[art_director]

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

It's a matter of ethics. A Republican feels ashamed of his actions and resigns, a Democrat has no ethics. They feel that their shame should be the norm, and they feel no shame in their actions.

Sorry, but that's not accurate.

[art_director]

Originally Posted by SpaceMonkey

Regarding the age of consent issue, I was under the impression that the laws on sexually explicit online conversations with minors (maybe even the one Foley helped pass?) made it a crime to have such online conversations with anyone under the age of 18, regardless of the specific states' age of consent laws.

I believe that's correct.

[art_director]

Originally Posted by BRussell

You are defending Foley and the Republican conspirators, by attacking the messenger, shifting focus, claiming that "others do it too," and all the other tactics you've been using throughout this thread. Loyal Republicans are now reduced to applying their usual tactics in defense of child predators and those who cover for them. Congratulations.

Might I add...

It seems that if Joe Citizen had committed such a crime they would have long been arrested. The authorities would have siezed their computer equipment, subponead their phone and internet surfing records, combed throught their belongings, etc. To date no such action has been taken and the GOP leadership has known of the crimes for over a year. That, my friends, is a text book definition of a coverup.

For example, look at Michael Jackson. He was arrested within hours of accusations of his inappropriate behavior with children. So why, exactly, is it that the Congress has not, to date, pursued the same against one of their own?

Americans should be asking these and many other questions of Congressional leadership in the wake of this obvious abuse of power and position.

[art_director]

One of the first things Alberto Gonzales did when appointed to Atty Gen was to declare this type of crime job #1 for the Justice Dept and the FBI. So, where are the teeth behind his charge?

[besson3c]

Originally Posted by Buckaroo

It's a matter of ethics. A Republican feels ashamed of his actions and resigns, a Democrat has no ethics. They feel that their shame should be the norm, and they feel no shame in their actions.

Why do you guys insist on making idiotic generalizations like this that can neither be proven nor disproven, and often don't reveal any useful information anyway?

It really makes conversation suck ass. Please stop.

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Why do you guys insist on making idiotic generalizations like this that can neither be proven nor disproven, and often don't reveal any useful information anyway?

It really makes conversation suck ass. Please stop.

You've never let it stop you.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by spacefreak

Yeah, your little guise of wanting to protect children gets blown out of the water when (1) you fail to mention teacher predators who spend 8 hours a day with our children on a much larger scale than Foley emailing 2 pages, and (2), you immediately start hooting and hollering about the potential advantage your ilk will get in elections.

You have no core concerns or beliefs other than elections. Very sad.

Interesting, considering that you were the first poster in this thread who tried to politicize the issue.

[D. S. Troyer]

Originally Posted by Railroader

You've never let it stop you.

OOOOOH...you got him good!

[Railroader]

Originally Posted by D. S. Troyer

OOOOOH...you got him good!

Yup.

[pooka]

BWhahHAHAHHAHAHH! This is so ****ing comical my ass is bleeding. Holy ****. Wow. OK, how about everyone agree to this. The left can string up Foley and all of his defenders while the right can do the same with Roman Polanski. Fair?

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by pooka

BWhahHAHAHHAHAHH! This is so ****ing comical my ass is bleeding. Holy ****. Wow. OK, how about everyone agree to this. The left can string up Foley and all of his defenders while the right can do the same with Roman Polanski. Fair?

Yea but come on, Polanski has an Oscar...

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by pooka

BWhahHAHAHHAHAHH! This is so ****ing comical my ass is bleeding. Holy ****. Wow. OK, how about everyone agree to this. The left can string up Foley and all of his defenders while the right can do the same with Roman Polanski. Fair?

Polanski should be lynched for being a pedophile, but more importantly he should be made swallow flesh-eating ants for making the Ninth Gate.

V

[pooka]

Originally Posted by voodoo

Polanski should be lynched for being a pedophile, but more importantly he should be made swallow flesh-eating ants for making the Ninth Gate.

Come on, V. I can understand not forgiving someone for having sex with children but seriously. You can't hold that movie against him forever. It just wasn't THAT bad.

[ironknee]

is foley a...um...a "christ follower?"

[voodoo]

Originally Posted by pooka

Come on, V. I can understand not forgiving someone for having sex with children but seriously. You can't hold that movie against him forever. It just wasn't THAT bad.

Shh can't post much now, I'm outside mr Polanski's house now ready to attack...

There he is..!! One, two.. aaaand threeeeeeeeeeeeeeee

:sound of skirmish that ends with a loud thud:

Got him! Now he'll eat his film, frame by frame. Ahem, excuse me, I have some force-feeding to do.

