09:08 PM): beautiful

Xxxxxxxxx (8:09:38 PM): lol

Maf54 (8:09:44 PM): thats a great size

Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:00 PM): thank you

Maf54 (8:10:22 PM): still stiff

Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:28 PM): ya

Maf54 (8:10:40 PM): take it out

Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:54 PM): brb...my mom is yelling

Maf54 (8:11:06 PM): ok

Xxxxxxxxx (8:14:02 PM): back

Maf54 (8:14:37 PM): cool hope se didnt see any thing

He was supposed to be protecting him. He was Chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus!

After all this, they still covered for him. They didn't even take him off the Exploited Teen Caucus. They left him in charge.

Because they don't care. They don't care about anybody but themselves. They are driven mad with power. Their only goal is to stay in power. Now, the question is, are you going to let them get away with it? Are you going to let them keep that power, knowing what they've done with it?

Cenk Uygur is co-host of The Young Turks, the first liberal radio show to air nationwide.

[bowhunter 0]

Steven, I agree this is dispicable . . . the stuff Foley was involved in is dispicable and any cover-up or looking the other way is just as dispacable. Both need to be punished. But neither party has a corner on bad behavior. There are plenty of skeletons in both closets. I can't remember the last time I voted for a Democrat, but the Republicans are losing me fast. They've had an incredible opportunity with control of both houses, and the exec and, imo, have squandered that opportunity on several important fronts. I have a co-worker/friend from the UK who comes to the states to visit now and then. Ask him his opinion of Tony Blair and politicians in general and he will say . . . "Oh, they're all rubbish in my opinion". That about sums it up. There are some good ones out there, but the parties as a whole . . . very disappointing.

[one...two...tree 2,762]

Steven, I agree this is dispicable . . . the stuff Foley was involved in is dispicable and any cover-up or looking the other way is just as dispacable. Both need to be punished. But neither party has a corner on bad behavior. There are plenty of skeletons in both closets. I can't remember the last time I voted for a Democrat, but the Republicans are losing me fast. They've had an incredible opportunity with control of both houses, and the exec and, imo, have squandered that opportunity on several important fronts. I have a co-worker/friend from the UK who comes to the states to visit now and then. Ask him his opinion of Tony Blair and politicians in general and he will say . . . "Oh, they're all rubbish in my opinion". That about sums it up. There are some good ones out there, but the parties as a whole . . . very disappointing.

Yes, I agree that both parties have disappointed the American people. Hopefully, now the self righteous rhetoric and chest thumping will go quiet and we can get back to discussing issues on their own merit.

Edited October 1, 2006 by Steven_and_Jinky

[I'm Gone 60]

Now Foley has done what everyone that gets caught doing something he has check into rehab

Now also says he was abused by a clergyman and he is gay.

http://tinyurl.com/ronar

Meanwhile, the lawyer for Mark Foley, the Florida Republican who resigned his House seat Friday as the scandal was emerging, said Foley was molested between the ages of 13 and 15 by a clergyman.

Foley, 52, continues to undergo treatment at "one of the most renowned mental health and substance abuse facilities in the United States," Foley's lawyer, David Roth, said at a news conference early this evening.

Roth said for the first time that Foley is gay. Roth repeated a statement he made yesterday that the sexually oriented messages Foley exchanged with House pages were triggered by alcohol.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I think this could do the Republicans in come election time more than Iraq. Most people don't fully undestand if Iraq was a good thing or a bad thing, but everyone understand some old perv trying to get in the pants of some young guy and the Republican leadership trying to cover it up.

Edited October 4, 2006 by mdyoung

[homesick_american 1]

I wasn't surprised at all to see the same Republican talking heads defending Mark Foley that blasted Bill Clinton and practically called him a pedophile during the Monica Lewinsky scandal.

At least Monica Lewinsky was legal.

[GaryC 7]

The Dems don't care about the boy, they only care about getting their power back.

Drip, Drip, Drip of Foley Messages Part of Calculated Campaign?

Posted by Mark Finkelstein on October 2, 2006 - 16:32.

Day One: Suspicious-but-not-explict emails.

Day Two: Explicit instant messages, but no evidence Foley met with boys.

