This is absolutely ridiculous.
Clearly now it is inappropriate to be a Congressman who happens to be gay who also happens to be in the company of anyone else of the same sex. Well, that is the result of the “shock and awe” campaign by Gay Liberals to “out” gay Republicans. Now the victim is US Rep. Jim Kolbe.
Federal prosecutors in Arizona have opened a preliminary investigation of a camping trip Congressman Jim Kolbe, R-Ariz., took 10 years ago that included two teenage congressional pages, a Justice Department spokesman told NBC News.
A spokesman for the Justice Department in Washington said that the U.S. attorney in Arizona has started a “preliminary assessment” of the trip, after an unidentified source made allegations about the congressman’s behavior on the expedition. (GP Ed. Note – I’m sure we will never know that source’s political leanings…. but I can make a safe bet.)
NBC News interviewed several people who were on the trip, and their accounts vary. One participant, who requested anonymity, said he was uncomfortable with the attention Kolbe paid to one of the former pages. He was “creeped out by it,” he said, adding that there was a lot of “fawning, petting and touching” on the teenager’s arms, shoulders and back by Kolbe.
However, Gary Cummins, the deputy superintendent of the Grand Canyon National Park at the time — and who also was on the trip — said he did not see anything inappropriate take place.
NBC also interviewed the two former pages, who are now in their late 20s. One of them said that Kolbe was a gentleman and never acted in an improper fashion. He recalled that the pair spent time in Kolbe’s house at one point — and briefly were alone with him on the trip — and that Kolbe always acted professionally and decently.
The other would not comment on Kolbe’s behavior during the trip or characterize it in any way.
“I don’t want to get into the details,” he said. “I just don’t want to get into this… because I might possibly be considered for a job in the administration.”
However, the former page — who is the one to whom Kolbe allegedly paid special attention — said he had a “blast” on the trip and did not report anything improper to this parents or any House officials after the trip. He said he has a favorable impression of the page program to this day and likes Kolbe.
So now “anonymous sources” are enough to have scurrilous accounts develop into Nightly News-leading stories? Good God.
Why do I think this is designed to breathe new life into the Foley scandal as it has begun to recede? Thanks to the Gay Liberals’ own hatred, gays are now the target of any slight level of innuendo and scorn.
Brilliant move. (/sarcasm off)
I wonder what the Hypocrite Rights Campaign has to say about this? Or were they the ones that called NBC in the first place.
**UPDATE** – AJ Strata at The Strata-Sphere wonders why the Democrats and MSM were okay with it when Gay Scoutmasters were on camping trips with boys, but are upset when a Gay Republican Congressman does the same.
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
[Comment deleted. This commenter has been repeatedly deleted for conduct violating our commenting policy.]
US Attorney Paul K. Charlton was appointed by President George W. Bush on November 12, 2001, and confirmed by the U.S. Senate as the United States Attorney for the District of Arizona.
And why, pray tell, is this alleged behavior surfacing NOW? Before an election. In which the incumbent is not running again.
I knew it all along – the RATS are engaging in drive-by smearing and using the usual gay suspects as bait. For all you gay RATS out there, you’ve just been sold down the river.
I hope you are happy with YOUR party. As for me, this is just one more reason I vote GOP.
Regards,
Peter H.
We need to find out who the source is. I said a few days back that someone was after Kolbe.
This, along with fake articles (see AIM) about Christians calling for a purge of gays from the republcan party, are attemtps to split the party over this.
Look Bruce, it’s a lot simpler a conspiracy theory than trying to find a second shooter on the grassy knoll in Dallas.
The Democrats and their media hounds need to keep the Foley scandal fresh and breaking. The only way to do that, now that the principals can say “it’s under investigation by the FBI and I can’t possible comment”, is to spread the net, cast about for ANYthing… anything at all and then run with it before the rumors are dismissed by rational inquiry.
Old game, new story. The GOP did it with SlickWillie and his co-President wife on WhiteWater… no one could have imagined then that Slick Willie and his wife would actually help keep the story alive and fresh with stupid move after more stupid moves. But they did. Now, the feeding frenzy is on and pretty soon we’ll be hearing about BarneyFrank’s video rental of “Boys4Hire” or ChrisShays’ red, white & blue leather harness last worn at PTown on the 4th of July… pictures included whether ya want em or not.
Old game, new story. The tabloid quality of journalism took another dive… where’s BoyGeorge or GeorgeMichael or MichaelJackson to restore the honor of gays when we need it most?
Second thought, scratch that last notion.
Peter, it’s the shallow politics of personal destruction that is so well practiced by Democrats and their radical lapdogs like the GayLeftBorg, urban mayors thick in corruption, the ecoTerrorists, and the UnionHallGoons.
They feel “their” election victory is slipping away and are fighting to restore the tide to the Left.
Sounds like it’s an embittered former Kolbe staffer that’s fanning the flames of witchhunt. I doubt that there is any substance to these allegations whatsoever. It’s also irresponsible for the media to report on a preliminary investigation like this when the allegations are so patently flimsy.
This is ABSOLUTELY ridiculous! Read the story–totally inconsistent, no fact-checking, Jim Kolbe is an honorable American patriot. He is a boy scout–as far from a Mark Foley as you can find in this shady world.
“The other would not comment on Kolbe’s behavior during the trip or characterize it in any way.
“I don’t want to get into the details,” he said. “I just don’t want to get into this… because I might possibly be considered for a job in the administration.””
Very odd. That doesn’t even rise to the level of damning with faint praise. Why wouldn’t this page have been as effusive in his praise for Kolbe as the other one? Why would he be concerned about what he had to say jeopardizing his chances of a job in the administration? Hmmm, I think you have your mystery source. Once again as with all Pagegate revelations, the source appears to be a Repub. After his inconsistencies on the Foley predations and now this, alas, I think Kolbe has a lot of explaining to do.
I am bothered that investigations are being started over what amounts to nothing more than rumor.
If the Pages themselves were complaining about the behavior and asking for an investigation, that would be one thing, but this is an unnamed source-it just stinks. It also plays well on the stereotype that gay men are out to pick up teenage boys and “recruit” them into homosexuality.
#9 The article certainly seems to imply that the kid who didn’t want to talk would have said something bad, but is that what the quote says? Or did they ask him and he replied that he didn’t want to be involved or talk about it, that he was hoping to get a job. Maybe he’s just practicing not talking to the press? That seems like a good job skill to display. But he gets quoted in such a way that everyone who reads it is going to assume that he participated in something fishy.
