About

You're viewing one of 40,737 blog entries. Click here to read some more.

Other views

Recent Comments
Comments By...
Last 100 Entries
Read Chronologically
Random Entry
Random Image
View by Category
Mobile Edition


Ad

Advertise Here



Tuesday, 03 October, 2006

It’s Vile
(with comments)

A congressman talks about Bill Clinton, in 1998:

"It's vile. It's more sad than anything else, to see someone with such potential throw it all down the drain because of a sexual addiction."

- Rep. Mark Foley, R-West Palm Beach


Permalink | Posted in Politics |
  1. By Sheldon. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @06:56am:
    Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....
  2. By Sheldon. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @06:58am:
    I just remembered this morning, back when I was a page in the Texas House of Representatives, there was one Representative that liked to play a special trick on the female pages. He would ask for a kiss on the cheek, and when the young lady went to kiss him he would turn his head real quick and kiss her on the lips. Everyone would just laugh and laugh...
  3. By Ozzy. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @07:17am:
    Now that is funny.
  4. By JL. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @07:37am:
    A classic case of "do as I say, not as I do"....
  5. By ben. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @07:52am:
    I want to hear Barney Frank weigh in.
  6. By Debb. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @08:07am:
    No party is immune. It IS vile and proves again that the whole place needs industrial strength Lysol. I think encasement in concrete and burial next to some nuclear waste. This stench is going to outlast the waste.
  7. By Indigo Kid. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @08:21am:
    Oh where is that little old lady frustrated school teacher who had the first grade boy branded as a child molester for kissing one little first grade girl on the cheek as every parent seems to teach their children. What is it with this lip fetish anyway?
  8. By Gee.... Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @08:26am:
    Dennis Hastert keeps saying how they never SAW the emails. They were told about what the guys was doing so they spin it with the never SAW anything.
  9. By jhenderson. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @08:29am:
    "I want to hear Barney Frank weigh in."
    He won't say much because of AbScam 26 years ago is coming to light
  10. By Mean Jean. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @09:59am:
    Like we used to say on the playground: It takes one to know one.
  11. By pj. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @10:04am:
    So this schmuck (and Bob Ney) are blaming alcohol for their problems.

    Methinks me smells an upcoming rightwing conspiracy/attempt to introduce a reason for promoting the abolition of alcohol? Hmmm... where have I heard about that before... and doesn't that other 'religion' support a ban on such beverages?
  12. By Tom McMahon. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @10:30am:
    "Vile and Sad" pretty much sums it up in both cases.
  13. By Mean Jean. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @12:20pm:
    Foley checked into a rehab clinic in Clearwater, Florida aka: Scientology Capitol of the Universe. Could it be...?
  14. By Minderbinder. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @12:46pm:
    It's the hypocrisy, stupid. As a dad/grandpa/uncle, I react to the sex thing too, forgetting that in other times, other cultures, NAMBLA might have been something of a state religion. Yes it's bad, but getting past the old in/out and the abuse of power and trust, this "scandal" is about the inevitable (almost requisite) cover up, magnified deliciously by the hypocrisy.
  15. By Gee.... Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @12:50pm:
    Scroll down to Wanda Sykes on Lenno to see her take on the alcohol thing:

    http://onegoodmove.org/1gm/
  16. By KS. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @12:56pm:
    It's all the Democrats fault!
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R7kFyY0hOKQ

    How long before somebody mentions T-- K------?
  17. By DiannB. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @01:39pm:
    This is just about sex.

    It is a private matter.

    Oh, wait.

    Is it because he's gay?
  18. By Sheldon. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @01:49pm:
    DiannB, you think that pedaphilia is just sex? You don't think there is anything wrong with pedaphilia? Do you think it's a private matter to have sex with children?

