Congressman Mark Foley resigned

[Marthatex]

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./QUOTE]


This is very dangerous thinking in my opnion. An adult CAN help himself, a two year old can not help themselves. If he had these compulsions, then he needed to get help. Go see a therapist, doctor, lock himself in his home with no computeror phone, get himself castrated for goodness sake !!! Just do something!!. He CHOSE not to help himself. I am quite certain he could help himself!!!!

mjak

If it's a sexual addiction or compulsion - compare it to alcoholism or drug addiction - they don't really WANT to get help, because they want the next HIGH.

Often it takes an intervention, or tough love to force an addict to get help, or someone with serious depression or mental problems.

This man was addicted to what he did, to the point he snuck around and lied to cover up, and what's happening to him now is TOUGH CONSEQUENCES.

I agree that he could have gotten help, but I doubt that he wanted to badly enough.

 

[Pedro]

Here is a timeline from ThinkProgress.org. As a side note, it corresponds to the timelines presented in today's NYT and W. Post:

2003 — Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) has sexually explicit IM exchanges with an underage boy who worked as a Congressional page. [ABC News, 9/29/06]

2005 — Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) sends inappropriate emails to another former Congressional page. [CREW]

SEPTEMBER 2005 — Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA), who sponsored the page, learns “of the e-mails from a reporter.” [AP, 9/29/06; CQ, 9/30/06]

FALL 2005 — “Tim Kennedy, a staff assistant in the [Speaker J. Denis Hastert’s] Office, received a telephone call from Congressman Rodney Alexander’s Chief of Staff who indicated that he had an email exchange between Congressman Foley and a former House page…[Mike] Stokke [Deputy Chief of Staff for Speaker Hastert] called the Clerk and asked him to come to the Speaker’s Office so that he could put him together with Congressman Alexander’s Chief of Staff.” [Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

LATE 2005 — Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), Chairman of the House Page Board, “was notified by the then Clerk of the House, who manages the Page Program, that he had been told by Congressman Rodney Alexander (R-LA) about an email exchange between Congressman Foley and a former House Page.” Shimkus interviewed Foley and told him “to cease all contact with this former house page.” He did not inform Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI), the only Democrat on the House page Board. [Roll Call, 9/29/06]

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006 — Alexander tells NRCC chairman Tom Reynolds about “the existence of e-mails between Mark Foley and a former page of Mr. Alexander’s.” Reynolds tells Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) about the emails and his conversation with Alexander. [Reynolds Statement, 9/30/06; Roll Call, 9/30/06; Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

SPRING 2006 — House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) learns of “inappropriate ‘contact’ between Foley and a 16-year-old page.” After leaning about Foley’s conduct, Boehner told Speaker of the House J. Denis Hastert who assured Boehner he would “take care of it.” Later, Boehner changed his story and told the Washington Post he didn’t remember whether he talked to Hastert. [Washington Post, 9/30/06; New York Times, 10/1/06]

JULY 27, 2006 — Foley, still co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus, attends a signing ceremony at the White House for the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. [White House, 9/27/06; Talkingpointsmemo, 9/30/06; Washington Post, 10/1/06]

SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 — ABC publishes emails between Foley and former page. [ABC, 9/28/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — Foley resigns. [ABC, 9/29/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — ABC publishes sexually explict Instant Messages between Foley and several former pages. [ABC, 9/29/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — “Aides to the speaker [Hastert] say he was not aware until last week of inappropriate behavior by Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., who resigned on Friday after portions of racy e-mail exchanges between him and current and former underage congressional pages became public.” [Chicago Tribune, 9/30/06]

SEPTEMBER 30, 2006 — Hastert admits he was told about the emails by Reynolds in the spring. [Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

 

[mjak]

If it's a sexual addiction or compulsion - compare it to alcoholism or drug addiction - they don't really WANT to get help, because they want the next HIGH.

Often it takes an intervention, or tough love to force an addict to get help, or someone with serious depression or mental problems.

This man was addicted to what he did, to the point he snuck around and lied to cover up, and what's happening to him now is TOUGH CONSEQUENCES.

