Congressman Foley resigns

[deep]

Victims say Foley should name abuser

By BRIAN SKOLOFF



WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. -- Former Rep. Mark Foley's refusal to identify the clergyman he says molested him as a boy is reckless and could put other children at risk, say victims' advocates and a former priest who knows the ex-congressman.

If Foley has information about a child molester, especially one who is still living, he should come forward with that immediately, they say.

"To simply say, `I can't tell you the name,' in my judgment, that's despicable," said William Brooks, a former Roman Catholic priest at Cardinal Newman High School in Lake Worth where Foley was briefly a student in 1969. "It casts a dark cloud of suspicion over all the clergy who worked during those days. I just think it's wrong."

 

[deep]

If this child was molested

Then this man should not protect the molester!

 

[Irvine511]

gay witch hunt? last night, on Katie Couric:

[q]GLORIA BORGER: Just a few hours after Kirk Fordham resigned as chief of staff to Tom Reynolds, the House Republican campaign chairman, Fordham told the Associated Press that he had more than one conversation with senior staff at the highest level. That means Hastert’s staff. Fordham was once a top aide to Mark Foley and is known to be gay. CBS News has learned that several other top Republican staffers who handled the Foley matter are also gay. Their role in this controversy has caused a firestorm among Republican conservatives who charge that a group of high-level gay Republican staffers were protecting a gay Republican congressman.

TONY PERKINS: Was the leadership afraid to stand up to that network out of fear of being labeled homophobic or gay bashing?

BORGER: Hastert’s office didn’t immediately respond to Fordham’s charges, saying it’s a matter for the ethics committee to handle. But Republicans won’t wait that long and they could still decide that Hastert has to go. Katie?

KATIE COURIC: Alright, thanks so much, Gloria.[/q]

so are we going to see the Republicans try and blame this on a secret cabal of gay staffers who sought to protect one of their own, unbeknownst to poor Denny Hastert?

note first the inclusion of something rather outlandish, along with Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council, and then Katie's lack of counterpoint.

liberal bias, indeed.

i find it wonderfully ironic that, again, another election won't be decided on the war, oil, torture, the constitution, reckless spending, or issues that actually matter ... but, once again, on boys kissing. or not even kissing. doesn't look like there was any sex involved, not even unfinished blow jobs. only this time the GOP that has been feeding and fomenting homophobia for so long as a ticket to the White House (they would never have won Ohio if not for the gay marriage amendment), are now having it turn on them and devour them alive at the polls.

 

[martha]

only this time the GOP that has been feeding and fomenting homophobia for so long as a ticket to the White House (they would never have won Ohio if not for the gay marriage amendment), are now having it turn on them and devour them alive at the polls.

And this is what's making this such a train wreck to watch. For me at least.

As usual, Conservatives forget that what they require of others will also be required of them.

 

[80sU2isBest]

i find it wonderfully ironic that, again, another election won't be decided on the war, oil, torture, the constitution, reckless spending, or issues that actually matter ... but, once again, on boys kissing. or not even kissing. doesn't look like there was any sex involved, not even unfinished blow jobs. only this time the GOP that has been feeding and fomenting homophobia for so long as a ticket to the White House (they would never have won Ohio if not for the gay marriage amendment), are now having it turn on them and devour them alive at the polls.

Don't hold your breath, Irvine. This will not be one of the factors that hurts Republicans at the polls. I'm not saying the Republicans won't be hurt at the polls; I'm just saying this will not be one of the factors.

 

[Irvine511]

Don't hold your breath, Irvine. This will not be one of the factors that hurts Republicans at the polls. I'm not saying the Republicans won't be hurt at the polls; I'm just saying this will not be one of the factors.

[q]WASHINGTON — House Republican candidates will suffer massive losses if House Speaker Dennis Hastert remains speaker until Election Day, according to internal polling data from a prominent GOP pollster, FOX News has learned.

"The data suggests Americans have bailed on the speaker," a Republican source briefed on the polling data told FOX News. "And the difference could be between a 20-seat loss and 50-seat loss."