    There's nothing wrong with being gay. I wish all the congress members were gay. I wish they would turn the white house into a big gay disco, complete with the presidential mirror ball, and the stripes on the flag were rainbow...
  19. By Barney Frank. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @01:53pm:
    Is that you ben over?
  20. By another larry. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @01:56pm:
    Gingrich: House GOP would have "been accused of gay bashing" if it "overly aggressively reacted" to Foley's emails in 2005
    http://mediamatters.org/items/200610010003
  21. By Sheldon. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @02:12pm:
    Gingrich: Another sexual pervert. Likes to cheat on his wife when she's dying of cancer. No telling what he likes to do to little boys. Apparently he thinks being gay and being a pedaphile is the same thing. I wonder what he thinks his own sexual orientation is?
  22. By KS. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @02:13pm:
    Hastert could have handled this quietly in 2005. When he first learned about Foley's messages to the page, he should have told Foley that he was lucky that the boys parents did not want to make an issue out of the 'indiscretion'. Next, Hastert should have told Foley to retire quietly and not run for the House seat again. But Foley was a moneymaker for the GOP and Hastert could not let that money go.

    When this came out last week, Bush should have told Hastert that he was going to have to step down too. Now Bush is going to have to either continue to defend Hastert or admit that he made a mistake when he said he fully supported Hastert's actions. Which is more likely to happen?
  23. By elfrijole. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @02:18pm:
    The GOP is trying to make this about being gay. They are vile. Gay does not equal pedaphelia. Sickos.
  24. By carlos. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @02:22pm:
    KS, I disagree on letting Foley quitely go away. It's kind of like assigning a pedophile priest to a different church. He should be exposed for the predator he is.
  25. By KS. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @02:35pm:
    Carlos: I'm not saying Foley shouldn't be punished. He should be. I am saying that Dennis Hastert cared more about having was a successful fundraiser in the House that he did about the kid being molested.

    Sorry if I wasn't clear.

    BTW, have you seen how Tom Reynolds is avoiding questions about Foley: http://snipurl.com/xxh0
  26. By Doug. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @04:01pm:
    A timely gee-tar song:

    "Mothers don't let your sons grow up to be pages"
    http://www.thatguitarman.com/MP3/mamas-pages.mp3
  27. By ~Q~. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @04:02pm:
    I should have been outraged when this story broke, but I was too drunk.
  28. By Mary. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @05:43pm:
    Any 52-year-old who approaches any 16-year-old for sexual favors has crossed the line; males, females, the same gender or different - doesn't matter one bit.

    Foley may have conveniently disappeared into the black hole of a rehab center, but Hastert and the rest of them are still around; shout them down when they use terms like "gay bashing" and "it's just about sex" and "it was the alcohol" - don't let them get by with such stuff.

    And [B]Minderbinder[/B], I love your word "deliciously" - "...cover-up, magnified deliciously by the hypocrisy" - ah, yes.
  29. By J-Walk. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @05:49pm:
    It does appear that Foley is involved in Scientology:

    http://www.fso.org/en_US/news-events/pg005.html

    More here.
  30. By biff. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @06:24pm:
    Foley's attorney held a press conference and said that he (Foley) had been molested by "clergy" when he was younger.

    So there's his excuse.

    I just flipped on hammity and Colmes just to see how hamboy was spinning this. It's freakin laughable.
  31. By wally the duck. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @06:29pm:
    Ah, yes... molested by clergy. Going into rehab.

    Rule # something-or-other in politics: when caught, assume the victim role as quickly as possible.

    Pssst: abused by an adult; pass it on.
  32. By another larry. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @06:34pm:
    Question,
    If Foley had been caught giving Bill Clinton an oral job in the White House would it have been ok?
  33. By wally the duck. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @07:40pm:
    No, larry. They are of opposite political parties; it would be regarded as giving aid and comfort to the enemy.
  34. By KS. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @07:54pm:
    Fox News has found a way to make Foley less of a problem for the Republicans: http://www.bradblog.com/?p=3570
  35. By Wm. L. Bassett. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @08:35pm:
    Why is it that Democrats are "shocked" by Rep. Foley's behavior even as they castigate the Boy Scouts because they will not welcome gays as Scout Masters? As I recall, Barney Frank allowed a gay prostitution ring to operate out of his Washington apartment and he is still in Congress. Rep. Foley is wrong, wrong, wrong but the hypocrisy is breathtaking.
  36. By boswell. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @10:39pm:
    Barney Frank allowed a gay prostitution ring to operate out of his Washington apartment

    That was the allegation of a convicted felon and hustler who was running the ring. Frank fired him when he found out. "As I recall" are weasel words. It doesn't take any effort to find the facts online.