Day Four: Instant message indicating Foley was indeed seeking to meet and possibly had already met with a boy.

Foley deserves what he's gotten and what is likely to come. But it seems increasingly plausible that the timed release of information - of ever-escalating seriousness - is part of a calculated campaign to keep the story in the news and inflict maximum political damage on the GOP.

That would seem the logical inference in light of the latest information promulgated this afternoon by ABC News. An article written by Brian Ross and Maddy Sauer, E-mails Show Foley Sought to Rendezvous with Page, contains the text of an instant message session in which Foley expressly tells a boy "I want to see you." Foley also mentions "I miss you a lot since San Diego," suggesting that perhaps they had already met.

When Ross' source provided him the first email, isn't it likely that he already had the more graphic instant messages in his possession? But dumping everything on day one would have reduced the number of news cycles of front page coverage.

Could the people behind the campaign have more bombshells in their back pocket? If in coming days we see, for example, the release of evidence that Foley had actual physical contact with a page, that could be the clincher as to this being more a political than a moral campaign by the leakers.

This story has obviously destroyed Foley's professional career. It might inflict wider damage on the GOP. But if it turns out that political partisans were behind a carefully-timed disclosure campaign, it's not hard to imagine a serious backlash on the Democrats.

http://newsbusters.org/node/8035

[GaryC 7]

Why do the Dems say what Foley did was so despicable when they gave this guy a pass?

Does Anybody In Our Media Remember Gerry Studds?

For some reason I just feel the need to remember that great Democrat Congressmen and gay rights pioneer Gerry Studds.

From Wikipedia:

Gerry Studds

Gerry Eastman Studds (born May 12, 1937) is a retired American politician, born in Mineola, New York. He served as a Democratic Congressman for Massachusetts from 1973 until 1996. He was the first openly homosexual member of the US Congress and, more generally, the first openly gay national politician in the US.

Congressional page sex scandal

Studds is remembered chiefly for his role in the Congressional page sex scandal in 1983, when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of Representatives for separate sexual relationships with a minor – in Studds's case, a 1973 relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional page.

During the course of the House Ethics Committee's investigation, Studds publicly acknowledged his homosexuality, a disclosure that, according to a Washington Post article, "apparently was not news to many of his constituents."

Studds stated in an address to the House, "It is not a simple task for any of us to meet adequately the obligations of either public or private life, let alone both, but these challenges are made substantially more complex when one is, as I am, both an elected public official and gay."

As the House read their censure of him, Studds turned his back and ignored them.

Later, at a press conference with the former page standing beside him, the two stated that what had happened between them was nobody's business but their own.

Studds was re-elected five more terms after the censure...

Maybe the change of season is just making me nostalgic. I'm also strangely reminded of that equally heroic Congressman Barney Frank:

I guess some Congressman are more equal than others.

Especially Democrats.

http://www.sweetness-light.com/archive/doe...er-gerry-studds

Edited October 4, 2006 by Iniibig ko si Luz forever

[Fandango 1,439]

What's that sound I hear? Why it's GaryC raining on SJ's parade!

[homesick_american 1]

Why do the Dems say what Foley did was so despicable when they gave this guy a pass?

Because this guy is just gay. Foley was flirting with Congressional pages under the age of 18. They're not in any way shape or form the same thing.

[GaryC 7]

Why do the Dems say what Foley did was so despicable when they gave this guy a pass?

Because this guy is just gay. Foley was flirting with Congressional pages under the age of 18. They're not in any way shape or form the same thing.

Hello?

Studds is remembered chiefly for his role in the Congressional page sex scandal in 1983, when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of Representatives for separate sexual relationships with a minor – in Studds's case, a 1973 relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional page.

[homesick_american 1]

Why do the Dems say what Foley did was so despicable when they gave this guy a pass?

Because this guy is just gay. Foley was flirting with Congressional pages under the age of 18. They're not in any way shape or form the same thing.

Hello?

Studds is remembered chiefly for his role in the Congressional page sex scandal in 1983, when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of Representatives for separate sexual relationships with a minor – in Studds's case, a 1973 relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional page.