Is this what he’d want to imply if he’s hoping for a job?
one liitle word_paranoia. a liitkle insecure are we??? well anyways, another some to bite the dust. and a close race to against a vice-admiral no less. http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/15754123.htm duly recorded
#11: I just don’t understand why he would not simply say nice things about Kolbe assuming that’s what he believed. Maybe he’s lawyered up. I don’t know. I do hope Kolbe is cleared of any wrongdoing. If this is a dishonest smear, then I hope the “source” has the book thrown at him/her.
And yet no one in the MSM is questioning why Democrat Gubernatorial candidate Ken Strickland opposed a House Resolution in 1999 condemning pedophilia.
I guess for the same reason no one in the MSM is curious about Harry GReid’s shady land deal.
There’s no there there. Another gay-baiting assault by the drive-by media.
At this rate, no adult man in the country, gay or straight, will dare be alone with a teenage male (similar to the situation we already have with teenage girls).
It takes a village, I guess… provided lots of gummint chaperones are present.
Thank God I grew up when it was OK for adult men to associate with unrelated teens… my career as an electrical engineer (fairly successful) is the result of mentoring by a man on my paper route.
I remember one day being called into his house… he was all excited that his new HP-35 calculator had arrived. He’d be crazy to do that now.
In those days, he was a great guy. These days, he would be considered a perv.
This investigation is probabaly unwaranted, but explain something to me…
How can the FBI investigation be a Democratic plot when the Justice Department, Homeland Security and the FBI are all run by Republicans?
If the Republican political appointees in those agencies wanted to kill this investigation, they certainly could. Why then is the anger here directed at the Democrats?
Does anyone here have any evidence the investigation was started by a Democrat at the FBI?
whew…glad it was clarified that only some democrat could be anonymous. I mean, it’s not even thinkable or possible for one solitary single second that the source could be an anonymous anti-gay conservative, now could it?
Rep. Kolbe is the keynote speaker at our annual black tie dinner here in Dallas next week. I’m quite confident that his moral compass is in good working order. Unlike our former President and the sockpuppet commentators on this site.
If the Republican political appointees in those agencies wanted to kill this investigation, they certainly could. Why then is the anger here directed at the Democrats?
Actually, the FBI refused to comment; this is an action being taken by Federal prosecutors in Arizona.
With that in mind, though, the FBI’s job (and the US Attorney’s office’s job, for that matter) is to investigate, and they take complaints like this seriously — as they should. Like any law enforcement agency, they should act on and investigate potential crimes, regardless of the source from which they get it. This case shows that they are in fact NOT spiking investigations because of the political affiliation of the person involved — which means they’re doing their job.
The question, then, is not who in the FBI’s or Attorney’s office chose to start an investigation — that should happen automatically with the complaint.
However, it’s more than a bit peculiar that NBC ran this piece out of the blue on October 10 — and then suddenly came back with today’s piece about an investigation — and, in that short period of time, was able to interview so many of the participants.
I smell setup — and it reeks even worse of paid Democratic operatives like Mike Rogers.
A common liberal and Democratic tactic of smear has been to exploit the fact that good law enforcement agencies investigate ALL complaints. All they need to do is file a complaint, then trumpet the fact that an investigation has been opened, using lurid language to portray the individual complained against as already guilty — and twisting the words of individuals like the pages quoted to support that.
Of course, they do this from hiding, either behind the fact that sources must be kept confidential in the initial stages of an investigation if they wish, or by using partisan reporters’ claims of journalistic protection.
Meanwhile, IanRaj, who as you notice first leaped to proclaim Kolbe guilty, can sit back secure in the knowledge that the damage is already done. The point was to smear Kolbe with the claim that he was being investigated by the FBI for raping pages.
When the complaint goes nowhere, the FBI is not going to release an “exclusive” about how the charges lacked merit, nor is it going to identify its source.
NBC News, when pressed to do the same, will claim journalistic privilege — and they certainly won’t publish an “exclusive” about how the investigation found nothing.
Furthermore, Democrats like Chase and IanRaj, when the investigation turns up nothing, will claim that “Republican political appointees” made sure it was killed and that the evidence was destroyed.
#17: “that the source could be an anonymous anti-gay conservative”
You could start with those members of the Texas delegation to the 2000 GOP convention who staged that insulting demonstration while Kolbe spoke. Or you might want to look in the direction of the homohater Repub who’s trying – no doubt in vain – to replace Kolbe in the House. Kolbe’s endorsement of Graf would have been of great help but Kolbe detests the odious Graf so much he refused an endorsment. Payback time perhaps?
And personally, what I find amusing is so many of our board liberals making excuses for a news story that started by using a story about a camping trip ten years ago to imply that a gay Congressman took pages out in the woods and raped them, and then introducing an “anonymous source” to back it up three days later.
This is why I support modifying current libel and slander laws to have a lower threshold of culpability when a source is anonymous. If a source was identified, the current threshold would apply — knowingly and maliciously publishing false information about an individual; however, if the source was anonymous, the publisher of the information is liable unless they can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that what they published was true.
Or, IanRaj, we could start with the obvious, which would be the people who are currently spreading innuendo and rumors about gay Republicans, and who historically have hated Kolbe.
That would be the Democrats — and especially paid Democratic operative Mike Rogers.
#19: “IanRaj, who as you notice first leaped to proclaim Kolbe guilty”
Lying again. I’m thinking that when we send you for re-education, part of your therapy will be to listen to Stephanie Miller’s “You’re a Lying Sack of Crap ditty 24/7 for a couple of months.
Come now, IanRaj, do you really think we didn’t catch what you said?
As a straight male and Republican, I am appalled at the crude appeal by the Democrats and mainstream media to gay bashing and single older gay male = pedophile.
That much said, that implicit premise doesn’t appear to be resonating with the American people, and hopefully
will engender a backlash.
NDT, I said the investigation was probabaly without merit.
But you guys are too quick to think NBC is in collusion with the Democrats in some giant conspiracy. NBC probabaly reported the story because, in light of Mark Foley’s resignation, any federal investigation into alleged improper conduct by a Congressman with Congressional pages is going to be considered newsworthy.
It’s like it was with the Duke lacrosse case. Otherwise unimportant investigations into assault charges and disorderly conduct on the part of Duke lacrosse players become newsworthy because of the larger story involving alleged rape.