I agree that he could have gotten help, but I doubt that he wanted to badly enough.

I take a very tough stand on the topic of addictions. As an adult who grew up in the home of a father who was a drug addict I believe adults make a choice to continue there addictions. Where I am symapthetic to the difficulties of dealing with addiction I firmly believe adults have a responsiblity both to themselves and maybe even more importantly to these they hurt by there addictions to get help. They CAN get help they choose not to. I believe it is a choice. When the choice to continue an addiction results in hurting a child, spouse or another human being then I believe the addict is fully responsible for the pain they cause others and if it is criminal hurt then they should be held accountable. An adult has a choice to live a life that is distructive to themsleves they do not have the right (because of an addiction) to be distructive to others.

mjak

 

[Marthatex]

I take a very tough stand on the topic of addictions. As an adult who grew up in the home of a father who was a drug addict I believe adults make a choice to continue there addictions. Where I am symapthetic to the difficulties of dealing with addiction I firmly believe adults have a responsiblity both to themselves and maybe even more importantly to these they hurt by there addictions to get help. They CAN get help they choose not to. I believe it is a choice. When the choice to continue an addiction results in hurting a child, spouse or another human being then I believe the addict is fully responsible for the pain they cause others and if it is criminal hurt then they should be held accountable. An adult has a choice to live a life that is distructive to themsleves they do not have the right (because of an addiction) to be distructive to others.

mjak

If that were true, every addicted person would just quit drinking and smoking TOMORROW. Nothing to it.

Ohh, this is bad, I'm hurting my family, think I'll just quit.

In reality it's more like: YOU'RE GETTING A DIVORCE IF YOU DON't QUIT

Or, YOU'RE LOSING YOUR JOB PRONTO

Or, YOU'RE GOING TO DIE SOON IF YOU DON'T QUIT

You can't tell me it doesn't often take the riot act or tough love to get people into treatment. The one who goes on his own is certainly to be commended.

After the addiction sets in, we are controlled by the "addiction talking to us"; and I have had experience with it in my family as well, as well as a brother-in-law who is a psychiatrist and treats addictions.

I definitely believe in personal responsibility also; and hopefully in most of us, that keeps us from getting too deep into a bad habit or addiction to begin with.

Also I think women tend to go for help and get out of their addictions more easily than men do; I think that is proven in the research.

 

[Marthatex]

Here is a timeline from ThinkProgress.org. As a side note, it corresponds to the timelines presented in today's NYT and W. Post:

2003 — Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) has sexually explicit IM exchanges with an underage boy who worked as a Congressional page. [ABC News, 9/29/06]

2005 — Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) sends inappropriate emails to another former Congressional page. [CREW]

SEPTEMBER 2005 — Rep. Rodney Alexander (R-LA), who sponsored the page, learns “of the e-mails from a reporter.” [AP, 9/29/06; CQ, 9/30/06]

FALL 2005 — “Tim Kennedy, a staff assistant in the [Speaker J. Denis Hastert’s] Office, received a telephone call from Congressman Rodney Alexander’s Chief of Staff who indicated that he had an email exchange between Congressman Foley and a former House page…[Mike] Stokke [Deputy Chief of Staff for Speaker Hastert] called the Clerk and asked him to come to the Speaker’s Office so that he could put him together with Congressman Alexander’s Chief of Staff.” [Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

LATE 2005 — Rep. John Shimkus (R-IL), Chairman of the House Page Board, “was notified by the then Clerk of the House, who manages the Page Program, that he had been told by Congressman Rodney Alexander (R-LA) about an email exchange between Congressman Foley and a former House Page.” Shimkus interviewed Foley and told him “to cease all contact with this former house page.” He did not inform Rep. Dale Kildee (D-MI), the only Democrat on the House page Board. [Roll Call, 9/29/06]

FEBRUARY/MARCH 2006 — Alexander tells NRCC chairman Tom Reynolds about “the existence of e-mails between Mark Foley and a former page of Mr. Alexander’s.” Reynolds tells Speaker J. Dennis Hastert (R-IL) about the emails and his conversation with Alexander. [Reynolds Statement, 9/30/06; Roll Call, 9/30/06; Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

