Republican sex scandal! Boys! Pedophilia! Everything except actual sex!

[Jenny_Jackson]

I wish we could clarify the labels on this. NC child abuse? At the moment, all he's accused of is flirting with a 16 year old (which is of legal age in DC anyway, so all he'd be guilty of breaking the internet law he helped write). More could come out later (rumor has another teenager saying he was invited to Foley's house for sex), but there is a lot of assumption going on right now.

Pedophile? Since when was a 16 year-old a pre-pubescent child? Am I wrong here, I've always heard (and have heard dozens of explanations in the last week) that there is another word for attraction to underage teenagers (I believe it was called hebophile...or something like that).

I think this is creepy and nothing I didn't expect from a Republican. However, why blow it up into something it's not, just to make a point? He wasn't trolling the schoolyard for 10 year-old boys, he was flirting with 16-18 year-olds. That makes it gross, but hardly a captial crime. Not saying he doesn't deserve to be fired for it (and charged with a crime if it's determined that he did break the law), just wondering how this got to be such a big deal. Is a pervy old guy hitting on legal-age boys really the biggest thing to worry about in our country today?

Sorry, but in this state, as in most, a 16 year old is a child until the age of 18. Not only that, but the House Pages are 14 to 16. If he didn't do anything wrong then why is he hiding out in an alcohol rehab center? Why did Hastert try and cover it up? And the fact that he blew into office with the Religious Conservative Right and wrote the Internet Child Protection law makes this and even worse case.

What happened to the old days when Republican and Sex were mutually exclusive?

 

[S-Des]

Sorry, but in this state, as in most, a 16 year old is a child until the age of 18. Not only that, but the House Pages are 14 to 16. If he didn't do anything wrong then why is he hiding out in an alcohol rehab center? Why did Hastert try and cover it up? And the fact that he blew into office with the Religious Conservative Right and wrote the Internet Child Protection law makes this and even worse case.

What happened to the old days when Republican and Sex were mutually exclusive?

Actually, the age of consent is below 18 in every state (I believe). In most states, it's 17, in Utah it's 14. In DC it's 16. He obviously did something wrong, I'm just reading the posts and listening to the hysteria over the case and wondering if this is truly the biggest event in our country. Much like Clinton, I never understood the outcry. Actually, I do understand it, but I wish people would just get over it and talk about the issues.

Hastert never tried to cover it up. If we're going to talk about this stupid thing, at least let's be factual. He was asked by the parents of the boy to tell Foley not to write anymore. They told him there was nothing bad in the emails, just that they were unwanted. Foley told him it was just him being "overly-friendly". Hastert told him to stop, which is what the parents asked. Where's the cover up?

I don't know about you, but I've always heard that Republicans and sex weren't mutually exclusive (except in public ).

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

Des, I think you are misconstruing the law. When the emails and IM's were sent to the boy he was 16 and in LOUISANA. Washington DC has nothing to do with whether a crime was committed or not. It comes under the State where the boy was at at the time. The Age of Consent in Louisana is 17 not 16.

The Foley mess was a well kept secret among the Republican Leadership. I googled this mess. The only people I could find who were in on it were:

Rep Hastlet and his top aids.
Rep Alexander of Lousiana and on of his aids.
One unnamed Republican member of the House.

The emails and IM's were reported by the boy's parents to Rep Alexander in 2005. The boy did not report them. In addition, the parents sent a letter to Rep Alexander asking that they remain anonymous and that there be no further action at the time they reported the scandal.

When ABC got hold of the information, an aid from Alexander's office went to ABC News and tried to squash the story. In doing so, he confirmed the material to ABC News.

 

[rgraham666]

S-Des, you'll have to forgive people for going a little crazy over this.

The Republicans have been running on a 'moral' ticket for a couple of decades now. With the sotto voce implication that they are the only moral ones. Anyone who disagrees with them is immoral, unclean, maybe even outright evil.

So the people who have been tarred with this brush are going to feel a great deal of schadenfrude about the general discovery that the GOP consists of mere mortals after all.

 

[Huckleman2000]

Actually, the age of consent is below 18 in every state (I believe). In most states, it's 17, in Utah it's 14.

Two words: Orrin Hatch.

 

[S-Des]

Two words: Orrin Hatch.

*snicker* Like I said....GROSS!!!!!

BTW, Rob I do understand why the Republicans are getting tarred and feathered and it serves them right (just like the Schiavo mess). All I'm saying is that this is a minor thing in the greater scheme of scandals. To talk about non-consent and pedophilia smacks of hysteria. I've heard that the boy was 16 at the time of being a page, but 18 when he received the emails that his parents complained about. I'd check, but honestly I couldn't give a shit about it. Like I said, the guy's a scumbag and probably going to be convicted of something.

Of course this gave the Republicans the chance to bring up the Democratic congressman who actually had sex (not just wrote letters) to a 17 year-old page in 92 (and was backed by the Democratic leadership). I'd give you his name, but again, I don't give a shit. They should both rot in hell for messing around with teenagers, especially ones who work for them.

However, I find this issue to be far less important than Clinton's blow-job, which registered about a 5 for me on Jenny's 'Give-A- Fuck-o-meter'. How 'bout this crazy notion...let's see the politicians talk about taxes, spending, Iraq, crime, border security, medicare, social security, etc... Anything but who is trying to get into what teenager's pants.