Major news stories always branch out like a tree. This instance is no different. If not for Mark Foley’s alleged misdeeds, nobody would be reporting on the Jim Kolbe story.
And furthermore, why is it always blame the Democrats? Why is there no outrage over this recent Lou Sheldon statement regarding gays in the GOP? “It’s time for what we call a ‘Come to Jesus Meeting. Homosexuality is a dysfunctional lifestyle, and it must be addressed.”
That man is a member of your party and was invited to the White House by President Bush as recently as September 6, 2006.
Why doesn’t that make a headline here?
So NDT (and all the other gay GOPers),
Will you repudiate Rev. Sheldon’s most recent statement, as well as his long history of such caustic, anti-gay remarks, and condemn the President for inviting him last month to the White House?
And if you won’t condem them, what is your explanation for not doing so?
As that what we have to look forward to if the libs manage to steal Congress?
I tell you in a nut shell why the Democrats are pushing all of this. They can’t win on issues so they are trying to drive a wadge between the Christian Right and the Republican Party. As you recalled the Democrats wanted to make this election a moral election, but they could not take any votes away from the Republican Party, example Health care. I listen to Rush and to balance it out I also listen to the Ed Schultz show (Liberal talk) some times. Well Mr. Schultz is all upset because James Dobson (Christian Right) is tell every Christian Right to vote and vote Republican, because the Democrats is behind all of this Gay bashing in the Republican Party. I thought that Rush was on a lot of radio stations, but James Dobson is on over 1200 radio stations by what Ed Schultz was telling everybody on the air.
Will you repudiate Rev. Sheldon’s most recent statement, as well as his long history of such caustic, anti-gay remarks, and condemn the President for inviting him last month to the White House?
No.
I make a practice of not jumping on command for other peoples’ power trips — which means not bothering to respond to their outrageous and untruthful statements that are clearly made for the sole purpose of getting a rise out of others.
That goes for both Sheldon AND you.
And furthermore, why is it always blame the Democrats?
Because, in all the time that Jim Kolbe has been out, I have never once heard a conservative or even a religious rightist accuse him of raping children.
Only Mike Rogers, the Democratic Party that pays him, and the looniest of the right wing seem to be interested in outing, demanding firings of, and insisting that all gay people are suspect of pedophilia and complicit in an alleged Foley coverup.
I knew Howard Dean was insistent that Dems “shared their values”, but this is a match I wouldn’t have foreseen any time soon.
-And yet no one in the MSM is questioning why Democrat Gubernatorial candidate Ken Strickland-
His name is Ted Strickland. Given that Blackwell once equated homosexuality to bestiality, I’m surprised he hasn’t brought up this vote.
My question is:
If gay liberals have SO much power that they can force the FBI and the media to do their bidding over and over again, then why are the White House, Congress, and many state governments controlled by anti-gay politicians who are beholden to groups like FRC and Focus on the Family?
I remember when Republicans laughed and laughed over Hillary’s “vast right wing conspiracy” comments. I had no idea the reverse would be used not even a decade later.
I understand the camping trip was a large outing that included Kolbe’s sister. Like the overwhelming majority of gay men, I’m not interested in teenage boys. But if I were, I certainly wouldn’t be messing around with them next to my sister’s tent. 🙂
I don’t disagree with those here who think it was most likely someone on the left who made the complaint to the U. S. Attorney and/or tipped off NBC News. But I wouldn’t totally rule out the religious right.
The Kincaid opinion piece at Accuracy in Media (AIM) demonstrated that many on the right hate the presence of gay office holders and staffers in the Republican Party. And as Ian pointed out (damn him, he beat me to the punch), the way Texas delegates showed complete contempt for Kolbe when he addressed the 2000 Republican National Convention (on the topic of free trade, not gay rights), it’s always possible that someone on the far right decided there’s no better time to destroy Kolbe’s reputation than in the midst of the fallout from the Foley scandal.
I guess it all comes down to: How dumb are the voters? The Democrats and the Left, obviously, believe the voters are really, really dumb.
Because the voters would have to be really dumb to:
(1) buy the type of anti-gay hysteria the Democrats have been cultivating, and
(2) believe that Democrats, the party of NAMBLA, are the answer to any voter concerns about pedophilia. Or about Iraq. Or the economy (which is booming). Or Congressional corruption (William Jefferson and Harry Reid, anyone?). Or about anything, except for abortion-on-demand which clearly is an issue the Democrats own.
But the Democrats, including the “heirloom media” which they own and which serves as their unpaid political arm, are staking everything on a bet that voters are that dumb… “the sheeple”, as the Kos Kidz like to say. We’ll see in 3 1/2 weeks if it worked.
-Or the economy (which is booming).-
The economy has improved for some people, yes, but poll after poll, for years, has shown many in the public don’t think the economy is getting better, or hasn’t gotten better for them. The GOP often say this is because the media hides the truth, but after 3 or 4 years of saying this, and the public still doesn’t believe the economy is that great, I have to wonder.
-why the Democrats and MSM were okay with it when Gay Scoutmasters were on camping trips with boys, but are upset when a Gay Republican Congressman does the same.-
My question would be why the Wall Street Journal criticized Nancy Pelosi because she supported gay scoutmasters yet was disgusted by the Foley incident. Their implication seemed to be that Foley and these pages was somehow akin to what gays would do with Boy Scouts. If we’re going to be upset about the Democrats or the MSM, then we shouldn’t be thrilled with the Wall Street Journal either, should we?
Even if Democrats and the MSM had kept silent, groups like FRC, people like Tony Perkins and Bay Buchanan, were among the first to go on TV and try to blame gays.
I don’t know why they are exempt from criticism.
“many in the public don’t THINK the economy is getting better…” (emphasis added)
And what has that got to do with the objective reality of the economy, or of people’s lives / incomes?
It says more about the MSM shilling for the Democrats than anything. The media does indeed DOWNPLAY (not hide) economic triumphs that, under Clinton, they trumpeted.
Again, the Democrats / media are betting that the voters are too dumb to notice how excellent the economy really is – and, in 3 1/2 weeks, we’ll find out if they’re right about the voters.
“Even if Democrats and the MSM had kept silent, groups like FRC, people like Tony Perkins and Bay Buchanan, were among the first to go on TV and try to blame gays.”
