Congressman Foley resigns

[yolland]

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.

Done.

 

[BVS]

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.

Stop posting. Come back when you know the facts.

Your posts are becoming more and more troll like.

 

[yolland]

Allright guys, enough. I agree that AEON's post was unacceptable, but the point doesn't need to be reiterated over and over.

 

[BVS]

Sorry Yolland, I'm just getting tired of some of the outright hatred being spewed in here lately.

 

[VertigoGal]

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 haven't really posted in this thread cos really I'm just disgusted by Foley and every person who knew about it, regardless of politics. and I have nothing really to contribute.

but I actually was thinking about that the other day and had the same thought. even though it isn't exactly the main point of this story, that subtle implication does seem to be a common theme whenever any story like this comes out. I really hate the message that sends...

 

[daygloeyes2]

I have no issue with Mark Foley being gay. I have an issue with him hitting on underage pages.

 

[dazzlingamy]

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.

I do agree that i obviously don't know what its like to be gay, and the implications of what 'coming out' entails emotionally to a gay person, but my whole point is that, if you ARE gay, people know (like you said ppl knew about this in washington before it hit the news right?) or people suspect. I know it would be hell scary to publicly come out and suddenly you are branded 'the gay politician' but if you ARE gay, how farking stupid do you have to be to try hit on a 17 yr old subordinate?
I also do see a self destructive angle to this as well, but yet again don't think it matters one jot to what happened. This is a grown middle aged full fuctioning man, if he can't take responsibilty fully for his actions then who can?

*edit* just to say, i dont think you are defending him or not thinking he was a tool, i was just going back along the lines of my first point about responsibility

 

[diamond]

what's so funny about-
peace
love
and
understanding Pink Elephants?

 

[AEON]

Allright guys, enough. I agree that AEON's post was unacceptable, but the point doesn't need to be reiterated over and over.

I do apologize that my post caused such a firestorm. I simply wanted to point out that Pelosi is just being opportunistic.

 

[Irvine511]

I do apologize that my post caused such a firestorm. I simply wanted to point out that Pelosi is just being opportunistic.

sounds like the Pope apologizing for the firestorm his words started ... not for the words themselves.

 

[AEON]

sounds like the Pope apologizing for the firestorm his words started ... not for the words themselves.

Well, the fact is that Pelosi did march in a parade where NAMBLA was also marching. Does this mean she directly endorses them? No. However, if she was as "sickened" by pedophilia as she now claims to be - then I would think she would refuse to march until they were uninvited.

That was the point I was trying to make – that she is a hypocrite. I could have articulated this better.

 

[anitram]

From Time Magazine.

Every revolution begins with the power of an idea and ends when clinging to power is the only idea left.

 

[Irvine511]

Well, the fact is that Pelosi did march in a parade where NAMBLA was also marching. Does this mean she directly endorses them? No. However, if she was as "sickened" by pedophilia as she now claims to be - then I would think she would refuse to march until they were uninvited.

That was the point I was trying to make – that she is a hypocrite. I could have articulated this better.

you are really s t r e t c h i n g here. where's the hypocrisy?

all politicians who come from any sort of sophistocated, cosmopolitan American city aren't going to win elections without the support of the BGLT community -- Rudy Guiliani went to gay pride parades in NYC. if NAMBLA were present at a parade in NYC, would you say the same thing about Rudy?

chances are, Pelosi had no idea they were there, and again, i'll point back to the NORMAL example -- NAMBLA has a right to exist, even though they have no right whatsoever to practice what it is they wish to make legal. this is why the ACLU has defended NAMBLA in the past. it is a free speech issue, no matter how repulsive you and i might find that speech.

 

[martha]

I do apologize that my post caused such a firestorm. I simply wanted to point out that Pelosi is just being opportunistic.

We need a back-tracking smiley in here.

You're apologizing for the problems the post caused, not what you said in the post.