V

[Spliffdaddy]

The Democrats seem to forget Barney Frank.

Apparently, if Foley had only moved-in with his "love interest" - and started a prostitution business from their apartment - and fixed 33 traffic tickets for his "love interest" - then Foley would have won re-election with 66% of the votes....and his lifestyle would be none of our business.

But then, this Foley guy isn't a liberal Democrat.

Heh. And you liberals have the unmitigated gall to point fingers at Foley. Shameful.

*SMACKDOWN*

[ironknee]

spliff, basiclly you're saying pedofiles are ok

[Spliffdaddy]

No, I'm saying liberals don't have a problem with liberal Democrat pedophiles.

[Spliffdaddy]

But wait. I'm not finished.

Some of you folks act like a 'leading' email or an IM to an underage person is some sort of criminal offense. Well, only if it's a Republican doing it. If it's a Democrat having gay sex with an underage page - then Democrats think it's none of our business. I present to you:

Gerry Eastman Studds (born May 12, 1937) is a retired American politician, born in Mineola, New York. He served as a Democratic Congressman for Massachusetts from 1973 until 1996. He was the first openly homosexual member of the US Congress and, more generally, the first openly gay national politician in the US. In 1983, he admitted having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male page a decade earlier.

Studds refused to apologize for his misconduct.

thanks wikipedia.

Soooo, in 1983 he admitted to doing FAR WORSE than what Foley did....yet he served for 13 more years.

Stuff it, Democrats. Bunch of hypocrites.

[itai195]

So, you are defending a pedophile?

And you are defending the House leadership covering up his illicit activities?

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by art_director

Now the question becomes WHY, if Dennis Hastert's office knew of inappropriate communication between Foley and children, did he not remove the predator from the very group that was charged with protecting kids?

Wtahc closely, kids. This is going to rip through Washington and take a number of Reps with it.

pfft.

Not even a remote chance.

You can dream if you like.

[Nicko]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

But wait. I'm not finished.

Some of you folks act like a 'leading' email or an IM to an underage person is some sort of criminal offense. Well, only if it's a Republican doing it. If it's a Democrat having gay sex with an underage page - then Democrats think it's none of our business. I present to you:

Gerry Eastman Studds (born May 12, 1937) is a retired American politician, born in Mineola, New York. He served as a Democratic Congressman for Massachusetts from 1973 until 1996. He was the first openly homosexual member of the US Congress and, more generally, the first openly gay national politician in the US. In 1983, he admitted having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male page a decade earlier.

Studds refused to apologize for his misconduct.

thanks wikipedia.

Soooo, in 1983 he admitted to doing FAR WORSE than what Foley did....yet he served for 13 more years.

Stuff it, Democrats. Bunch of hypocrites.

I suppose it didn't occur to you that this might be only the tip of the iceburg?


This scandal is just getting started, it needs time to fully realise itself. We need an intense investigation, interviews, testimony, and prosecution...perhaps leading to a trial of some sort. Without doubt, everything needs to be broadcast live around the world 24/7. Wolf Blitzer's 'situation room' should dedicate atleast half his show to this everyday. Heads need to roll, the conspiracy needs to be uncovered! No one should be spared!

Mwhahahahahaaha!

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by itai195

So, you are defending a pedophile?

Are you are defending the House leadership covering up his illicit activities?

The only folks you'll see defending pedophiles are Democrats.

As far as the "House leadership" covering up his activities - so what? It wasn't a crime. If it were a crime, then the boy would have contacted police.

Historically, nothing ever happens when they're caught having sex with minors. In fact, Foley's resignation was *more* punishment than we've ever seen.

The other guys continued to serve and got re-elected.

Suck it up, Democrats. You've made your bed.

[itai195]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

As far as the "House leadership" covering up his activities - so what? It wasn't a crime. If it were a crime, then the boy would have contacted police.

BTW, Studds was overwhelmingly censured by a Democratic House. And he was reprimanded at the same time as a Republican who also had a relationship with a page, I forget the name, who I believe also did not resign.

There's absolutely no reason to politicize this issue anyway. I don't care if the guy was a Republican or a Democrat.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by Nicko

I suppose it didn't occur to you that this might be only the tip of the iceburg?


This scandal is just getting started, it needs time to fully realise itself. We need an intense investigation, interviews, testimony, and prosecution...perhaps leading to a trial of some sort. Without doubt, everything needs to be broadcast live around the world 24/7. Wolf Blitzer's 'situation room' should dedicate atleast half his show to this everyday. Heads need to roll, the conspiracy needs to be uncovered! No one should be spared!