Carl, could you please edit better? The statement doesn’t even make sense. It glues a hypothetical (“even if the Democrats and MSM had kept silent” – which we KNOW they didn’t), to an empirical claim (“the FRC were among the first to go on TV and try to blame gays”) for which you have not provided any evidence.
I mean, it’s been proven that the whole Foley story was broken in the first place (with careful partisan, October timing) by Democratic activists.
You guys are priceless!
Let’s see, according to the MSNBC article a Republican Congressman goes on a trip with “…. five current staff, two former pages, and his sister, … One participant, who requested anonymity, said he was uncomfortable with the attention Kolbe paid to one of the former pages.”
“He” seems to rule out the sister. That leaves 5 Republican staffers and 2 pages and an unknown number of park employees. Kolbe just ratted out the leadership for 3 more years of Foley follies. The park rangers are about as far from the chattering classes as you can get. Hmmm, who could it be???
This is so obviously a GOP on GOP hit, but by all means spin spin spin away!
There is no indication that the “uncomfortable” staffer was the person that was the anonymous reporter. It may just be that the investigators called him up and he stated his opinion.
You are right that this could be something coming from the right, but then, if this staffer was taht uncomfortable, maybe he should have come out ten years ago, when it would have been more politically expedient to do so.
Nope my guess is that this came from Rogers or somebody like him, because right now it is politically expedient for this story to be revealed. If the GOP christian right people who don’t like gays in the party wanted to get rid of the gays, they wouldn’t do it now, because the Christian right doesn’t want to hand the house or especially the senate (judges are too important), the Christian right would be waiting until an off year, or at least during the primary season to expose this stuff, not a few weeks before a very important mid term election.
#39, of course the Christian Right wants gays out of the GOP, but i did not imply it was them.
Congress and their staff are loyal to leadership and party above all else. They measure their lives by their connectons. The whole thing beginning to end is typical. Staff cover up, staff give Members all credit, staff holds on to dirt on everybody else. As # 11 said, not talking is a job skill that kid who would not talk because ” he might want a job” learned well.
But it all starts coming out when one Member pushes another under the bus. The Speaker or his velvet palace guard push Reynolds, then Fordham, then I can’t keep all the snipers straight. Then Kolbe pops up with “Hell, I told them 6 years ago and I am outta here”, what do you expect?
His staffers have already or want to stay on in DC with someone. One of them wasn’t crazy about working for the closeted Kolbe in ’96, and made a note for future use. Is it because he wants all gays out of the party, maybe. Is it because Kolbe spoke up, undoubtedly.
I see Carl and RajIan are resorting to classic liberal misdirection. When confronted with left-wing double-standards, don’t address them, just complain about some completely unrelated people or issue on the right.
Here’s irony for ya, The Congressional Sex Predator Sheltered by Democrats for two decades, Dead at 69.
-And what has that got to do with the objective reality of the economy, or of people’s lives / incomes?-
I guess if we assume that the public are morons, then we can believe they’re pessimistic about the economy solely because of media bias. But if that’s the case, then why didn’t they elect Kerry, and give Democrats control of Congress years ago? If the media that that much power over the public mind, and the media was overwhelmingly biased in favor of liberals, then it would show in favor of more than just the public’s view of the economy.
For a lot of people, the economy hasn’t improved that much, and even if it has, they’re always so afraid of one problem or another (Iraq, terror, etc.) they don’t have the time to feel great about the economy.
-to an empirical claim (”the FRC were among the first to go on TV and try to blame gays”) for which you have not provided any evidence.-
If people followed the scandal, then they’d know how the events unfolded. Gingrich was on TV pretty early on saying that the GOP kept quiet because they didn’t want to be seen as anti-gay. Tony Perkins was on TV from early on making these claims.
http://mediamatters.org/items/200610040014
-I mean, it’s been proven that the whole Foley story was broken in the first place (with careful partisan, October timing) by Democratic activists.-
Didn’t CREW send this information to the press and to authorities many months ago? The information which ABC used was sent to them by a Republican, or so Brian Ross said. Does that mean the Republican was using partisan timing in releasing the information to ABC?
-When confronted with left-wing double-standards, don’t address them, just complain about some completely unrelated people or issue on the right.-
Is that really any different from acting like liberal gays or Democrats are the only people who have pushed this story or made anti-gay claims?
This line in particular:
“**UPDATE** – AJ Strata at The Strata-Sphere wonders why the Democrats and MSM were okay with it when Gay Scoutmasters were on camping trips with boys, but are upset when a Gay Republican Congressman does the same.”
The Wall Street Journal tried to make hay out of Pelosi supporting gay Scoutmasters even though she has campaigned against what Foley did. The WSJ is not exactly liberal or Democrat. Yet that isn’t mentioned. I don’t see how this is unreleated, V the K.
Both sides have tried to make hay out of the Mark Foley issue. The idea that only liberals or gays or Democrats are responsible for all of this that has happened to Jim Kolble just doesn’t fly, in my opinion.
-Here’s irony for ya, The Congressional Sex Predator Sheltered by Democrats for two decades, Dead at 69. –
That is irony, I agree. I guess the Republicans are probably going to be happy to see his name in the news more often, since they’ve been bringing him up over and over as a campaign issue.
Is that really any different from acting like liberal gays or Democrats are the only people who have pushed this story or made anti-gay claims?
Yes, because not a single commenter on the right has ever tried to excuse what Foley did. Everyone here has said Foley is a sleaze and we’re glad he’s gone. Then, people go on to point out that the story is being entirely pushed by Democrat operatives. The critical difference is that people on the left don’t condemn their own no matter how egregious the offense (e.g. Gerry Studds, Harry Reid), they immediately shuck and jive and try to misdirect.
That is irony, I agree. I guess the Republicans are probably going to be happy to see his name in the news more often, since they’ve been bringing him up over and over as a campaign issue.
Rightfully so, considering Democrats are acting like IM’s are tantamount to rape, but kept a congressman who actually did what Foley only fantasized about within the warm embrace of their party.
-Yes, because not a single commenter on the right has ever tried to excuse what Foley did.-
Didn’t Drudge say that the pages involved were “beasts”? And didn’t Dobson say that what happened with Foley was just a prank?
-Harry Reid-
I don’t think what Harry Reid did compares to anything Studds or Foley did. Both parties have scandal, as Republicans like to point out. I mean Curt Weldon is being investigated by the FBI right now, and the Republicans aren’t calling for him to resign. Both parties have their scandals and their controversies, all on a different scale.
