Congressman Mark Foley resigned

[Pedro]

That was my earlier question. If they knew why didn't they get him out. I really think it's more of the "good 'ole boys" club situation more than GOP politics. And maybe he knew about their dirty laundry too! Yeah, kinda like "cast the first stone".

It wasn't done because during the Tom Delay era the GOP was more focused in the machine than it was in reality. Once he was gone, they just had a few days to deal with this before the campaign got hot. Dennis Hastert should have done it a year ago.

 

[Pedro]

I agree with the point you are trying to make to Pedro. However, I hope you see that in this post you are doing EXACTLY what you accuse Pedro of doing! Your second sentence is dead on but the by saying "the Democrats want you to believe about Republicans" you fall into the same generic stereotyping that Pedro was doing.

I am blaming the GOP for running on values while keeping a man known to be involved in sexual activities with a minor in the missing and exploited children caucus for a YEAR.

Such as getting pervs like Mark Foley away from our children.

Right, and that should have been done a YEAR ago.

Yep, we got a bone and we are going to chew on it!

 

[RiverRat]

"Is this guy a married man? Like others have said, the big problem is he is having these inappropriate conversations with minors."

Foley is not married.

 

[Pedro]

"Is this guy a married man? Like others have said, the big problem is he is having these inappropriate conversations with minors."

Foley is not married.

Yes, he is not married. Don't get me wrong, I had no problem with the man before this, it is a very sad story and I am sure he couldn't help himself.

But DH should have remove him a year ago!

It's just politics, nothing personal, people do what they have to do.

 

[HeartofTexas]

IMO, there are three problems here.

One, this man was abusing underage children. "Nuff said on that topic.

Two, Washington knew about this particular problem and covered it up.

Three, sexual cover-ups in Washington have been going on for years and years.

What angers me the most, though, is that this man was chairman of the caucus for missing and exploited children. When you have the fox guarding the hen house, and all of the other foxes know that he's guarding the hen house and do absolutely nothing about it, then there's more than one hen with a problem that needs addressing.

Where is the public's outrage over this being allowed to happen for a year with no disciplinary actions against Foley?

 

[HeartofTexas]

As you can see from the cases listed below, sex with underrage children is a problem for both parties:

Rep. Fred Richmond (D-N.Y.)
In April 1978, Richmond was arrested in Washington for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old boy.

Rep. Robert Bauman (R-Md.)
On Oct. 3, 1980, Bauman, a leading "pro-family" conservative, pleaded innocent to a charge that he committed oral sodomy on a teenage boy in Washington.

1983 - Reps. Dan Crane (R-Ill.) and Gerry Studds (D-Mass.)
The House ethics committee on July 14, 1983, announced that Crane and Studds had sexual relationships with teenage congressional pages – Crane with a 17-year-old female in 1980, Studds with a 17-year-old male in 1973. Both admitted the charges that same day, and Studds acknowledged he was gay.

Rep. Donald "Buz" Lukens (R-Ohio)
On Feb. 1, 1989, an Ohio TV station aired a videotape of a confrontation between Lukens, a conservative activist, and the mother of a Columbus teenager. The mother charged that Lukens had been paying to have sex with her daughter since she was 13.

Rep. Mel Reynolds (D-Ill.)
Freshman Reynolds was indicted on Aug. 19, 1994, on charges of having sex with a 16-year-old campaign worker and then pressuring her to lie about it.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/clinton/congress.htm

 

[Pedro]

That is the point H. of T., they kept him in that caucus for a year and now they pretend to made of this a "gay people" issue. Like all gay men and woman like underage kids and that is wrong.

 

[SadieMae]

That is the point H. of T., they kept him in that caucus for a year and now they pretend to made of this a "gay people" issue. Like all gay men and woman like underage kids and that is wrong.

I agree with you on this. This is NOT about being gay, it's about being a pedophile. Pedophiles can be hetro or gay. I have many gay friends of both sexes. And I can say they are some very caring and decent people. My gay male friends are "uncles" to my sons, and they don't have a problem with their "Uncle Rob" being gay. My boys know there is a difference between gay and pedophile. Their Uncle Rob has been the closest thing to a father they have ever had.

ETA: He'd also be the first in line to kick A$$ if anyone ever touched my boys inappropriately!

 

[JDB]

my husband coaches hockey- started when my son was 5--- he is now 10--- so after 5 years of coaching these kids--- and loving them to death--- he has found he cant enjoy it like he did--- just for what you said-- because of all the NUT casses involved with children...he finds himself so concerned that if he puts his hand on a boys shoulder when talking to him, a parent might go to the deep end---- point being--- even the GOOD ones invloved with children, now have to step back, when their intentions are nothing but gold...yet my husband understands, as he has 2 children----- it is such a sad----sad afair--
the bad soooooooooooooooooooooooo screw it up for the good-:furious:

I know what you mean. I coached my sons Little Leauge tem from 1989-1999. Before we even had a practice we would call a meeting with all parents.Letting them know no kid will be with only 1 coach after a practice we would all stay.We as parents took the extra steps to make sure no one could say a word.During games We made sure when we did touch thier kids we did it right in front of the parents. So they could also listen to what was being said.The parents I had for 10 years were great.They never doubted the coaches or managers. They also knew that if thier child needed a ride home from either a game or practice it would not just be a coach and kid. we made sure we had more then 3 in the car.

