Congressman Foley resigns

The friendliest place on the web for anyone that follows U2.
If you have answers, please help by responding to the unanswered posts.
Would that be the same for hetero and homo or is there a difference?

I think that in many parts of the world this would not be illegal; I don't think that he has any future in public office after this (a nice check against sleeze) but calling for arrest for propositioning a 16 year old teen seems wrong.
 
I'm not going to apologize deep, I didn't intentionally misrepresent you about anything. If you want to continue insisting that I did rather than discuss the actual topic of the thread, well carry on-without me.

And he wasn't just sending porn to the page-didn't anyone read the IM's?

Situations might not be exactly the same, but the fact is that Democrats and Republicans are both capable of certain types of inappropriate behavior, and of hypocrisy, and of covering up for certain activities that their fellow politicians engage in. That's all I have been trying to say. It's good fodder for political haymaking, but the sexual exploitation of children and the preying on them by adults is a matter that goes well beyond that. Yes people will accuse any Republican who is caught in such activity of being a hypocrite, but it's not as if Democrats wouldn't be the same (if they aren't well I guess they're just expected to be moral degenerates or something). Anyone who does this is a despicable hypocrite in my opinion, as any politician who does is-they are betraying the laws they are supposed to abide by, and the people they are supposed to be representing, the ideals they allegedly espouse.

Honestly I can't believe anyone here thinks it's not inappropriate for an adult man or woman to have sexual communication of any kind with a minor. That's how some of these posts are coming across. An adult certainly should be arrested for propositioning a 16 year old. :|
 
An adult certainly should be arrested for propositioning a 16 year old
Propositioning is announcing and intent for consensual sex and if if the age of consent is 16 then why should that be illegal? We are not talking NAMBLA here and I think that once a person is able legally allowed to consent to and choose to have sex then they should be able to do so with whomever they choose.\

I don't think that a middle age man propositioning a teenager for sex is appropriate but I don't think that it or the act itself should be illegal.
 
The age of consent is 16? :hmm: Who said that?

Not matter what the age of consent is, Foley or any other adult like him has no business having any sort of sexual communication or conduct with a minor. And legal or not, I don't know why anyone his age would want to have sexual communication and/or sex with a 16 year old, or an 18 year old actually (unless they have a sexual prediliction for children or "almost children"). And that all leaves out the little "technicality" of his position on caucus for missing and exploited children, and the statements he made involving that position.

A man his age sending IM's to a 16 year old such as the ones he sent (and there are allegedly 36 pages of them, even more than what's been revealed) is sexual exploitation of a child in my opinion, even if some law doesn't consider a 16 year old to be a child. I do. If I was the parent of a 16 year old, and a man Foley's age was sending him/her sexual IM's, you can be damn sure I would want the law to get involved somehow. Foley is not an 18 or 20 year old with a "crush" on a 16 year old.
 
The age of the perp is also important. Being involved with and underage child at 19 is vastly different in the eyes of the law than if you are 35 years old.
 
How long did the GOP know about Foley's inappropriate behavior???

5 years??

GOP Staff Warned Pages About Foley in 2001

October 01, 2006 4:00 PM

Maddy Sauer and Anna Schecter Report:

Republican staff member warned congressional pages five years ago to watch out for Congressman Mark Foley, according to a former page.

Matthew Loraditch, a page in the 2001-2002 class, told ABC News he and other pages were warned about Foley by a supervisor in the House Clerk's office.

Loraditch, the president of the Page Alumni Association, said the pages were told "don't get too wrapped up in him being too nice to you and all that kind of stuff."


Staff members at the House Clerk's office did not return calls seeking comment.

Some of the sexually explicit instant messages that led to Foley's abrupt resignation Friday were sent to pages in Loraditch's class.

Pages report to either Republican or Democratic supervisors, depending on the political party of the member of Congress who nominate them for the page program.

Several Democratic pages tell ABC News they received no such warnings about Foley.

Loraditch says that some of the pages who "interacted" with Foley were hesitant to report his behavior because "members of Congress, they've got the power." Many of the pages were hoping for careers in politics and feared Foley might seek retribution.

Loraditch runs the alumni association for the U.S. House Page Program, and he is deeply concerned about the future effects this scandal could have on a program that he sees as a valuable educational experience for teens.
 
I am and have been a registered Republican for approx. 30 years, now.

and this bunch is the worst group of worthless louts I have ever seen.
 
Last edited:
Interstate communications-and soliticing an underage person for sex online is a federal crime. It doesn't matter if the solicitor is 52 or 18, I would imagine.

This is why the FBI is investigating

(AP)While GOP leaders scramble to contain the political fallout from the latest Washington sex scandal, the FBI is examining Republican Rep. Mark Foley 's e-mail exchanges with teenage boys and the former congressman has checked himself into an alcohol rehabilitation facility.