BTW, I had a few questions about the Studds matter, if you could answer them.
You said that Democrats sheltered him for 2 decades. Did he have any other scandals after the page scandal in 1983? I thought he was censured and then the voters in his district chose to keep him, and that was the last heard of him until he retired in 1996. I guess they could have done what Gingrich did to Steve Gunderson (although Gunderson had done nothing wrong, he was just gay) and threatened to primary him if he didn’t retire.
When Dan Crane was censured for his affair with a page, did Republicans in Congress try to take it further and have him expelled? Henry Hyde was in Congress then, right? Did he say anything about the matter?
Crane was defeated for reelection. So that shows the voters in his district were disgusted by what he did, but I’m not sure what it shows about Republicans in Congress at that time. If anything it just makes me think that both parties in Congress sheltered their incumbents.
I was looking at the AP article on his death (and they mentioned his “husband” – surprising to see that in print, I almost forgot gays can marry in Massachusetts), and this was near the bottom:
–In 1996, Congress named the 842-square mile Gerry E. Studds Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary after him in recognition of his work protecting the marine environment.–
Republicans controlled Congress in 1996. So apparently they had gotten over his page scandal enough to name a marine sanctuary after him. So for all the talk of him being sheltered, apparently people in both parties must have had respect for him.
Did he have any other scandals after the page scandal in 1983?
So, we’re back to it’s okay to have sex with an underage page if you’re a Democrat, but if you send IM’s to a page, you’re a sex predator.
I thought he was censured…
Which, as we all know, is meaningless. The only penalty attached to a Congressional censure is that you have been censured by the congress. Big whoop.
… and then the voters in his district chose to keep him
Apparently, Provincetown doesn’t have a problem with middle-aged men preying on young boys. No shock there.
I guess they could have done what Gingrich did to Steve Gunderson
Hello, Miss Direction, I knew you’d show up before long.
When Dan Crane was censured for his affair with a page, did Republicans in Congress try to take it further and have him expelled?
No, they held him to same standards Democrats held Studds to… except they didn’t name a Marine Sanctuary in his home district after him.
Crane was defeated for reelection. So that shows the voters in his district were disgusted by what he did
Unlike the voters in Provincetown.
But I’m not sure what it shows about Republicans in Congress at that time.
They were wrong not to have expelled him. I can say that. Unlike Democrats can say about Gerry Studds.
Maybe it’s unfair to single out Provincetown. Maybe fairer to say Democrat voters in general don’t have a problem with middle-aged men preying on teenaged boys (unless they’re Republicans).
From my moral perspective, though, preying on teenagers is wrong, regardless of whether your voters let you get away with it.
#45 – Exactly. I agree Foley is a creep and I’m glad he’s resigned. But if just doing IMs makes you an utter monster, worth talking about even after you resign… then, ummm, why didn’t we execute Bill Clinton or Teddy Kennedy or Gerry Studds outright, again?
Actually that’s probably another subtext of this whole thing right there. If you can get people to excorciate sins that are merely venal, you’ve warped the standards and people will have no more capacity to notice or deal with real (as opposed to virtual) sins.
No more capacity to deal with real sins like, say,
— Harry Reid actually using his position to change the law to benefit a Mob buddy, then profiting to the tune of $700,000, then calling it a mere “technical error” that he didn’t disclose it – and not resigning…
— or Congressman Jefferson actually taking bribes and having the cash in his freezer – and not resigning…
— or Clinton actually having sex with a 21-year-old intern in the Oval Office and comitting actual legal perjury about it – and not resigning…
— or Gerry Studds actually having sex with a minor – and not resigning…
— or Teddy Kennedy actually driving an intern off a bridge and killing her – and not resigning.
It’s at least partly about creating disproportion and moral confusion, or a thoroughly false sense that something huge and hypocritical has gone on even with Foley resigning, so that actual Democratic sins can be drowned out or pooh-poohed in the past and future – without the guys resigning.
As for your CREW / Brian Ross comment, Carl: You missed the point. You appear not to hear yourself speaking. Yes, they (liberals all) received key information about Foley months ago (from liberal activists). Yet they carefully held the story until October. Why?
They must not have cared very much about Congressional pages. Here is a comprehensive timeline on the Foley story which you may find educational and interesting. The Washington Post confirmed that the Foley story was pushed for months – by Democrat activists. (And thus implicitly HELD for months by the world’s Brian Rosses.) Of course, we know that Mike Rogers and others have been pushing the story since at least 2004. Why this sudden October 2006 frenzy, again?
By the way, here is a good article I came across on the Democrats’ long history of pedophile problems – again, involving actual sex (not virtual): http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/ReadArticle.asp?ID=24723
“In 1996, Congress named the 842-square mile Gerry E. Studds Stellwagen Bank National Marine Sanctuary after him…Republicans controlled Congress in 1996. So apparently they had gotten over his page scandal enough…”
It’s called “Congressional courtesy”, Carl.
– or Gerry Studds actually having sex with a minor – and not resigning…
Interesting excerpt from the Gerry Studds story on MSNBC.
Being a Democrat sex predator means never having to say you’re sorry.
(i.e., the Republicans were giving into or granting normal courtesy to the Democrats’ firm request)
I do wonder if Nancy Pelosi will take a break from her vigorous schedule of demagoguery and cosmetic surgery to attend the funeral of her former colleague, or if it would be too politically awkward.
-So, we’re back to it’s okay to have sex with an underage page if you’re a Democrat, but if you send IM’s to a page, you’re a sex predator.-
No, not at all. I think what he did was disgusting. What I wondered was if he’d done something else after that because you said they sheltered him for 2 decades.
-It’s called “Congressional courtesy”, Carl. –
But if you think what Gerry Studds did was horrible, doesn’t it bother you that a Republican-controlled Congress named a marine sanctuary after him? That’s why the Republicans who bring Gerry Studds up to the press all the time and say Democrats are hypocrites make me wonder why Republicans were not more vocal in 1983 about calling for Studds expulsion, and why they rewarded him in 1996.
–
No, they held him to same standards Democrats held Studds to… except they didn’t name a Marine Sanctuary in his home district after him. –
No, they just named one after Studds. Newt Gingrich was the Speaker of the House in 1996, and he let the vote through that named the sanctuary after Studds, even though he was in 1983 vocal about Studds and his disgusting behavior with the page.