My bad, I missed that part. I don't condone that sort of behavior from either side of the aisle.

[GaryC 7]

I don't condone it either. What Studds did was criminal, he should have went to jail. What Foley did may or may not be criminal. If it's shown that he had sexual contact with any minor then he should be in jail also. My point is that the hypocrisy of the Dems and the left is staggering!

Lets look at the crimes and the reactions shall we?

Studds:

Had a sexual relationship with a 17 year old page.

When caught he didn't resign.

When called on it he had a press conference WITH the boy and declared it was no ones business but theirs.

When censured he showed his disdain for the congress by turning his back while the censure was read.

The Dems, who controlled the house, blocked his expulsion.

He went on to be re-elected 5 times.

Foley:

Exchanged sexually suggestive emails and IM's with a 16 year old boy.

When caught he immediatly resigned.

The speaker called for an investigation.

See the difference?

Also, now the Dems are making political hay out of this. They are gleeful about it. They are calling for the speakers resignation, they are calling the republicans hypocrites. The press is eating this up with a spoon.

The real hypocrites here are the Dems. They will use any low handed tactics to regain their power. This is only the latest example.

[homesick_american 1]

I don't condone it either. What Studds did was criminal, he should have went to jail. What Foley did may or may not be criminal. If it's shown that he had sexual contact with any minor then he should be in jail also. My point is that the hypocrisy of the Dems and the left is staggering!

Lets look at the crimes and the reactions shall we?

Studds:

Had a sexual relationship with a 17 year old page.

When caught he didn't resign.

When called on it he had a press conference WITH the boy and declared it was no ones business but theirs.

When censured he showed his disdain for the congress by turning his back while the censure was read.

The Dems, who controlled the house, blocked his expulsion.

He went on to be re-elected 5 times.

Well, I don't approve of that. I didn't approve of Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky either, but at least she was over 18. Over 21, too. I wouldn't blame Congress and the Democrats as much as I would blame the district that kept sending him back to Washington. I wouldn't have voted for him.

Foley:

Exchanged sexually suggestive emails and IM's with a 16 year old boy.

When caught he immediatly resigned.

The speaker called for an investigation.

I think the problem here is there is evidence that the speaker knew about this almost a year ago but did nothing. In the scenario you describe with the Democrat, which I don't remember since it took place when I was a child, it appears that Congress DID come down on him. All I've seen so far on TV is Republicans defending Mark Foley's behavior.

Also, now the Dems are making political hay out of this. They are gleeful about it. They are calling for the speakers resignation, they are calling the republicans hypocrites. The press is eating this up with a spoon.

The real hypocrites here are the Dems. They will use any low handed tactics to regain their power. This is only the latest example.

Of course they're gleeful about it. The Republicans purport to be the party of morals, family values, and law and order. For something like this to happen to a Republican is hilarious. Of course they're going to use it; this is politics, not Mother May I. Just look at what the Republicans did to Bill Clinton. Do you really think the Democrats aren't out for a bit of revenge here?

Personally, I hope they nail Mark Foley and Dennis Hastert to the wall, and I hope the Democrats regain control of Congress...but only because I see them as the lesser of two evils. However bad the Democrats are, in my opinion the Republicans are worse. The fact that THIS is the pre-election scandal and not the Bush administration's bogus Iraq war or the disgusting way they handled the aftermath of Katrina speaks volumes about the American electorate. Not good volumes, either.

[GaryC 7]

The speaker said he didn't know about the extent of the emails until recently. But the Dems and the press did. They chose to hold off until it would cause the most damage possible. The Republicans do have more morals than the libs. It has been proven time after time. But in the end everyone is human and mistakes are made. How we deal with the mistakes show us where our soul is. You think the Speaker should resign? Well look at this and tell me who should take the blame for not exposing this sooner.

Oh, BTW Monica was 19.

Did Democrats Page Mark Foley?

Scandal: Right after Mark Foley was revealed to have had inappropriate e-mail conversations with a 16-year-old page, he resigned and checked into rehab. Now, what did Democrats know, and when did they know it?