 

[deep]

I do apologize that my post caused such a firestorm. I simply wanted to point out that Pelosi is just being opportunistic.

feel free to use my words

you are right

i did jump the gun on this

I simply wanted to point out that Pelosi is just being opportunistic.

opportunistic?

seems to be the word used by Conservatives, to describe anyone that justly citicizes a member of the GOP.

when I hear it

I consider it an admission,
"Oh yeah, we are corrupt, you don't have to tell everybody, do you?"

 

[AEON]

you are really s t r e t c h i n g here. where's the hypocrisy?

all politicians who come from any sort of sophistocated, cosmopolitan American city aren't going to win elections without the support of the BGLT community -- Rudy Guiliani went to gay pride parades in NYC. if NAMBLA were present at a parade in NYC, would you say the same thing about Rudy?

chances are, Pelosi had no idea they were there, and again, i'll point back to the NORMAL example -- NAMBLA has a right to exist, even though they have no right whatsoever to practice what it is they wish to make legal. this is why the ACLU has defended NAMBLA in the past. it is a free speech issue, no matter how repulsive you and i might find that speech.

Well, I am not arguing about NAMBLA's right to exist. However - having that group in the parade is a sign of endorsement, in my opinion. If Bush joined a Fourth of July parade and the KKK just happened to follow along - you can imagine there would be quite an uproar (and there should be).

I do not take issue with a politician in a Gay Rights parade. I take issue with those that would allow NAMBLA in their parade. And I take issue with politicians that take a tough stance on a moral dilemma when it suits their needs, even though nothing about their past indicates they really do support their newfound position.

It sounds to me that you are equally disgusted by NAMBLA - would you really want them marching next to you in a Gay Rights parade? If pedophilia has nothing to do with homosexuality - then why in the heck allow them to be in the parade in the first place?

 

[Irvine511]

first, i have been to several gay pride parades (in SF, DC, and Brussels) and have never seen NAMBLA marching. in fact, i'm only aware of their existence through, first, South Park, and then through their defense by the ACLU.

let me ask you this: if you are pro-life, is it right to implicate you whenever someone shoots a doctor and bombs a clinic in the name of Christ? is a pro-life politician by default in support of such actions? because you're saying that Pelosi, by supporting gay rights, is by default in support of each and every group who sees themselves as belonging under the broad, broad banner of gay rights, even those which 99.99% of gay people find reprehensible, just as 99.99% of christians find bombing a clinic and shooting a doctor reprehensible.

 

[AEON]

first, i have been to several gay pride parades (in SF, DC, and Brussels) and have never seen NAMBLA marching. in fact, i'm only aware of their existence through, first, South Park, and then through their defense by the ACLU.

let me ask you this: if you are pro-life, is it right to implicate you whenever someone shoots a doctor and bombs a clinic in the name of Christ? is a pro-life politician by default in support of such actions? because you're saying that Pelosi, by supporting gay rights, is by default in support of each and every group who sees themselves as belonging under the broad, broad banner of gay rights, even those which 99.99% of gay people find reprehensible, just as 99.99% of christians find bombing a clinic and shooting a doctor reprehensible.

If I were a senator or a representative and I went to a Christian Family Day parade (just making that up) - and if I found out that of all the various Christian groups marching - one was a militant abortion clinic bombing group - then I would either refuse to march or only march on the condition they would not also march.

 

[deep]

If I were a senator or a representative and I went to a Christian Family Day parade (just making that up) - and if I found out that of all the various Christian groups marching - one was a militant abortion clinic bombing group - then I would either refuse to march or only march on the condition they would not also march.

Many GOP politicians have associations or involvements with Operation Rescue and it's members.