-No more capacity to deal with real sins like, say,-
Like Bob Ney staying in office after pleading guilty to various crimes, and the Republicans didn’t start calling for his resignation until after it became a big controversy.
The Republicans have said this over and over, so I may as well say it again – both parties have a problem with bad behavior by their politicians. But all these things that Clinton did or Studds did don’t have much of an effect on what Foley did, just as bringing up Bob Bauman or Dan Crane would not have excused Clinton’s sex scandals.
-Yes, they (liberals all) received key information about Foley months ago (from liberal activists). Yet they carefully held the story until October.-
Is Brian Ross a liberal? I don’t remember hearing he was a liberal. You yourself say that liberal activists sent the information to the media months ago. So that shows liberals were not just waiting until the right time to reveal this story.
If this was all a big media conspiracy against Republicans, then why wouldn’t all this have come out in 2004, when there was a Presidential election at stake and both parties were heavily contesting Florida?
But if you think what Gerry Studds did was horrible, doesn’t it bother you that a Republican-controlled Congress named a marine sanctuary after him?
Yes, it does. But I don’t think it was a Republican idea, it was probably part of a deal demanded by Democrats, and the Republicans would have been slammed as ‘homophobes’ if they opposed it.
None of which excuses the fact — yes, the fact — that Gerry Studds remained an honored member of the Democratic Caucus until he chose to retire, even after proving himself to be a sexual predator. Does it bother you that the Democrat Caucus kept an admitted sex predator in their ranks for two decades in Congress? Apparently not, because you keep defending him and trying to point the blame at Republicans.
And, Carl, can you say with a straight face that if Bill Frist or George Allen made $700,000 off an undocumented land deal, with flavors of cronyism, tax evasion, and mafia ties thrown in, that the media would regulate it to the back pages because “it’s too complex for voters to understand” or “no big deal, business as usual in Washington?”
-But I don’t think it was a Republican idea, it was probably part of a deal demanded by Democrats, and the Republicans would have been slammed as ‘homophobes’ if they opposed it.-
That would have been a tall order for Democrats, since most of them voted for DOMA that same year, and Clinton bragged about signing it.
-And, Carl, can you say with a straight face that if Bill Frist or George Allen made $700,000 off an undocumented land deal, with flavors of cronyism, tax evasion, and mafia ties thrown in, that the media would regulate it to the back pages because “it’s too complex for voters to understand” or “no big deal, business as usual in Washington?”-
You have a good point. Sometimes Republicans are held to a higher standard. I think that much of the scrutiny about George Allen has been a “gotcha” that makes his detractors look like fools. However, I do think that the public, in general, sleeps through a lot of the financial scandals, like Abramoff, like the Keating Five, etc.
Anyway, I don’t mean to be so argumentative about this. I’m not even a Democrat. I’m an independent and I’m not fond of either party. I guess I just disagreed with the idea that only gays or Democrats were behind the campaign against Kolbe and against gays, and everything in the thread snowballed after that. Sorry.
Carl, Bob Ney isn’t staying in office. He’s resigning.
Misdeeds and corruption sure are bi-partisan. And not all Republicans do the right thing by resigning. They seem to more often, though.
Oh, but I guess we’re supposed to hold them to a higher standard – i.e., to have double standards.
“You yourself say that liberal activists sent the information to the media months ago. So that shows liberals were not just waiting until the right time to reveal this story.”
That makes no sense! It shows they WERE, repeat WERE, just waiting until the right time (October) to reveal the story.
*sigh* Why is this so hard for you to understand?
Liberal activists have been PREPARING the Foley story for months, in fact, for years (as I quoted earlier). If they and the media gave a hoot about the Congressional pages, “they” (now collectively including the activists’ media buddies) would have brought the information forward much sooner. But they don’t, so they didn’t. As is now well established, they only rolled it out in the October of an election year. They carefully held the story until then.
(brought it to the public / held it from the public, I mean. Obviously, to PREPARE the story and its timed release to the public, the activists & media people must talk amongst themselves or bring it to each other, months or years in advance. Which they did.)
Hastert says, in his defense, “the Democratic Congressional Campaign Committee had Foley’s explicit electronic messages before Hastert did.”
That, if true, is shocking and reprehensible. On the part of Democrats.
OK… Having descended into the mire of Foleygate… By way of coming up for clean air… Let’s all take a minute to notice and celebrate that THE LEFTIES HAVE, BY NOW, DESERVEDLY SHUT UP ON THE TOPIC OF WILSON-PLAME.
The righties were completely, 100% right about what a non-scandal that one was. (Excepting Wilson’s lying to the public about Iraq-Niger, which still ought to be a scandal – going in the other direction).
I didn’t know about the Teddy Strickland pedophelia thing, can someone e-mail me a source to point out to my mom?
As to the ‘inappropriate attention’ the problem of (how best to phrase this) dealing with an underaged individual of the same gender to which you are attracted is a) we don’t know what the inappropriate attention is in this context (I’m very physical contact oriented myself) and b) would it be inappropriate if it was not with someone of the sex he was attracted to? For example, say he showed an interest in the page because the page reminded him of Kolbe at that age? Or he saw potential in him? My spending time with a young woman would raise several eyebrows, even if my motives were innocent.
As Jawa Report has chosen to state it, “What a Difference a Party Makes – Democrat Sexual Predator Dies.”
Among the differences it makes: Studds never had ABC’s Brian Ross making the infraction appear even worse, quite possibly on purpose, by his obfuscating (or misreporting) the page’s age.
I have been following Mike Rogers’s blog the last few days. Mike is either the ultimate hypocrite or a very deranged gay man. He is more pious than the Pope. He is worried about being labeled a predator after contributing to the outing of Foley.
I quote
“Congressmen, straight or gay, should not be off on camping trips with pages or recent former pages. I don’t care if they are 16 or 19 or 21. Period. Legal or illegal, I don’t care. Its’ immoral and it’s unethical. It’s wrong. And, as we know, often it’s the pressure of the closet and not being gay itself that leads gay men to make unhealthy and inappropriate choices.
And now, this new tale of outrageous, predatory is a problem for everyone. For gay Americans like me, it means more conservatives will equate being gay with being a predator. For Ken Mehlman, it means anti-gay social conservatives will question even more a party that covered up Foley’s behavior, kept Jim Kolbe in the closet for years, and has a lot of other gay men secretly in its ranks.”
