PLEASE DO NOT BEND
THE PAGES OVER….

Lying leftist puppet.

Foley was confronted and ordered to cease email contact with the pages involved — who, in several cases, appear to have been FORMER pages.

Your theory rests on trying to confuse the emails, which are odd, with the instant messages, which are catastrophic. No evidence exists that says the Republicans had the IMs, but enormous amounts exist that say the Democrats did.

Furthermore, puppet, there is ample information that shows the Democrats had the emails well before this broke. Why didn’t THEY inform their own member on the Page Committee?

What we see here is nothing more than a flagrant attempt by Democrats to lie and spin that “children were endangered since people didn’t act” and “we were never told” when the facts are that THEY had the emails in their possession and failed to act — until such time as it would have maximum effect on the fall elections.

Mark Foley suffers from a disorder, ephebophilia, which — like pedophilia — typically involves a splitting of awareness, so that the individual can maintain two oppositional styles. This occurs through the process called a reaction formation.

As Dan argued, he should certainly take responsibility for the injury he did people. But he also deserves compassion for his illness. The fact is that in the world of the typical ephebophile, he seems to have practiced relative restraint.

Once again: The issue here is the party’s response. It’s not the Democrats’ handling, in an open way, of somethning that occurred 25 years ago. It’s not about Teddy Kennedy’s questionable behavior. What it’s about is the fact that the Republican leadership was informed that a likely ephebophile was sexually harrassing Congressional pages and refused to do anything about it until the media exposed the story. We’ve seen denial, revision and re-revision coming from the leadership.

The decision to ignore the matter — witness withholding of the information from the Page Committee’s one Democrat — WAS POLITICAL. It’s the Republicans’ game thihs go-round, not the Democrats’ responsibilty because you think TK drowned Mary Jo.

The fact that I acknowledge the political aspect of this — and I’ve been a bit laconic in my replies because I don’t believe you don’t undertand that this can’t be depoliticized — doesn’t mean that I don’t think Mark Foley suffers and caused suffering.

It is quite apparent, though, that you want to limit it to a matter of Foley’s behavior. Perhaps you took the same attitude in the Clinton affair, but I doubt it. If you did, good for you, but it doesn’t diminish the political reality resulting from dissembling, as Richard Nixon so completely admitted before his death.

That’s because this is just a political game to you. You don’t give a damn about right and wrong, and you don’t give a damn about real people whose lives were affected. In other words, a typical Democrat operative.

And then there was the collective of Republican moralists who brought Bill Clinton to trial — and turned out to all be philanderers themselves. Oh, but wait,, that wasn’t about sex. It was about lying and a coverup. But the Foley case isn’t about a coverup. No wait…

The Dems you cite chose to undergo public scrutiny and contest the charges against them.. Apparently you think we should presume guilt and that an accusation alone is adequate to require resignation.

Personally, I couldn’t care less if Foley resigned or remained in office and chose to contest the accusations. What, for the 1000th time, is reprehensible is the leadership’s protection of someone they knew to be sexually harassing teenagers. Many in the Republican party feel the same way and realize bringing up Clinton or Studds only looks like evasion of the more important issue of a cover-up.

We deeply appreciate your “yes, but…”, V.

Um, when did the GOP “get rid” of Foley? He was given a pass for 3 years, according to Fordham. And he resigned when he was confronted by the media. The Republicans did nothing to “get rid” of him. And that is the issue.

That Bill Clinton, or any other Dem didn’t resign but chose to endure public scrutiny and legal proceedings, has nothing whatsoever to do with the Foley case. Why should aa man whose offense, lying about a blow job, quit the presidency if he’s willing to undergo a trial? Why should Studds have resigned if he was willing to undergo public scrutiny?

You just keep avoiding the salient fact: The Republican leadership PROTECTED Foley, who is now engaged in representing himself as a victim of a psychological disorder.

Your legacy is so much to be proud of. No wonder you guys have to pile onto a Republican who, as far as we know, didn’t touch anybody.

The boy didn’t seem all that interestent in Foley, as he had plenty of attivities to keep him busy, and sleepy. I hate to think that it was a ploy the OUT Foley, especially during this very sensitive time, but it just seems that way to me from reading the transcript.

The boy also made it clear that his Mother was not computer savy, suggesting that their conversations were very safe. I personaly don’t think that the boy was a boy!
Perhaphs a sting operation? We see them all the time on TV. The TV is filled with sting operations.

I just have a gut feeling that it was a sting. Produce the boy, I want to hear the evidence come from his mouth and not IM’s produced electronically.

Oh let ‘em whine, Francis. It’s great entertainment to watch them become the victim of their own style.

Seeing Bruce cite the corroboration of a psychologist who thinks gay men are inherently attracted to adolescents is priceless. He’s so blinded by his distaste for the left that he’ll even enlist the help of someone who thinks he’s pathological by nature.

(Note: Democrat scheming aside, Foley is still a scumbag who should be tied to a goalpost and beaten by a JV football squad … not pardoned like Democrat Mel Reynolds, or re-elected like Democrat Gerry Studds).

Because they wanted something to be done about it — namely, Alexander to be made aware, Foley to be warned, and for Foley to no longer have contact with their son. Doing it any other way — like going to the media — would likely have compromised their privacy.

On Pelosi, I’m not sure where that gets you, or where the conspiracy gets you. All that reinforces the notion that the Republicans kept it internal, which we know is true. And if Pelosi hears about this, what are the chances the GOP didn’t know? And simply asserting she knew about this is worse politically than having HRC insist Foley isn’t gay.

Simple.

Pelosi’s argument is that the Republicans were negligent because they knew and didn’t do anything about it.

Since she knew and did nothing about it, that would make HER negligent as well.

If she tries to claim that the emails weren’t enough for her to act……then why did she demand action from the Republicans?

Queen Pelosi was derailed when Boehner was intelligent enough to deflect her attempt to make this a House investigation — and when Hastert referred it to the FBI, which unlike the Ethics Committee, is going to look at this from the standpoint of multiple parties.

What will eventually come out is that Pelosi and her puppets knew about the emails at the same time Republican leadership did, or even before — PLUS had the IMs, which are even more damning.

But she left Foley to molest children because immediately acting would have had little to no political impact in late 2005.

However, I am flattered that you think this is a “vast right-wing conspiracy.” You must have spent too much time reading Shrillary’s ghostwritten book…

Also, you messed up - AGAIN. Number 72 was written by ND30, not me. And he is “somebody” as well.

You are batting 0-4 on all those comments you made, kiddo. And frankly, your whiny arrogance is getting on my nerves.

Go way in the back and sit down.

Regards,
Peter H.