    Most people with any intelligence would not try to equate Barney Frank's homosexuality with the sexual predation of children. That would be intellectually dishonest, wouldn't it?
  37. By Mary. Comment posted 03-Oct-2006 @11:27pm:
    Yeah, it sure would.

    It's not a partisan issue, Mr. Bassett, and it's not a gay vs straight issue; it's a 52-year-old person making sexual advances to a high-school student.

    When you say the [I]Democrats[/I] are showing "breathtaking" hypocrisy - well now, that's just rich.

    Of all the comments in this thread and yesterday's Foley thread, that's the one that best represents the reason people say Republicans are distorting facts and repainting the picture to suit their own agenda.

    It's interesting how this has taken our attention away from Iraq and the Pentagon's report and away from today's story, in which it's confirmed that Tenet DID meet with Condi to give harsh warning about Bin Laden, just as he said (Condi said yesterday that she "couldn't recall" a meeting with him).

    Lies, lies and more lies - BUT the only way the administration has anything to do in the Foley uproar is in the cover-up, and that DOES neet to be addressed.
  38. By Greg. Comment posted 04-Oct-2006 @05:29am:
    Sheldon,

    Couple of things: First of all, the word you're looking for is 'pedophile' (if you're in the US) or 'paedophile' (if you're in the UK). Not 'pedaphile'.

    Second: Mark Foley is neither of these things. Although Foley's actions have been portrayed by many – including Jennifer Crider, spokeswoman for House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) – as preying on "children",[43] under District of Columbia child-molestation statutes (D.C. Code Sec. 22-3001) a "child" is defined as an individual under age 16. Sixteen is the minimum age for entering the page program, so even if Foley is proven to have engaged in sexual activitiy in addition to sexual discussion, it would not be a crime in Washington, DC.

    Get your facts straight, you prejudiced bigot.
  39. By Sheldon. Comment posted 04-Oct-2006 @06:23am:
    Greg: Thanks for the clarification. I'm sticking with my assertions. So you are saying that it's okay for a man in his 50's to hit on a 16 year old boy? I don't think that's okay. I call that being a sexual predator. I was molested as a child too, but I've never had the urge to pick up a 16 year old BOY. I've also gotten drunk, but never during that time did I have the urge to try to pick up a 16 year old BOY. Also, as far as I know, people don't warn other 16 year old boys to watch out for me. Actually, I used to work in a State Hospital with 16 year old boys and girls whom had been molested by pedophiles like Foley. Things did not go well for these children. It does not take a law to define what Foley is, and if you can't see that, then you have a problem discerning between what is right and wrong, and I feel sorry for you.
  40. By another larry. Comment posted 04-Oct-2006 @06:49am:
    Sounds like Greg is defending his position.
  41. By SnarlingCoyote. Comment posted 04-Oct-2006 @06:56am:
    another larry: "Question, If Foley had been caught giving Bill Clinton an oral job in the White House would it have been ok?"

    wally the duck: "No, larry. They are of opposite political parties; it would be regarded as giving aid and comfort to the enemy."

    ROFLMAO! Howl!
  42. By another larry. Comment posted 04-Oct-2006 @07:23am:
    SnarlingCoyote, there's a homeless gal that's outside our office building a lot. She has a lab/sheperd mix she calls Hyena. Since I've never heard a coyote laugh as they're usually scooting off I can only imagine what you sound like. Maybe this link is close... maybe not.


    http://www.hyenarecords.com/
  43. By Greg. Comment posted 04-Oct-2006 @07:25am:
    We have laws for a reason: They clearly define the behaviour that our society to a greater degree deems acceptable. What is the point of our making laws if we then choose to ride roughshod over them the minute they cease to suit us?

    It may not sit comfortably with you, while you sit finger-wagging in moral judgment over a man who sent slightly dirty messages to an individual of legal age (which, as far as we know, is all Mark Foley did), but just because there is a large discrepancy in the ages of the two individuals involved in the conversations (which, incidentally, seemed to have been largely enjoyed by both parties), that does not give you the right to accuse someone of being a paedophile.

    My problem with Foley is, as others here have said, the hypocrisy he showed in condemning Clinton. Not for engaging in perfectly legal (if somewhat slightly objectionable to the holier-than-thou brigade) naughty email chat.
  44. By biff. Comment posted 04-Oct-2006 @09:00pm:
    What is the point of our making laws if we then choose to ride roughshod over them the minute they cease to suit us?