 

[yolland]

Can anyone provide a news story documenting NAMBLA's participation in whichever parade it was that Pelosi also marched in? Everything I've been able to find seems to derive from the same current American Spectator article, which reports on her having marched in the same San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade (in 2001) as Harry Hay, a gay rights pioneer (now dead, then 89; politically active from the 50s through to the early 80s) who never himself belonged to NAMBLA but did oppose their exclusion from the LGBT movement, which so far as I can tell dates to the mid-80s (they emerged as a splinter faction post-Stonewall, and were never part of the mainstream Gay Liberation movement). I've found nothing about NAMBLA as an organization having participated in this 2001 parade, nor in any other since the mid-80s. But perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places.

 

[deep]

facts are a funny thing

 

[verte76]

I remember seeing people with off the wall stuff on their signs, like "Kill the Klan" at demonstrations I went to during the Reagan years when I was protesting their Latin American policies. I disapproved of these signs, but I did demonstrate with them. I didn't associate with the ultraleft movement at all, but they showed up at some of our demonstrations and we let them demonstrate. I remember some dumbass group held up the statue of Vulcan here in Birmingham, claiming that the statue symbolized oppression. I wasn't anywhere near that particular demonstration. It was too stupid for words.

 

[Irvine511]

Can anyone provide a news story documenting NAMBLA's participation in whichever parade it was that Pelosi also marched in? Everything I've been able to find seems to derive from the same current American Spectator article, which reports on her having marched in the same San Francisco LGBT Pride Parade (in 2001) as Harry Hay, a gay rights pioneer (now dead, then 89; politically active from the 50s through to the early 80s) who never himself belonged to NAMBLA but did oppose their exclusion from the LGBT movement, which so far as I can tell dates to the mid-80s (they emerged as a splinter faction post-Stonewall, and were never part of the mainstream Gay Liberation movement). I've found nothing about NAMBLA as an organization having participated in this 2001 parade, nor in any other since the mid-80s. But perhaps I'm looking in the wrong places.

which would probably explain why i've never heard of NAMBLA at a gay pride parade.

so ... let's get back to discussing what really matters: how a creepy old man sexually harassed some high school boys and whether or not the Republicans covered his ass because he was a very popular congressman with a very secure seat in a closely divided House.

let's ignore the civil war in Iraq, and nuclear tests in North Korea.



it's all so depressing, right now. the world.

 

[anitram]

so ... let's get back to discussing what really matters: how a creepy old man sexually harassed some high school boys and whether or not the Republicans covered his ass because he was a very popular congressman with a very secure seat in a closely divided House.

Well, just breaking from The Washington Post:

A Republican congressman knew of disgraced former representative Mark Foley's inappropriate Internet exchanges as far back as 2000 and personally confronted Foley about his communications.

A spokeswoman for Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) confirmed yesterday that a former page showed the congressman Internet messages that had made the youth feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley (R-Fla.) was taking their e-mail relationship. Last week, when the Foley matter erupted, a Kolbe staff member suggested to the former page that he take the matter to the clerk of the House, Karen Haas, said Kolbe's press secretary, Korenna Cline.

The revelation pushes back by at least five years the date when a member of Congress has acknowledged learning of Foley's behavior with former pages.

 

[yolland]

Well, looks like Pat Buchanan's been making these claims too, and not just about Pelosi.

Scarborough Country, MSNBC, Oct. 5

BUCHANAN: Let me say this, Joe. I mean, look, we are now hearing that this flamer, Mr. Foley, was going after kids as early as 19 -- I mean, 20 -- I mean, 1998. I mean, you knew Foley. Did you know he was this kind of flamer who was after pages?
....................
Ms. Pelosi has marched in gay pride parades with the North America Man-Boy Love Association, NAMBLA, which—who are pedophiles who are trying to get the laws repealed for sex between men and boys! If she's been marching with pedophiles, is she credible standing up there saying, I‘m shocked, shocked that some Republican is after 17-year-old pages?
.....................
Let me tell you something. Two national figures, Rudy Giuliani, Hillary Rodham Clinton marched in gay pride parades in New York in which I believe that NAMBLA floats were moved right along, and these are child predators who are arguing for getting rid of--