Mwhahahahahaaha!

oooh! yet another scandal allegation by liberals. If it's anything like the last 100 allegations, it'll yield jack.

[Spliffdaddy]

There's always a double standard in politics.

Republicans are expected to be honest and Democrats are expected to be crooked.

It ain't even news when a Democrat bones an underage page.

But it's a widespread scandal when a Republican sends an email.

[Spliffdaddy]

I think Foley should get the same punishment as Studds got.

Seems fair to me.

[Zeeb]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

I think Foley should get the same punishment as Studds got.

Seems fair to me.

O.J. got away with a crime too, does that mean we should release all the murderers?

[ironknee]

oh yeah, he's from the south

[hyteckit]

I love how Spliff would defend a child predator just because he is a Republican. How sad.

[BRussell]

I feel sorry for the conservatives. They are so religiously devoted to the party and their W.essiah that they defend sex predators by attacking Democrats.

[Spliffdaddy]

We learned by watching Democrats re-elect pedophiles.

Though we won't be re-electing our pedophile since he had the decency to resign.

[dcmacdaddy]

Yeah, add me to the list of people offended by Spliffdaddy's defense of a sexual predator. His party affiliation is IRRELEVANT to his actions. What is relevant is what he did and the fact that some in Congress knew about it and did nothing. You can be damned sure this liberal would be just as outraged if it was a Democratic member of Congress being shielded by a Democratic-majority Congress. As for Barney Frank, yeah, he should have been forced to resign. I remember when that story broke and was horrified nothing came of it: Such a blatant abuse of one's position. If we, the citizens, don't hold our leaders accountable we have no one to blame but ourselves for their mis-deeds.

[Spliffdaddy]

No, actually the same thing *has* happened before and Democrats were not outraged. Instead, they forgave him - told us it was none of our business - and re-elected him.

You can't get past that fact by suggesting I'm defending Foley.

I never said what he did was acceptable. I'm just saying he should face the same punishment as the Democrat pedophile did. And that guy had actual sex with a minor.

[NYCFarmboy]

agreed, this seems to be a extreme doublestandard.

[Spliffdaddy]

I know, right.

[Spliffdaddy]

I've been taking good care of your thread, NYCFarmboy. It almost died back on page 2, but I managed to breathe some life back into it.

I think it's good for 5 pages, at least.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

No, actually the same thing *has* happened before and Democrats were not outraged. Instead, they forgave him - told us it was none of our business - and re-elected him.

You can't get past that fact by suggesting I'm defending Foley.

I never said what he did was acceptable. I'm just saying he should face the same punishment as the Democrat pedophile did. And that guy had actual sex with a minor.

Why are you still bringing politics into the issue? Gerry Studds should have been removed from office. The fact that he wasn't is a mark of shame on the Congressional session in which he served and will always be a mark of shame for the history of that Congessional session. If you do think what Foley did is unacceptable then you should be calling for his punishment REGARDLESS of what happened in the past. What Gerry Studds did was wrong, what Barney Frank did was wrong, what Mark Foley did was wrong. So Mark Foley should be punished for what he did wrong. Why is it so hard for you to come out and say you think Mark Foley should be punished for solicitation of sex from a minor REGARDLESS of how previous criminals fared when charged with a similar crime?

[Spliffdaddy]

Sure he should be prosecuted if he committed a criminal offense. *Everyone* should be prosecuted for it.

The point I'm making is this scenario has already played out several times before - yet there was no outrage from the Democrats. In fact, the voters - American citizens - were not outraged, because they re-elected him.

It's obvious to me that there's a double standard when it comes to which political party the pedophile was a member of.

I'm happy to have highlighted that fact.

So, liberals, carry on with your phony 'outrage'. It's transparent to anybody with half a brain.

[dcmacdaddy]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

Sure he should be prosecuted if he committed a criminal offense. *Everyone* should be prosecuted for it.

The point I'm making is this scenario has already played out several times before - yet there was no outrage from the Democrats. In fact, the voters - American citizens - were not outraged, because they re-elected him.

It's obvious to me that there's a double standard when it comes to which political party the pedophile was a member of.

I'm happy to have highlighted that fact.

So, liberals, carry on with your phony 'outrage'. It's transparent to anybody with half a brain.

Well, if you want to mount a campaign to retroactively punish Gerry Studds or Barney Frank for their actions you have my full support. I think we all should advocate for the removal of Barney Frank from office and a retroactive censuring of Gerry Studds for his actions. And, if we have not exceeded the statue of limitations, Studds should certainly be charged and convicted for his actions. So, do you want to go for it and do the right thing?