Most GOP lawmakers have stood by Hastert, pending a full airing of the facts in his handling of the Mark Foley affair, in which the former Florida representative was caught exchanging salacious messages with teen pages in Congress. The new polling data, however, suggests that many voters already have made up their minds.[/q]

 

[80sU2isBest]

[q]WASHINGTON — House Republican candidates will suffer massive losses if House Speaker Dennis Hastert remains speaker until Election Day, according to internal polling data from a prominent GOP pollster, FOX News has learned.

"The data suggests Americans have bailed on the speaker," a Republican source briefed on the polling data told FOX News. "And the difference could be between a 20-seat loss and 50-seat loss."

Most GOP lawmakers have stood by Hastert, pending a full airing of the facts in his handling of the Mark Foley affair, in which the former Florida representative was caught exchanging salacious messages with teen pages in Congress. The new polling data, however, suggests that many voters already have made up their minds.[/q]

It's a fresh and bold reaction to a fresh situation. I would be very surprised if it actually carries through at election time. Why? Because the people who would have voted Republican at this point will not let the horrible actions of 2 men dissaude them from doing so.

 

[martha]

Republicans are a fickle lot, aren't they?

 

[deep]

Don't hold your breath, Irvine. This will not be one of the factors that hurts Republicans at the polls. I'm not saying the Republicans won't be hurt at the polls; I'm just saying this will not be one of the factors.

I think you are right

i think it will be hard for the dems to win enough seats

not because the public wants the GOP

more because of the redistricting done by the GOP

congressional districts have been gerrymandered to protect the GOP majority

 

[anitram]

The night is young. Tons of time till November.

They seem to be coming out with a scandal-a-week, who knows what's next.

 

[deep]

i think it will be hard for the dems to win enough seats

especially in the senate

the GOP only need 49 Senate seats to keep control

 

[financeguy]

and i'll be honest: i'd be much less understanding if Foley were heterosexual and these were teenaged girls. because at least heterosexuals have options available to them and a healthy, socially-approved way to exercise their sexuality in a natural narrative. homosexuals do not have this. this does not excuse predatory behavior, but it makes me more sympathetic to the predatory because i can imagine the private hell his life in the closet must be like, and how desires can be pathologized and we can find ourselves doing things we know are wrong and that we'd never actually do if our sexuality were allowed to grow and develop as naturally as any heterosexual.

I respectfully disagree.

There's a acronym they have in Northern Ireland - 'M.O.P.E'. it stands for 'Most Oppressed People Ever'. What it is intended to convey is the tendency of some on both the Loyalist and Republican sides to look for special treatment on the basis of some alleged oppression.

I think that being 'much less understanding' of a male politican coming on to female as opposed to male interns comes dangerously close to allotting 'M.O.P.E.' status for gays - which could easily be interpreted as looking for special rights.

 

[martha]

I respectfully disagree.

There's a acronym they have in Northern Ireland - 'M.O.P.E'. it stands for 'Most Oppressed People Ever'. What it is intended to convey is the tendency of some on both the Loyalist and Republican sides to look for special treatment on the basis of some alleged oppression.

I think that being 'much less understanding' of a male politican coming on to female as opposed to male interns comes dangerously close to allotting 'M.O.P.E.' status for gays - which could easily be interpreted as looking for special rights.

You have a lot of experience as a closeted gay man, then?





On another note, I haven't heard the phrase "special rights" in ages! Good job bringing it back, and in perfect context too!

 

[financeguy]

So you disagree with the concept of equality under the law?

 

[martha]

So you disagree with the concept of equality under the law?

When did anyone here suggest that Foley should be exempt from law because he's gay?

 

[financeguy]

When did anyone here suggest that Foley should be exempt from law because he's gay?

Interesting way of re-arranging my question

The debate is over whether a different standard should be applied to individuals depending on how oppressed they are (or perceive themselves to be).

Do you favour special treatment for 'closeted' adult homosexuals, or are you in favour of equality under the law?

 

[martha]

law?

Dude, you're the one that keeps bringing up the law!

Who else has in relation to special treatment?

That would be only you!!

 

[Irvine511]

Interesting way of re-arranging my question

The debate is over whether a different standard should be applied to individuals depending on how oppressed they are (or perceive themselves to be).