Yes, you read that right: the Democrats. It's of course clear that Foley, a Republican representative from Florida, resigned for good cause. We don't defend him or his inexcusable behavior -- good riddance.

But it didn't take long at all after Foley's resignation for the Democrats to call for an investigation of the entire Republican leadership in the House, charging that GOP stalwarts knew early on that Foley, as they like to say in the rehab business, had a "problem."

Democrats have begun losing their once-significant lead in the polls, and a mere five weeks remain until the midterm elections. Is this scandal the Democrats' own "October Surprise," meant to throw the GOP into a tailspin shortly before the vote?

Recent polls show Democrats aren't doing very well on several key issues. What better way than a good, old-fashioned sex scandal to get people's minds off such things as the importance of winning the war in Iraq, our ongoing vulnerability to terrorist attack and the necessity of keeping the Bush economic boom going?

As it is, Republicans deny knowing about the explicit text messages that Foley sent to a 16-year-old congressional page back in 2003. In repudiating Foley, House Speaker Dennis Hastert called the messages "vile and repulsive."

Despite this, the immediate take by Democrats and much of the mainstream media was that this was a classic example of Republican hypocrisy -- talking "morals" and "values" while all the time shielding a child predator. But it was nothing of the kind.

If anything, the episode reveals the Democrats' hypocrisy about their own behavior. The fact that Foley resigned virtually within minutes of being told that ABC News had copies of his salacious e-mails and text messages indicates he at least felt shame for his actions. Can the same be said for Democrats?

Sadly, it doesn't seem so. How else can you explain the following?

In 1983, then-Democratic Rep. Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was caught in a similar situation. In his case, Studds had sex with a male teenage page -- something Foley hasn't been charged with.

Did Studds express contrition? Resign? Quite the contrary. He rejected Congress' censure of him and continued to represent his district until his retirement in 1996.

In 1989, Rep. Barney Frank (news, bio, voting record), also of Massachusetts, admitted he'd lived with Steve Gobie, a male prostitute who ran a gay sex-for-hire ring out of Frank's apartment. Frank, it was later discovered, used his position to fix 33 parking tickets for Gobie.

What happened to Frank? The House voted 408-18 to reprimand him -- a slap on the wrist. Today he's an honored Democratic member of Congress, much in demand as a speaker and "conscience of the party."

In 2001, President Clinton, who had his own intern problem, commuted the prison sentence of Illinois Rep. Mel Reynolds, who had sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer and pressured her to lie about it. (Reynolds also was convicted of campaign spending violations.)

You get the idea. Democrats not only seem OK with the kind of behavior for which Foley is charged, but also they protect and excuse it. Only when it's a Republican do they proclaim themselves shocked -- shocked! -- when it comes to light.

We have a lot more questions about this whole affair. The timing of the revelations, as we noted, couldn't be more propitious for the Democrats. Turns out both the Democrats and several newspapers seem to have known about Foley's problem as far back as November, according to research by several enterprising blogs.

Why didn't they come forward then? Who dredged up these e-mails -- and why did they hold them until now? This reeks of political trickery.

We're glad Foley's gone. He betrayed Congress, his party and the trust of the 33 pages who serve in Congress, and their parents. He behaved immorally, and we won't be surprised at new revelations.

That said, if this scandal is the Democrats' answer to their problems at the polls, it's pretty pathetic. It shows a base contempt for the voters.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ibd/20061002/bs_ib...2006102issues01

Edited October 4, 2006 by Iniibig ko si Luz forever

[homesick_american 1]

The speaker said he didn't know about the extent of the emails until recently. But the Dems and the press did. They chose to hold off until it would cause the most damage possible. The Republicans do have more morals than the libs. It has been proven time after time. But in the end everyone is human and mistakes are made. How we deal with the mistakes show us where our soul is. You think the Speaker should resign? Well look at this and tell me who should take the blame for not exposing this sooner.

Oh, BTW Monica was 19.

No, she wasn't. She was born in 1973 and the affair started in 1995, making her 21-22 years old.

I haven't seen any evidence that the Democrats knew about this scandal but there IS evidence that the GOP leadership did. Of course nothing will actually happen to THEM; nothing ever does. I'm so sick of the Republicans I could puke.