This just NUTS and not rationalize when he is out on a jhad against Gay Men who support the Republican Party.
Scratch the last sentence. That will teach me not to pre-write it on MSWord.
Replacement:
This is just NUTS and not rational when he is out on a jhad against Gay men in the Republican Party…….
I am curious when exactly the pro gay left decided men taking teenaged boys on camping trips is immoral-this really does seem to put the hypocritical label on their past positions on gay scout leaders.
Apparantly gay men should avoid any and all contact with any male under the age of 21, because they apparantly have no ability to control themselves-according to the new arguments.
Who ever thought there would be the day when a crazy gay lefty and the likes of James Dobson would be in agreement-although I think the crazy gay lefty may be even more extreme than the religious zealot.
If you sit there and whine and whine about inappropriate gays and gay outings then you contribute to the notion that: that is what being gay is all about. Sheesh, what a bunch of victims.
Mr. Rogers has Mr. Brit of #64 to thank for me seeing his blog. I’d never heard dof him until I heard a muffled voice from the Republican closet calling his name this week. I still wasn’t really interested until Mr. Brit said he is ‘deranged’.
When people talk about gays serving our enemies in the GOP, I had no idea how extensive the problem is. It is a sad little joke until you see how every prominent anti-gay politician has key staffers who are gay. What a cess pool of hypocrites, officials and staff, that needs to be drained. Give me an honest homophobe over a two-faced one like these guys any day of the week.
all these ‘unidentified sources’ trouble me – i’m thinking a suit should be filed and a subpoena served to find the identity of the source – it would require a judge willing to hand down a ‘judith miller’ to the reporter should he decide to protect the source
-As Jawa Report has chosen to state it, “What a Difference a Party Makes – Democrat Sexual Predator Dies.”-
Part of what that site puts down as MSM bias is a quote from Studds’ husband which defends Studds. I don’t see the bias there, in them just quoting someone.
It doesn’t matter WHO (what person) the quote came from, Carl. The point Jawa Report was making would seem to be that the MSM article went out of its way to defend Studds’ inexcusable behavior.
“GAY REPUBLICANS ARE CLOSETED DEMOCRATS”….no that wasn’t the liberal media who said it, it was a conservative media watchdog group….hmm, it must be nice to be attacked by your own
#71: Imagine if someone had come out and said, “I don’t think what Mark Foley did was a big deal,” and how they would have been treated. I think the double standard between Republicans who send IM’s and Democrats who actually get it on with underage males is pretty clear.
Why don’t you tell us about how you feel about Democrats claiming gays are pedophiles, James?
But James is right about many gay Republicans such as Patrick Guerriero, or other LCR-National office types.
They often show themselves to be closet Democrats – a point Bruce and Dan make on this blog all the time.
Maybe the “conservative watchdog” that James is quoting was… this blog! 😉
Well, looky here – Police Find No Report of a Foley Dorm Incident!
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/13/AR2006101300591_pf.html
This is from the Washington Post (so it must be true). Can you say “witchhunt,” boys and boys? I knew you could…
Regards,
Peter H.
NorthDallasnowSeattle32++,
Beckel is an ass and a conservative Democrat. But even worse is Calarato’s comment that Democrats are the party of Nambla – what a homophobic talking point – but all is fair in partisanship, riiiight?
Anyway, as Kolbe is not up for reelection, it looks to me as if some faction of the Grand Old Party is taking advantage of the upcoming defeat to “clean house” – you know, no more “closet Democrats, err, NAMBLA type!”
All the twists and turns on this site that are needed to rationalize gross political sado-masochism is fascinating but disturbing. In another era they would write Torquemada and Stalin, informing them about the misdeeds of underlings. Such touching faith!
But even worse is Calarato’s comment that Democrats are the party of Nambla
1. The Democratic Party is closely aligned with the ACLU, which openly supports NAMBLA’s right to distribute instructions on how to rape and murder children.
2. Nancy Pelosi marched in a Gay Pride parade next to Harry Hay, an outspoken supporter of man-boy sex.
3. In 1999, the House passed House Concurrent Resolution 107, condemning an APA article that supported “adult-child sex.” 355 House members voted for it. 13 Congressmen refused to support the bill and voted ‘present.’ All were Democrats.
Calarato’s point is entirely fair. Furthermore, I doubt any members of NAMBLA would vote for the Republican Party… what with all those icky values and morals and stuff.
Peter, this may be one of the WaPo’s more sickeningly hypocritical quotes in the article:
“Critics say Republicans’ eagerness to keep the Foley allegations quiet prevented them from launching inquiries that might have uncovered the lawmaker’s more sexually explicit communications with former pages in other states.”
Translation: Liberal Democrats say Republicans’ admirable civility and gay-acceptance prevented them from launching a vicious anti-gay witch-hunt that, if it had been executed with enough hysteria, might have uncovered the other, more serious evidence that Foley was hiding from everyone.
#79 – V, right on.
Of course, I wouldn’t guess all NAMBLA members to be Democrats. I imagine some could be Greens, Independents, Communists, apolitical or whatever. But I would happily bet they all hate Bush, or that a majority of them probably voted Kerry in 2004.
Addendum: I can’t find a reference to it, but wasn’t there a fundraising auction for Hillary’s 2000 Senate campaign in which one of the lots was a matching set of studded leather chairs, one full-sized, one child-sized, and the MC joked to the effect of, “These would be perfect for any of you NAMBLA types out there.” And the audience of Democrat Hillary supporters lapped it up?
Did that actually happen, or am I misremembering something. The examples I gave in #79 are well-documented, but I couldn’t remember enough details on the Hillary thing to check it.
It is often confusing to mix up liberals, conservatives, democrats, and republicans…I am a liberal democrat….frankly I wouln’t have minded burning any of the southern racist conservative democrats at the stake like they deserved, so if there is a conservative democrat who equates gays with pedophiles (and Jesus Christ, sex with somebody who is 17 isn’t pedophilia…I mean Foley might have been a dirty man, but he wasn’t lusting after some pre-pubescent child! Are you telling me that father’s at their son’s football game don’t have occasion to check out the teenage cheerleaders?! Please, it is a societal convention…a good one I think, but lets not treat it as a monstrosity….
Carl, I really urge you to follow the trail back to the Democratic Gay operatives. It is not that difficult because they are as blatantly open about their plans as Mike Rogers has been.