Do you favour special treatment for 'closeted' adult homosexuals, or are you in favour of equality under the law?

you should go back and re-read.

i am advocating the same punishment and accorded societal disgrace for Foley as i would for a heterosexual. the exact same. please point out where i've said differently.

however, my understanding of his particular predicament does cause me to have more sympathy for him, and i do think that homophobia not only kills, but harms straight people too.

 

[zoney!]

Can we re-name this thread?

The Sickness and Madness that prevails in FYM

 

[AEON]

The funny thing is listening to the Democrats take the moral high ground. One day they are marching in a NAMBLA parade - the next day they are calling for the head of anyone involved with knowing about naughty e-mails. Whatever gets the votes...

Both parties are really doing their best to make me lose faith in their ability to govern this great nation.

 

[MrsSpringsteen]

Which Democrats march in NAMBLA parades? Can you name even one? I didn't even know NAMBLA has parades (they're not that public as far as I know), and I would be shocked if anyone in any party supported them in any way.

 

[Dreadsox]

We are now deteriorating into new lows by FYM standards...

Lock this thread and throw out trolls.

 

[Bluer White]

The funny thing is listening to the Democrats take the moral high ground. One day they are marching in a NAMBLA parade - the next day they are calling for the head of anyone involved with knowing about naughty e-mails. Whatever gets the votes...

Not exactly. It wasn't a NAMBLA parade, it was a San Francisco Gay/Lesbian Pride parade. NAMBLA was marching, and Nancy Pelosi was marching a few groups behind them. I don't think she commented on NAMBLA.

 

[yolland]

Thank you for the clarification, Bluer White. And please avoid inflammatory generalizations like that AEON; you know better. Thanks.

 

[melon]

The funny thing is listening to the Democrats take the moral high ground. One day they are marching in a NAMBLA parade - the next day they are calling for the head of anyone involved with knowing about naughty e-mails.

I haven't the slightest idea why the GOP attracts so much sickness and madness.

Melon

 

[dazzlingamy]

You know this world is getting more and more screwed up as we go along. When did personal responsibilty go out the window? When did someone blaming their actions of other circumstances become accepted in society. Why have people become these frail shells of nothingness when one incident screws them up so royally that anythign they do is not completely their fault because of 'circumstances;

so foley whos a big closet homo takes a liking to a young man and decides to get a bit of action. While i do think a 16 yr old boy should have the choice to legally have sex with whomever he pleases (though why anyone would think he would ever choose a saggy old man then some hot 17 yr old) i think this dude foley is just a saddo who tried to get some closeted action cause he was horny, but he was the young mans boss, thats a position of power and that is frowned upon anyway (eg police, teachers blah blah)


BUT. the fact that suddenly, the reason it happened was *waaaaaaaaaah* im an alcoholic and *waaaaaaaaaaah* this stems from the fact that i was allegedly molest as a child by a priest so im like totally fucked up in the head and not thinking straight is A COMPLETE LOAD OF SHIT. And anyone who takes the story and tuts and bit and goes 'yeah man, what he did was wrong, but shiiiiit he was MOLESTED like come on...thats gotta screw u up... of course hes gonna want to do it with some boy...he's like MESSED UP'

Firstly i find this offensive on a whole lot of levels eg
1. the fact that he made it this far in life, was actually 'together' enough in the head to rise this far in the republication party, have a family, be acedemic and so on, without any melt down from his boyhood trama, but oh no SUDDNELY after he was CAUGHT OUT suddenly it all comes to a head and the truth is out

2. this whole 'well he was a republican and they make it hard for gay politicians to come out of the closet' well boo fucking hoo. Either come out and face the wrath, or resign and go be a politician for a party that supports gay rights, or be strong enough to stand up and be gay and say im proud to be gay and shit on you if you don't like it, OR stay in the closet, have nice hetro sex and don't be stupid and try and solicit pages for a bit of a mutual wank with each other

and lastly, i dont like the 'tone' of his whole statement. I think it is derogatory to gay people. Suddenly the only reason he did any of this is because he was molested and coked up on pills and alcohol. and hes seeing a mental health person, cause obviously any man who wants to sleep with a 16 yr old or younger man is completely FUCKED and perhaps not just...uhm GAY? It's like saying that the only reason people are gay is because they were molested, or their mum dressed them like girls or some boys touched their penis or some bullshit rather then that its just a natural occurance. Or maybe im reading to much into it.