The FBI "is conducting an assessment to see if there's been a violation of federal law," FBI spokesman Richard Kolko said, declining to elaborate.

Foley announced Monday through his attorney that he had been battling alcoholism and had checked into an unidentified rehabilitation facility for treatment over the weekend. "I strongly believe that I am an alcoholic and have accepted the need for immediate treatment for alcoholism and other behavioral problems," Foley said in a statement released in Florida by his attorney, David Roth.



So will he blame it on alcohol?

October 1, 2006

Painfully, the events that led to my resignation have crystalized recognition of my longstanding significant alcohol and emotional difficulties.

I strongly believe that I am an alcoholic and have accepted the need for immediate treatment for alcoholism and related behavioral problems.

On Saturday, with the loving support of my family and friends, I made arrangements to enter a renowned in-patient facility to address my disease and related issues.

I deeply regret and accept full responsibility for the harm I have caused.

Over the weekend, I communicated extensively with one of the most respected mental health experts in Palm Beach County, Florida, who has been instrumental in counseling and assisting me.

Attorney David Roth, my good friend of four decades has been requested by me to fully and completely cooperate regarding any inquiries that may arise during my treatment.

Words cannot express my gratitude for the prayers and words of encouragement that have been conveyed to me.

Sincerely,

Mark A. Foley
 
Last edited:
deep said:
I am and have been a registered Republican for approx. 30 years, now.

and this bunch is the worst group of worthless louts I have ever seen.

The Pope is much closer to being a Protestant

than you are calling yourself a Republican.
:wink:
 
Foley is a pitiful man. and this isn't about pedophilia. this is about pederasty -- ever seen Penthouse's "Barely Legal"? and would Britney have ever had a career if not for the pederastic yearnings of heterosexual men? -- and we are talking about a 16 or 17 year old, not an 8 year old. gross and creepy, absolutely. but not in the same ballpark as going after a prepubescent child. and i believe, but am not certain, that the age of consent in the District is 16.

and, on another level, a bit of a double-standard. in many states, the age of consent is different for heterosexuals than it is for homosexuals. 16 year old heteros can have sex, 16 year old homos cant. but on a political level, it's simply much more titlating and salacious because it was a boy, not a girl, and this might be a situation where the grotesque homophobia that has shaped republican domestic policy since 2002 might come back to bit them in the collective ass since they've basically campaigned on the contention that heterosexuality is always, always better than homosexuality, and that homosexuality is something that must be destroyed.

so now, the real issue, is the lengths that the Republican Party might have gone in order to cover this up to make sure that Foley, who was winning in the polls, retained his seat. THAT is the real story, and that's what's going to have political reverberations. did Republican leaders avert their gaze and let him continue for nearly a year because nothing, but NOTHING, is more important than holding onto a congressional seat?

on one level, i do feel for him. everyone who's gay in DC knew about the Foley rumors (amongst others). the closet is a horrible place, one where men act in implusive and pathological ways that, while inexcusable, arise from a series of circumstance that i have felt act upon me, so i'm not as harsh with my condemnation as i might be in another context. i am not at all excusing Foley's actions, and i hope he suffers whatever legal consequences might arise, and i hope the Republicans suffer for the alleged cover-up of his behavior.

but there's a reason gay men trapped in homophobic institutions (like the GOP) behave in terrbly self-destructive ways, so i hope Foley gets the help he needs, and whatever punishments he deserves.
 
I think there's a distinct difference between looking at a magazine and/or Britney Spears and whatever a person does with that..and actually involving a human being and having direct communication with a human being-and one who you are in a position of authority over. I don't differentiate between an 8 year old and a 16 year old. A 52 year old (or any adult of any substantial age difference) having that sort of contact with a 16 year old is not appropriate and shouldn't be legal, period in my eyes. It isn't legal, it violates federal law.

I feel complete sympathy for what being a closeted gay person must be like (as limited as that is given I can't directly experience it), but once you involve other people in that, especially 16 year olds, it just takes it to a whole different level. You are not just hurting/potentially hurting yourself anymore.

I am not saying he's a pedophile, and I abhor that gay man/pedophile stereotype. Gay, straight, whatever-that is irrelevant to how wrong it is. It's all equally wrong.
 