    That's an excellent question. I suggest you ask the president.
  45. By Some guy. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @10:41am:
    It's all about the republican family values. IMing a child while you jerk off is the new republican way!

    Real republicans should be pissed at Bush's team of hypocrites. Make no mistake: Lincoln would not be a republican nowadays. He'd be a Democrat.
  46. By Some guy. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @10:43am:
    Dianna B is Foley's drag name.
  47. By Sheldon. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @11:02am:
    I apologize J-Walk, for posting off topic.
    Someone said the boy was 18 at the time of the emails, someone please give links to verify that.
    Either way, other boys have come forward with more messages from Foley. Oops!

    Also, Foley knew what to say in those messages to keep from being prosecuted in case he did get caught. He knew what to say, being that he helped write those laws and all.

    Greg: You write with clarity. I will ponder my positions because of that. Thanks.
  48. By Commonwealth. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @01:02pm:
    It is now widely reported that the boy, Jordan Edmund, was in actuality 18 at the time of the exchanges

    Not a minor

    It is also reported that the IMs were initially a prank amongst conservative pages, and fell into the hands of Democratic dirty trickster Chip Englander who cooked this all up

    I wonder how many of those posting snide remarks here will return and acknowledge their errors

    None, I would bet

    Par for the course
  49. By Sheldon. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @01:04pm:
    Commonwealth: give us links. Gimmie!
  50. By Mary. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @01:36pm:
    If everything he did was perfectly okay, why did he handle the situation by resigning instantly and running away to a rehab facility?

    I think you're grabbing at straws, [B]Commonwealth[/B].

    Par for the course.
  51. By Sheldon. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @02:13pm:
    Still no proof?
    huh.
    Micheal Jackson and Mark Foley sittin in a tree,
    talkin about their private hobbies...
  52. By Mean Jean. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @02:51pm:
    Prank?

    You wish.
  53. By biff. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @03:12pm:
    Lie, deny, deflect and most importantly, blame the democrats.
  54. By robin. Comment posted 05-Oct-2006 @05:00pm:
    Clinton embroiled in sexual scandal: TEH DEMOCRATS' FAULT!!

    Foley embroiled in sexual scandal: TEH DEMOCRATS' FAULT!!

    By the way, Commonwealth, don't believe everything (or anything in fact) that Hush Bimbo says. I couldn't believe my ears when I heard how he was trying to spin this. The hypocracy and blind party loyalty of that man is unreal - he's either sick or laughing all the way to the bank. "It is now widely reported." That means it's reported by big wide Rush Limbaugh.

    At least Hannity displayed a tiny shred of integrity on his radio show about it...
  55. By Sheldon. Comment posted 08-Oct-2006 @03:12pm:
    Greg:
    "Get your facts straight, you prejudiced bigot."
    It just occurred to me. I've been called "Queer", "Fag", "Hoto", "Girl", and alot of other words I can't type here, but never a "prejudiced bigot". How dare you sir. I can only assume that the reason you are so offended is becuase you yourself are a pedophile. I have no sympathy for anyone that is part of a party that is pushing laws to ban gay marriage, a law that is as bigoted and prejudiced as the Klan passing laws to put Jews in concentration camps. And now a Klan member has the gall to try to spin the actions of a CHILD PREDATOR so that all of a sudden I'm the gay basher?! Well guess what, nobody's buying the bull you are trying to sell. They see the symbol on your sleeve just as clearly as they see the one on mine. Go wash your sheets, I think the white is fading...
  56. By Greg. Comment posted 10-Oct-2006 @06:25am:
    Sheldon, are you on drugs? I have no idea what you are talking about – really, read back what you've written. It simply doesn't make any sense.

    I'll reiterate: I have no time for self-regarding bigots who appoint themselves moral judge and jury over people – such as Mark Foley – who have committed no crime. The pomposity of it beggars belief.

    Good on you, Mark Foley. Your sex life is your business and yours alone, and as long as you commit no crime I hope small-minded moralists find it within themselves to keep their big noses out of your private life.
Commenting is not available in this weblog entry.