I don't really care about this Foley guy. I am just sick and tired of people doing the wrong thing and then suddenly blaming everyhting left right and centre instead of saying (in this case) 'i am a horny desperate man, who wants some hot gay sex, and this page was just like a little hottie and i wanted to get it on with him' I mean HAVE SOME BALLS.

 

[deep]

When I first posted this thread

I was not aware of the lurid instant messages


I believde Foley was forced out because he was Gay


The first reply from 80s stated it was more than a "gay GOP issue".

I checked some more (the second reply) and told 80s he was right.

I jumped the gun.


so if a MOD wants to change the title of the thread to:

Congressman Foley resigns, what happened?

I am good with that.


It might be a more fitting title.

 

[Irvine511]

The funny thing is listening to the Democrats take the moral high ground. One day they are marching in a NAMBLA parade - the next day they are calling for the head of anyone involved with knowing about naughty e-mails. Whatever gets the votes...

Both parties are really doing their best to make me lose faith in their ability to govern this great nation.

un. believable.

do you have any idea how fringe NAMBLA is? how loudly and publicly they've been denounced by every major gay group out there?

and thanks BluerWhite for the clarification.

ultimately, NAMBLA has the right to march and protest (though not participate in the activities they advocate) much in the same way that NORMAL (national organization for the reform of marijuana laws) members can march and protest but still not (legally) light up.

not that pot smoking and pedophilia belong in even the same sentence, but the principle remains the same.

AEON, please don't do this in the future.

 

[martha]

The funny thing is listening to the Democrats take the moral high ground. One day they are marching in a NAMBLA parade - the next day they are calling for the head of anyone involved with knowing about naughty e-mails. Whatever gets the votes...

In the last 25 years, which has been the greater number: the number of Democrats marching in NAMBLA parades, or the number of Republicans marching in Klan parades?


Whatever gets the votes....

 

[Irvine511]

2. this whole 'well he was a republican and they make it hard for gay politicians to come out of the closet' well boo fucking hoo. Either come out and face the wrath, or resign and go be a politician for a party that supports gay rights, or be strong enough to stand up and be gay and say im proud to be gay and shit on you if you don't like it, OR stay in the closet, have nice hetro sex and don't be stupid and try and solicit pages for a bit of a mutual wank with each other

just to clarify, i have never once said that his behavior was acceptable or even understandable because he was a powerful member of a party that has centered most of it's domestic policy around homophobia and aligned itself with virulently anti-gay organizations like Focus on the Family or the Family Research Council. what i am saying is that men in "the closet" (and women, too, but we're talking about men here) often behave in oddly self-destructive, pathological ways, such as chasing after 17 year old Congressional pages, which is every bit as numbskull-stupid as letting an intern perform oral sex on you in the Oval Office. it's downright stupid, and perhaps purposefully self-destructive, and in this case (as opposed to Monica) quite possibly criminal, but this is the type of behavior engendered by the closet. of course, most men in the closet do not behave this way; of course every man in the closet (and out) is responsible for his actions, and should have to pay the consequences of his actions. however, just as we talk about the "root causes" of things like terrorism that are never meant as excuses for terrorism, so can we talk about the psychological torment of the closet and how it can manifest in stupid, stupid behavior.

and, yes, i've said that as a gay man, i can rather viscerally understand what must have been Foley's inner torment, but i cannot and have not and will not excuse his actual actions.

i would also like to point out that it is far easier to say to someone, "oh, silly, just come out and deal with it!" than it is to actually be gay and have to deal with the consequences of coming out. there are always consequences -- always. would the GOP support an openly gay congressman? or would the homophobic elements i mentioned earlier have used their influence within the party (James Dobson gets consulted by the White House as to the appropriateness and Christian credentials of SCOTUS nominees, for Pete's sake) to get him axed?

while i agree, broadly, with virtually everything you're saying, i think that Foley's reality is sadly, and now tragically since he's now preyed upon teenagers and implicated them in his downward spiral, far more complicated and troubled than that.