SCARBOROUGH: All right, but Pat --

BUCHANAN: -- laws between men and boys --

SCARBOROUGH: -- that will not --

BUCHANAN: They're marching with that go into --

[crosstalk]

Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer, CNN, Oct. 8

BUCHANAN: Now, Ms. Pelosi, it's my understanding, has marched in gay pride parades in which they've had floats of the North American Man-Boy Love Association, which wants to eliminate all age of consent laws. And it's an outrageous group, in my judgment, a criminal group almost in what it recommends. But I've not seen the Democrats come down and condemn them, and I believe Senator Clinton has marched in a parade with a similar float.

Unfortunately, neither presenter asked Buchanan for his sources on this, and I still haven't found any; there are several blogs and message boards now repeating his Hillary claim (also without providing documentation), and as mentioned concerning the Pelosi claim, there's also the American Spectator article, though it hardly supports Buchanan's version. I did find a few older blogs alleging Giuliani had "marched with NAMBLA," though the only thing remotely resembling documentation I could find for that was a 2001 "Concerned Women for America" brief on Giuliani's "pro-homosexual" exploits which passingly asserted that "n 1992, during his first run for mayor, Giuliani took part in a homosexual 'pride' parade that included a contingent of pedophile activists marching behind a banner for NAMBLA" (no sources provided). NAMBLA isn't mentioned, however, in NYT's list of registered participants for that year's Gay Pride parade (June 28 edition).

But I'd appreciate it if someone could prove me wrong, because if I'm not than it seems to me this is jaw-droppingly baseless slander.

And I must say, some of the filth I had to read through trying to track down leads on this stuff made me sick to my stomach. And I'm not talking about NAMBLA.

 

[AEON]

Yolland,

It is the Pat Buchanan argument that has been repeated on the news and picked up by editorialists and then announced on talk radio. They all speak of this as if it is fact. That was what prompted my posting.

 

[martha]

It's always a good idea to believe everything Pat Buchanan says. That practice will never get you in over your head.

 

[Dreadsox]

Go to Google News. There must be a great Left Wing conspiracy to suppress this story. Buchannan is apparently the ONLY source to this shite.

 

[BVS]

Buchannan?! Yes, that's always my first source for the truth.

 

[Irvine511]

anyway ... something much more important than baseless NAMBLA sightings:

[q]Report: Rep. Confronted Foley in 2000
Rep. Jim Kolbe of Arizona Reportedly Confronted Foley on Web Chats With Pages As Early As 2000

Talk Politics: Join the Debate
By HOPE YEN

WASHINGTON Oct 8, 2006 (AP)— Rep. Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., confronted then-Rep. Mark Foley about his Internet communications with teenagers as early as 2000, according to a newspaper report.

The Washington Post reported Sunday night that a former page showed Kolbe some Internet messages from Foley that had made the page uncomfortable. Kolbe's press secretary, Korenna Cline, told the Post that a Kolbe staff member advised the page last week to discuss the matter with the clerk of the House.

Cline denied the messages were sexually explicit, telling the Post only that they had made the former page uncomfortable. She said "corrective action" was taken, although she did not know whether that went beyond Kolbe's confrontation with Foley.

Rank-and-file Republicans, meanwhile, sought to mount a public defense of Speaker Dennis Hastert over the scandal, which is threatening their congressional control one month before the elections.

But a House GOP leader under fire for his handling of the scandal involving former Rep. Mark Foley canceled a national broadcast appearance and one Republican lawmaker said those who participated in a cover-up would have to resign.

"Anybody that hindered this in any kind of way, tried to step in the way of hiding this, covering it up, is going to have to step down. Whoever that is," said Rep. Tom Davis, R-Va.

The House ethics committee is investigating the matter. If it finds evidence of a cover-up, the punishment could range from a mild rebuke in a committee report to a House vote of censure or expulsion.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory?id=2543551

[/q]