SPRING 2006 — House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) learns of “inappropriate ‘contact’ between Foley and a 16-year-old page.” After leaning about Foley’s conduct, Boehner told Speaker of the House J. Denis Hastert who assured Boehner he would “take care of it.” Later, Boehner changed his story and told the Washington Post he didn’t remember whether he talked to Hastert. [Washington Post, 9/30/06; New York Times, 10/1/06]

JULY 27, 2006 — Foley, still co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus, attends a signing ceremony at the White House for the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006. [White House, 9/27/06; Talkingpointsmemo, 9/30/06; Washington Post, 10/1/06]

SEPTEMBER 28, 2006 — ABC publishes emails between Foley and former page. [ABC, 9/28/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — Foley resigns. [ABC, 9/29/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — ABC publishes sexually explict Instant Messages between Foley and several former pages. [ABC, 9/29/06]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — “Aides to the speaker [Hastert] say he was not aware until last week of inappropriate behavior by Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., who resigned on Friday after portions of racy e-mail exchanges between him and current and former underage congressional pages became public.” [Chicago Tribune, 9/30/06]

SEPTEMBER 30, 2006 — Hastert admits he was told about the emails by Reynolds in the spring. [Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

Thanks for the timeline; the facts.

Interesting that the only Democratic member of the Page Committee wasn't told last year. Partisanship should always come ahead of committee responsibilities, I suppose.

I'm surprised Hastert dropped the ball like that. I always thought he was a pretty decent guy.

This probably should be in the political forum, as it involves a political cover-up, IMO.

 

[HeartofTexas]

SEPTEMBER 29, 2006 — “Aides to the speaker [Hastert] say he was not aware until last week of inappropriate behavior by Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., who resigned on Friday after portions of racy e-mail exchanges between him and current and former underage congressional pages became public.” [Chicago Tribune, 9/30/06]

SEPTEMBER 30, 2006 — Hastert admits he was told about the emails by Reynolds in the spring. [Hastert Statement, 9/30/06]

Gee, I wonder what lightbulb kind of moment happened to Hastert that in a mere 24-hour period he was able to recall something on the 30th that he never even knew about on the 29th.

It's this kind of cover-up and lies that make my blood boil. On the one hand you have a pedophile in office and on the other hand you have someone in office covering up for him. And these are the people we not only vote to represent us, but our tax dollars pay their salary? I ask again... where is the OUTRAGE? When are Americans going to stand up and say, "I've had enough... I want accountability... I want more than lip service paid to family values!".

 

[IdahoMom]

If Hastert covered it up, then he should resign too.

 

[Shadow205]

WASHINGTON — A spokesman for the Florida Department of Law Enforcement confirmed late Saturday the agency is deciding whether to press charges against former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley, who hastily resigned from office Friday.

"We will be discussing this matter with the FBI in an effort to determine if there are grounds for a criminal investigation and if so, who has jurisdiction," said Tom Berlinger, chief media spokesman for the FDLE.
Berlinger said the decision would be made this week. He added the FDLE had not contacted Foley about the matter.


FBI officials could not be reached for comment Saturday. Foley, who served in the U.S. House of Representatives for 12 years, resigned Friday after reports he exchanged a series of sexually explicit instant messages with a congressional page who is still in high school.

more at the link http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/florida_news/article/0,2820,TCP_24432_5034057,00.html

 

[Marthatex]

If Hastert covered it up, then he should resign too.

Seems he has a "fuzzy" memory about being told about it.

This is going to get interesting. Can you imagine not remembering something like that being brought up in your office?

 

[Pedro]

Memory is a matter of timing, mid-term election with 25 seat in dispute= bad memory.

But this is a very sad day for the house. We should let the investigation proceed and then those with legal and/or political responsibility pay for it.

 

[AlwaysShocked]

It is obvious that Hastert had to decide whether or not to keep lying about what he knew and when he knew it. He has now apparently decided to tell the truth. It will be interesting to see what this newfound truthfulness does to his political career.