<edit: fixed typos>

[olePigeon]

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

The point I'm making is this scenario has already played out several times before - yet there was no outrage from the Democrats. In fact, the voters - American citizens - were not outraged, because they re-elected him.

It's obvious to me that there's a double standard when it comes to which political party the pedophile was a member of.

When there's a Republican pedophile, the Democrats make a big deal about it and the Republicans don't do anything; when there's a Democratic pedophile, the Democrats don't do anything and the Republicans still don't do anything.

I don't think it's a double standard, I just think the Republicans are sick.

[besson3c]

Spliffdaddy, do you ever get tired of the whole partisan football match? You are really a broken record, and boring as hell.

We get it, you don't like Liberals. Liberals are Satan blabbity blabbity blab... can't do anything right, etc.

[Railroader]

And they correct response...

Originally Posted by Spliffdaddy

besson3c, do you ever get tired of the whole partisan football match? You are really a broken record, and boring as hell.

We get it, you don't like conservatives. conservatives are Satan blabbity blabbity blab... can't do anything right, etc.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by besson3c

Spliffdaddy, do you ever get tired of the whole partisan football match? You are really a broken record, and boring as hell.

We get it, you don't like Liberals. Liberals are Satan blabbity blabbity blab... can't do anything right, etc.

I love liberals. Politics wouldn't interest me, otherwise.

'Spliffdaddy' is a fictitious character, ya know. To the real me, politics is like a sporting event. There are 2 teams and they play to win. My life doesn't revolve around liberals and conservatives. It's just a online hobby.

Some folks take this crap too seriously. Lighten up. This forum should be making you grin - not getting your blood boiling.

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by olePigeon

When there's a Republican pedophile, the Democrats make a big deal about it and the Republicans don't do anything; when there's a Democratic pedophile, the Democrats don't do anything and the Republicans still don't do anything.

I don't think it's a double standard, I just think the Republicans are sick.

bzzt. The Republicans were outraged to the point they wanted to censure Barney Frank - something previously reserved for Congressmen who killed somebody. Remember Newt Gingrich? He was avidly outspoken about his dislike for Barney's activities. The Dems, instead, decided that something lesser was called for. He got what amounted to a "letter in his file".

Dude, you never seem to remember recent history.

[davesimondotcom]

Regardless of your politics, a simple read of the IM archive shows that Foley was clearly "grooming" the young man in a manner similar to that of pedophiles. Regardless of whether the boy was "legal," he is clearly a sick individual. Not because he's gay, because he's a predator.

And those who knew of his "proclivities," if they truly covered it up, should be in serious trouble, too. Regardless of their party.

Republican or Democrat: Do the right thing.

The "conservatives" on here should be ashamed of themselves for defending Foley or those who helped him cover up his actions. The "liberals" on here should be ashamed of themselves for looking at this as a political opportunity.

That is, of course, a major generalization. But really, come on people. Can't anything be above party bickering?

[Kerrigan]

If this were a Democrat congressman, and if the page were a Democrat too, you know he would've been all like "Molest me please! Anything to support my party!"

[Spliffdaddy]

Originally Posted by davesimondotcom

The "conservatives" on here should be ashamed of themselves for defending Foley or those who helped him cover up his actions. The "liberals" on here should be ashamed of themselves for looking at this as a political opportunity.

I'm the only conservative that offered anything other than condemnation for Foley's actions. In fact, even I condemned his actions - while stating the punishment history behind similar actions in the past.

[itai195]

At the time that Studds had sex with a 17 year old page, the age of consent in DC was 16. It was still a totally inappropriate relationship and he should have been removed from office, as should the Republican who was censured alongside him for the same transgression. If he had represented my district, I would not have voted for him. Same with Barney Frank. Not that I could vote back then anyway, so why I should care about what happened 20 years ago, I have no idea.

There is absolutely no reason to turn this into a partisan issue because some Democrats were treated differently 20 years ago. I am sure many Republicans also were. It's totally hypocritical that Republicans in this thread were the first ones to politicize this issue, and then they started screaming when someone mentioned elections... as if that's not obviously what's on your minds with this disgusting damage control effort.

[BRussell]

I believe the age of consent is still 16 in DC. From what I've read, strangely enough, having sex with that 16-year-old kid wouldn't have been illegal, but soliciting sex with him over the internet would be. Thanks to the laws that Foley himself got passed.