 

[Details]

WTF!!!! From Palm Beach Post

"Congressional staff members who asked not to be identified said it was widely known among Hill staffers and some House leaders that Foley had been engaging in inappropriate conduct and language with young aides.

One highly placed staff member said Foley's abrupt resignation may have been demanded by Republican leaders who have been aware for some time about allegations of inappropriate behavior."

They knew about his behavior????:banghead: Now he's been exposed and the "leaders" just now "demand" his resignation? All the ones that knew of his behavior need to get their butts kicked out too!!! :furious: GEEEEEZUSCHRIST!!!!

Full story at:
http://www.palmbeachpost.com/localnews/content/local_news/epaper/2006/09/30/s1a_foley_0930.html?cxtype=rss&cxsvc=7&cxcat=17

That's what I was afraid of - the standard political thing - defend your own, no matter what horrible thing they are doing, to avoid losing power. I hope we find out more about that - who has known and kept quiet - and how much did they know? Rumors - OK, they can easily believe the rumors to be malicious gossip- but if they knew facts, then I'm ticked, and they need to pay a price too.

 

[Details]

If I might suggest? Let's leave the political party out of it, and just go after those who cover up for pedophile politicians, of any party. If there is some party bias to coverups, then this method will penalize that party appropriately. If there isn't, it'll go after the right people in any case - those who would cover up for the inevitable pedophile (or rapist). Never mind that this time it's the GOP - higher ups knew about the problem, and just left this guy, not only in office, but even in a very sensitive, inappropriate committe!!! Those who knew shoudl be punished, should lose their power because they apparently cannot use is appropriately.

 

[Details]

More info http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/30/foley.quits/index.html
We'll see how, and if, the investigation goes. I've a nasty feeling that sending it to the commitee, rather than starting an investigation immediately, is a stalling move, in hopes the heat will die down, and the people who knew but did nothing can be spared - but we'll see how the House Ethics Committee handles it.

 

[Details]

Here is Time's view on it:
http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,1541195,00.html?cnn=yes

Seems a little whitewashy - saying the emails were maybe innocuous or innocent? No - "horny" is not innocuous. I'd like to take your shorts off is not innocuous.

 

[Shadow205]

IMO, there are three problems here.

One, this man was abusing underage children. "Nuff said on that topic.

Two, Washington knew about this particular problem and covered it up.

Three, sexual cover-ups in Washington have been going on for years and years.

What angers me the most, though, is that this man was chairman of the caucus for missing and exploited children. When you have the fox guarding the hen house, and all of the other foxes know that he's guarding the hen house and do absolutely nothing about it, then there's more than one hen with a problem that needs addressing.

Where is the public's outrage over this being allowed to happen for a year with no disciplinary actions against Foley?

HoT,

When you read this, did you think "Johnny Gosch"? I did.

 

[Details]

Just one more - some about who knew. They keep whitewashing the real tone of the emails.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060930/ap_on_go_co/foley_reynolds

 

[Marthatex]

Something like this is wrong, but I don't think it is the fault of the political party. When people get it in their head to do something like this, it isn't the party doing it. It is one individual who does it and is responsible for it.

It's the cover-up that is the fault of the political party, or at least those leading it. In this case.

It's too bad when the cover-up then becomes center stage, instead of dealing with the crime and the perpetrator to begin with.

 

[Details]

It's the cover-up that is the fault of the political party, or at least those leading it. In this case.

It's too bad when the cover-up then becomes center stage, instead of dealing with the crime and the perpetrator to begin with.

The crime is being dealt with - the cover up is still what needs to be found out. Anyone who would cover up this type of crime must be found out, and does not belong making the laws and possibly protecting other powerful criminals, in Congress, or on whatever political party or organization they might belong to.

 

[Pedro]

It's the cover-up that is the fault of the political party, or at least those leading it. In this case.

It's too bad when the cover-up then becomes center stage, instead of dealing with the crime and the perpetrator to begin with.

Yes, but this is an election year and people does what they are suppose to do.

We got a bone, we are chewing.

 

[Marthatex]

Oh, I'm not saying the cover-up shouldn't be investigated and consequences rendered; it's very important.

I meant that it's a shame it takes away from concentration on the original crime, which should have been the problem to be dealt with. (A shame for the Republicans; why did they do such a stupid thing?)

 

[Pedro]

Oh, I'm not saying the cover-up shouldn't be investigated and consequences rendered; it's very important.

I meant that it's a shame it takes away from concentration on the original crime, which should have been the problem to be dealt with.

That happens for two reasons:

1. - The GOP is trying hard to separate themselves from the issue, anything they said will look like a justification.

2. - The democrats think there is a good chance to capitalize in the story by moving the issue beyond Foley and into the leadership of the GOP in the house.

See, oil prices went down, so this is a treat.

Politics, just that, nothing personal.

However I can tell you that I see no reason to keep Foley on that caucus, I can only compare the behaviour of the leadership of the GOP to that of the leadership of the Catholic Church in the US.