I agree that anyone who knew about this pedophile and his actions, then did nothing about it and even kept him on the committee deserves to lose their position also.

 

[Details]

Seems he has a "fuzzy" memory about being told about it.

This is going to get interesting. Can you imagine not remembering something like that being brought up in your office?

I can imagine that being true in one, and only one case. If you routinely are told about, and handle issues (oh, btw, Rep A is sending sexually explicit messages to an underage, and Reb B is having an affair with one who let him in return for not being fired, and Rep C is taking bribes, oh, and Rep D went and sent another message to their underage page too!) like that. I'd prefer not to think that is true.

 

[Details]

If that were true, every addicted person would just quit drinking and smoking TOMORROW. Nothing to it.

Ohh, this is bad, I'm hurting my family, think I'll just quit.

In reality it's more like: YOU'RE GETTING A DIVORCE IF YOU DON't QUIT

Or, YOU'RE LOSING YOUR JOB PRONTO

Or, YOU'RE GOING TO DIE SOON IF YOU DON'T QUIT

You can't tell me it doesn't often take the riot act or tough love to get people into treatment. The one who goes on his own is certainly to be commended.

After the addiction sets in, we are controlled by the "addiction talking to us"; and I have had experience with it in my family as well, as well as a brother-in-law who is a psychiatrist and treats addictions.

I definitely believe in personal responsibility also; and hopefully in most of us, that keeps us from getting too deep into a bad habit or addiction to begin with.

Also I think women tend to go for help and get out of their addictions more easily than men do; I think that is proven in the research.

I don't know which is true - but it sounds to me like both concepts have the same response to someone with an addiction - tough love. Whether you believe they are able to control their behavior, so you don't give an inch, or you know that the addiction is controlling them and they won't stop until rock bottom, so you don't give an inch - seems both concepts work out to the same result.

 

[Shadow205]

WASHINGTON — Sexually explicit messages from former Rep. Mark Foley to one former congressional page might be just the tip of the iceberg, the leader of an alumni association for former congressional pages told Scripps Howard News Service on Saturday.

While Foley resigned this week after published reports of "friendly" e-mails to one 16-year-old male page and the pending broadcast of more sexually explicit instant messages, similar graphic messages from him were received by at least three other teenage boys who once worked in the page program, said Matthew Loraditch, a Maryland college senior who runs the U.S. House Page Alumni Association's Internet message board.
I've known about them (messages) for several years now," he said Saturday.


"It was more like, 'Hey, look at this,' " said Loraditch, 21, who served in the page program in the 2001-02 session. "I don't think the people in question felt that uncomfortable. It was more, 'Ooh, look at that creepy guy.'

"It was definitely crossing-the-line stuff. The instant message stuff, and stuff I've seen and heard about, definitely couldn't be misconstrued" as merely "friendly" or innocent, Loraditch said.

Loraditch said during his time on Capitol Hill, Foley was one of the members of Congress who expressed what appeared to be a sincere interest in the young pages, often visiting the areas where they congregate in the corner of the House of Representatives chamber to chat or offer stories and advice.

Loraditch said he and other pages viewed Foley as gregarious and "flaky" at the time, and that he offered several of them, not including Loraditch, his personal e-mail when they were graduating from the program and saying goodbyes. After Loraditch returned to Maryland and began attending college at Towson University, several male former pages told him they had received Internet messages that were similar to the graphic messages first reported by ABC News last week.

more at the link http://www.tcpalm.com/tcp/florida_news/article/0,2820,TCP_24432_5034317,00.html

 

[mjak]

I don't know which is true - but it sounds to me like both concepts have the same response to someone with an addiction - tough love. Whether you believe they are able to control their behavior, so you don't give an inch, or you know that the addiction is controlling them and they won't stop until rock bottom, so you don't give an inch - seems both concepts work out to the same result.