MrsSpringsteen said:
I think there's a distinct difference between looking at a magazine and/or Britney Spears and whatever a person does with that..and actually involving a human being and having direct communication with a human being-and one who you are in a position of authority over. I don't differentiate between an 8 year old and a 16 year old. A 52 year old (or any adult of any substantial age difference) having that sort of contact with a 16 year old is not appropriate and shouldn't be legal, period in my eyes. It isn't legal, it violates federal law.



do you think there's a difference between looking at pictures of naked 8 year old girls and looking at pictures of naked 17 year old girls?

what about the age of consent? should it be 16 (as i think it is in DC and in many Western countries and US states) or should it be 18? should there be a difference in age of consent laws between gays and straights?

i suppose i do differentiate between an 8 year old and a 16 year old, insofar as one is pedophelia and the other is pederasty. you are absolutely right that a 52 year old shouldn't have anything to do with a 16 year old, and all of the looking-not-acting and authority issues, absolutely.

i'm just making a distinction and also drawing a parallel to the fact that much of popular culture revolves around the sexualization of mid-to-older teenaged girls, so i don't see why we should somehow think it's worse when an older gay man is interested in a teenaged boy than when an older straight man is interested in a teenaged girl. both are equally wrong, yet both don't, for me, rise to the level of a 52 year old man preying upon an 8 year old.

as for the stereotype ... well, as everyone on FYM knows, absolutely nothing makes me angrier, so i'm just trying to head off any discussion on that before it even starts.

and, for the record, this gay man is far more interested in muscled Mr. Clean types than, say, an Aaron Carter look alike.
 
Last edited:
Why are you all so outraged?

Tony Snow says these were just "some naughty e-mails."
 
anitram said:
Why are you all so outraged?

Tony Snow says these were just "some naughty e-mails."
:lol:






...and, THANK YOU Irvine. I stopped myself from posting this early (and now I am outraged because what someone else has made of it) - but I think your earlier post about "the closet", the GOP and D.C. was by far one of the greatest posts I have ever read in FYM. Thank you.


This story intrigues me on many levels. I am interested to see how the GOP reacts moving forward. I even listened to Rush today to listen to see how he would spin this.

I need to find better ways to spend my day off.
 
Last edited:
*shudder*

I just read the IM conversation between foley and the page.



I'm absolutely disgusted. I seriously feel sick to my stomach, that man needs help, I'm afraid it goes deeper than alcoholism.
 
i hope Hastert goes down if for no other reason than i'd relish the irony that of all the issues that this Congress deserves rebuking on -- the war, the grotesque spending, the pettiness -- what they might most be held accountable for is the protecting of a creepy sexual predator. after all, if they win election by getting bigots to the polls with laws that promise to stop boys from kissing each other, it only seems fitting that the protection of someone who kisses boys might bring down Speaker Hastert and possibly swing control of both Houses to the Democrats.
 
Irvine511 said:




i think Hastert should resign.

but i'm not outraged.

i just think it's sad.

He should have just married the kid real quick so the Democrats would leave him alone. Heck - he'd be the new Rosie O'Donnell!
 
AEON said:


He should have just married the kid real quick so the Democrats would leave him alone. Heck - he'd be the new Rosie O'Donnell!



:eyebrow:

what are you talking about?

(gays can't get married)
 
Irvine511 said:




:eyebrow:

what are you talking about?

(gays can't get married)

Can't they run off to Boston and get married? San Francisco? If he can't get married - then he should have stayed in office and made it is #1 priority.

After all - who are we to deny this man and his 16 year old lover their right to do...whatever it is they want to do...
 
AEON said:


Can't they run off to Boston and get married? San Francisco? If he can't get married - then he should have stayed in office and made it is #1 priority.

After all - who are we to deny this man and his 16 year old lover their right to do...whatever it is they want to do...



oh, i get it now.

anyway, no, neither of them are residents of Massachusetts, so i don't think getting married is an option. there are wonderful laws in the District regarding domestic partnerships, but those are available to, you know, consenting adults, not powerful men who prey upon younger, underaged subordinates.

and Foley's hypocrisy on Marriage Equality is getting him burned in effigy on the gay sites, but that's another story.

and the "right to do ... whatever it is they want to do" is a right that is accorded to adults, not to minors, and certainly not to adults who want to exploit minors.

though, he could have been like my college writing professor ... he had a student lover and then ran off and married her after graduation.

of course, these are things that straight people get to do, after all, they have the "right to do ... whatever it is they want to do."
 
You can debate the "what should the age of consent" issue all you want,

You can debate the "should we treat adults who proposition/molest 16-year-olds any different than adults who proposition/molest 8-year olds" issue all you want.

You can debate the age of consent for homosexuals vs. heterosexuals issue all you want.

The heart of the matter is that the law is the law. Foley apparently propositioned someone under the age of consent. He broke the law as it is currently written and is on the books and therefore should be punished. Period. End of sentence.

The law is what it is right now. You can debate changing those laws, but it won’t change the fact that at the time the "propositioning" took place, the act was illegal.
 
Back
Top Bottom