 

[elsol]

*yawn*

Talk about a sexual harrassment case... *burp*

 

[3113]

How 'bout this crazy notion...let's see the politicians talk about taxes, spending, Iraq, crime, border security, medicare, social security, etc... Anything but who is trying to get into what teenager's pants.

Actually, given how the politicians, especially Republicans have been handling Iraq, crime, border security, medicare, ss, etc....I'd RATHER they talk about getting into a teenager's pants.

I pray they talk about that and only that until (please GOD!) the elections put in politicians who actually give a fuck about our country and it's people instead of trying to ruin medicare, social security, our budget (Iraq war), our image (Iraq war), etc. etc. etc.

Please. Let these asshole yack away about getting into a teenager's pants. Don't let them do any more damage to the U.S.

 

[shereads]

Actually, given how the politicians, especially Republicans have been handling Iraq, crime, border security, medicare, ss, etc....I'd RATHER they talk about getting into a teenager's pants.

So would the outgoing White House, which is why I'm not sure I'm kidding when I suggest Karl Rove timed the Foley leak to coincide with the release of "State of Denial."



Seriously, when your party's candidates are already declining local campaign appearances by the First Dufus, who can't run for re-election anyway - and if you had reason to believe this story would leak before the mid-terms anyway - why not bitch-slap your disloyal congressional majority and kill all the unwelcome talk of Woodward's book, with one blow?

Heck of a job, Karl. Heck of a job.



Meanwhile, the spinsters have three weeks to dig up something more spectacular on a Democratic candidate. (Underage Non-Consentual Bestiality?) Failing that, there's always Plan B: Destruction By Allegation. After the election, the truth of the allegation won't matter. It never does.

 

[elsol]

So would the outgoing White House, which is why I'm not sure I'm kidding when I suggest Karl Rove timed the Foley leak to coincide with the release of "State of Denial."

This underestimates Rove, she.

No way he ever fucks with his bread & butter... the values American. The boy knows he needs to those people to show up at the polls. If they vote by not-voting, the Reps have to win on the *gasp* issues.

A gay republican playing email patty-cakes with sixteen year old boys and having it covered up by other Republicans? Not in a million years does Rove go for that... not ever, ever, ever!

The North Korea thing is more his style.

 

[shereads]

Two words: Orrin Hatch.

Stop, stop. I just had breakfast.

 

[Jenny_Jackson]

This underestimates Rove, she.

No way he ever fucks with his bread & butter... the values American. The boy knows he needs to those people to show up at the polls. If they vote by not-voting, the Reps have to win on the *gasp* issues.

A gay republican playing email patty-cakes with sixteen year old boys and having it covered up by other Republicans? Not in a million years does Rove go for that... not ever, ever, ever!

The North Korea thing is more his style.

Actually, Karl Rove has been talking about the "October Bombshell" since early August. I suspect the Foley mess was going to be it. The plan was that the Republicans would take a sacrificial Foley and look like real statesmen. However, it's blown up in his face because of the depth of the cover up.

 

[elsol]

Actually, Karl Rove has been talking about the "October Bombshell" since early August. I suspect the Foley mess was going to be it. The plan was that the Republicans would take a sacrificial Foley and look like real statesmen. However, it's blown up in his face because of the depth of the cover up.

NK happened in October

 

[3113]

NK happened in October

Iran's blowing up a bomb perhaps...but I agree that Rove didn't plan the Foley thing. It ruins Iran's bomb. I mean, who cares about a bomb test when you've got a GOP Gay guy's exploits for front headline news?

 

[Pure]

question to sher.... re 'actual sex'

so are you saying cybersex is not 'sex'?

does your husband agree?

if so, PM me.

 

[Guest]

so are you saying cybersex is not 'sex'?

do your husband agree?

if so, PM me.

Pure, I must confess.

I am enjoying this delightfully flirtatious side of you.

 

[shereads]

Actually, the age of consent is below 18 in every state (I believe). In most states, it's 17, in Utah it's 14. In DC it's 16.

He's committed Carnal Naughtiness. CN is worse than illegal; it's embarrassing to all those evangelical ministers who registered new Republican voters in droves when the sanctity of heterosexual marriage was threatened. They helped carry the day in 2004. To get them to the polls for next month's midterm elections, you can bet that somebody's working on a bigger, better, nastier charge of Carnal Naughtiness against the opposition.

If I were a high-profile Democrat running for re-election to Congress, I'd be lying awake nights going over my past, one naughty incident at a time, evaluating each sin for its scandal potential in the hands of a spin doctor like Karl Rove.

Be afraid, Democratic candidates with less than pristine personal histories. Be very, very afraid...

 

[OhMissScarlett]

And now for your obligatory internet Foley jokes, just in case anyone needs one. And yes, they're completely inappropriate, before anyone starts whining.

*snicker*

Why did Foley resign from Congress?
-- He wanted to turn over a new page in his life.

Why does Rep. Foley want to be like a silver medalist at the Olympics?
--So he can also come in a little behind.

What's the difference between acne and Rep Foley?
--Acne comes on your face when you're 12, Foley waits 'til you're 15.

You know why Rep. Mark Foley doesn't use book marks?
--Because he prefers bent-over pages.