The difference with these two concepts is tough love ( as I see it refered to here ) puts the responsibility of making the person stop the addictive behavior on another person. I believe that behavior lies soley within the individual. I think tough love is great because it sets up boundries for people and alows people not to end up as enablers. I know addiction is very touch. I unfortunitly, have many of the same mental health issues as my father which led him down the road to addiction. I have not become an addict, Instead I deal with my issues and feel I have a responsibility to my family, society and to myself to be the best functioning person I can be. This conversation is getting away from the issue of the thread and I apologize for that. I just think a grown man who can function in a political position as he did has no excuse for his pedafhile behaviors other then he wanted to behave that way. Addiction in this situation is a cop out in my opinion.

mjak

 

[BarnGoddess]

I just posted in the PP about this subject. My oldest son served as a page for our Florida Congressman, Bill Lehman, back in the early 80's as a senior in high school. I am not happy about hearing a Congressman was exploiting a page. His resignation was overdue. What goes on in our Congress is definetly not exclusive to one political pary or the other. For Democratic leaders to immediately attempt to politicize this tragic situation is contemptible.

Briefly, as I posted at length in the Political Pavillion, my son attended a party hosted by the aides of a very well known Democrat Senator. There he learned not to mix beer and hard liquor and also learned the effects of marajuana.

I also did computer input for campaign mailing lists when we lived in DC. Temporarily I was paid with numerous pay checks from the US Treasury. In order to have you, as taxpayers, pay for my work, I was sworn in numerous times as an "aide", on the payroll of a Senator or Congressman. There was always room in the budget for help that was not used up. It wasn't exclusive to a particular political party. Democrats and Republicans equally employed this little "loophole" for getting voter lists turned into lists for campaign mailings.

Sit back, and think this out.

 

[southcitymom]

The difference with these two concepts is tough love ( as I see it refered to here ) puts the responsibility of making the person stop the addictive behavior on another person. I believe that behavior lies soley within the individual. I think tough love is great because it sets up boundries for people and alows people not to end up as enablers. I know addiction is very touch. I unfortunitly, have many of the same mental health issues as my father which led him down the road to addiction. I have not become an addict, Instead I deal with my issues and feel I have a responsibility to my family, society and to myself to be the best functioning person I can be. This conversation is getting away from the issue of the thread and I apologize for that. I just think a grown man who can function in a political position as he did has no excuse for his pedafhile behaviors other then he wanted to behave that way. Addiction in this situation is a cop out in my opinion.

mjak

One of my best friend's husband is a recovering sex addict. There's a place in his fellowship's literature that states "we are not responsible for our addiction, but we are responsible for our recovery." Addiction is never an excuse for the things people do, but it is very often a precipitating factor.

I have no idea if this congressman is a sex addict, but it wouldn't be surprising if he is.

Pedophelia is a sexual orientation - that's different from sex addiction. I know of no way to change a person's sexual orientation. If a person is a pedophile and makes the decision not to act on it or to only act on it in fantasy, they are sentencing themselves to a pretty solitary sex life. I'm not opposed to that - I think it's much better than the alternative. But I doubt the average human being is capable of denying himself social sexual contact for very long.

 

[LovelyPigeon]

Eeek! I read one of the IM's between Foley and a former page. If others in congress knew the content of messages from Foley to young pages, each and every one of those persons should be removed from their elected positions if they kept Foley's behavior secret and from being investigated.

The Republicans (I'm a Democrat) have their share of scandals to deal with this year and especially this fall, and Foley may turn out to be the most salacious of their political problems.

 

[Pedro]

For Democratic leaders to immediately attempt to politicize this tragic situation is contemptible.

Yeah, they are impeaching a President for getting oral sex from a consenting adult.

This is the GOP mess, don' try to put it in the democrats.

 

[Pedro]

Eeek! I read one of the IM's between Foley and a former page. If others in congress knew the content of messages from Foley to young pages, each and every one of those persons should be removed from their elected positions if they kept Foley's behavior secret and from being investigated.

The Republicans (I'm a Democrat) have their share of scandals to deal with this year and especially this fall, and Foley may turn out to be the most salacious of their political problems.

That's right, the GOP is trying to blame the democrats for seeking accountability.

Next they'll blame Clinton!