Sydney, why do you assume that these Gay Men that are working for said Congressmen are hypocrites? They may after all be truer to their core belief than many of us. They may in fact have placed a higher value on say abortion than that of same sex marriage.
I am Jewish but I do not belong to the Democratic Party as so many do. The Democratic Party does not currently support Israel as strongly as President Bush has done during his presidency. The Democratic Party supports Abortion but. I do not. I have never wanted to be married and so it is not a critical issue to me even though I can appreciate others desire to allow same sex marriage. Therefore, I do not consider myself a hypocrite because I am Gay.
Mike Rogers and his friends in the Democratic Party are attempting to destroy men who hold different views just because they do not agree with them. How enlightened is that. It is so typical of the Gay Left that they think that because one is Gay or Lesbian that they MUST have and hold the same values as they do.
Should ALL Jews vote Democratic and if they don’t they will be sought out at their place of work so they will be fired?
Should ALL Blacks vote Democratic and if they don’t they will be sought out at their place of work so they will be fired?
Should ALL Hispanics vote Democratic and if they don’t they will be sought out at their place of work so they will be fired?
Our GAY Brothers of The new FAR Left are as frightening as the FAR Right. They have adopted the same tactics used against the Jews by Hitler by turning Jew against Jew. They are our New Modern Day Fascists. Turning Gay against Gay, Father against Son, Son against Father, Mother against Son, Son against Mother. Just because they do not believe someone holds the same views on issues as they do.
But, more importantly so they can split the Republican Party and turn Republican against Republican so they can obtain Power and control Congress. They hope by making the Christian Evangelists so fed up with the party they will decide to forfeit their vote. And the hell with who they destroy.
When I was growing up we were required to read the “Scarlet Letter” and “1984”.
I hope it is still required reading in most educational programs. It has either been lost on these Gay Democratic Outers or I am wrong and there are whole new generations that have not even heard of these books.
Brit, placing a higher priority on one issue over another is one thing, but the leaders of the GOP have as their policy demonizing gays as a political tool. They demonstrably make life worse for other gays in order to advance their masters’ and their own careers. That is evil.
We are told there are Republicans officials who do not advance their careers catering to homophobes. These quislings could be working for one of them instead of Hastert, Santorum, and Frist.
Brit, placing a higher priority on one issue over another is one thing, but the leaders of the GOP have as their policy demonizing gays as a political tool. They demonstrably make life worse for other gays in order to advance their masters’ and their own careers. That is evil.
But of course,. isn’t it amazing how Sydney and his ilk have nothing to say about them and their fellow Democrats’ involvement in actions such as this, this, and this?
All done, of course, to advance their own careers, with the willing help of numerous gay staffers, tens of millions of gay dollars, and the hallelujahs of people like Sydney, who called them “pro-gay” and “gay-supportive”.
Since Sydney and his ilk have demonstrated that they don’t consider pandering to evangelicals, rewriting the Democratic Party platform on the fly to appeal to religious rightists, and advocating for state and Federal constitutional amendments stripping gays of rights to be “demonizing gays”, you have to wonder exactly what their priorities really are.
My guess is complete and utter servitude to the Democratic Party.
Are you telling me that father’s at their son’s football game don’t have occasion to check out the teenage cheerleaders?!
It doesn’t matter what sexuality is involved. When adults leer at teenagers, it’s disgusting and wrong. Most people would find it morally repugnant, except in Hollywood, where you can make a movie about a 40 year old guy chasing a 16 year old cheerleader and win an Oscar.
Your right, VtK.
Let’s get rid of Shakespeare and Greek tragedies while we’re at it. Oedipus Rex should only be read on a dog liscense.
Pixar for everyone…..so that VtK can understand, in his own limited way, the true nature of the human psyche.
monty
Let’s get rid of Shakespeare and Greek tragedies while we’re at it.
In the times in which those pieces were written, most people barely lived past their twenties, and didn’t usually bother with education.
However, I find it hilarious that you and your fellow Dems are using those as excuses for having sex with children and teenagers. And I can hardly wait for you to come back with them as an excuse for incest.
[Comment deleted. This commenter has been repeatedly banned.]
#89: I think #88 is just an example of a lefty who can’t refute an argument, so he just throws out some weird non-sequitur and follows it up with a lame insult.
Sad, sad, sad.
Let’s get rid of Shakespeare and Greek tragedies while we’re at it.
NDT wrote: “In the times in which those pieces were written, most people barely lived past their twenties, and didn’t usually bother with education.”
“However, I find it hilarious that you and your fellow Dems are using those as excuses for having sex with children and teenagers. And I can hardly wait for you to come back with them as an excuse for incest.”
Comment by North Dallas Thirty
______________________________
Poor dear NDT.
Someone should alert you to the fact that Shakespeare and Greek plays were of different eras and were each a collection of works and not “pieces”. You just can’t lump them all in together. Well….I guess YOU can. You’re a repug and can make up the facts as you go along. 🙂
I find it sad that you can’t discuss the idea that works such as these open a window to understanding the psyche of the human condition. They upset the simpleminded view you have of “Just say NO!” You jump to these classics as an excuse for child sex and incest because you don’t want to be bothered about thinking any deeper than the hole you crap in.
What a shallow and morally sorry state you and your party are in.
Now…
Run along and watch some cartoons so your brain doesn’t hurt. Make sure those cartoons are in black and white, BTW. I’d hate for you to be overly taxed by having to contend with a bit of color. 🙂
monty
I find it sad that you can’t discuss the idea that works such as these open a window to understanding the psyche of the human condition.
If that were your point, I might agree.
However, you’re simply trying to obfuscate and make excuses for your party’s support of child sex and incest practitioners by claiming that people like V the K want to ban classic literature when they express disgust with men leering at underage cheerleaders.
You might recall that Oedipus only commits incest because he doesn’t know that Jocasta is his mother — and that, once he finds out, he a) blinds himself and b) is thrown out of the city by his subjects.
But your theory is that incest is OK because you find it in classic literature.
Oh….is that what I meant?? Guess it had nothing to do with his “Hollywood” remark. Get your mind out of the gutter and take a breath of fresh air, NDT. You remember fresh air, don’t you?
Oh yeah….libs supporting that incest and kiddy sex stuff too?? Thanks for clearing it up for me. Do you really think you are sounding rational, except to the other loonies there in the asylum with you?? You sure are spending a lot of time bringing it up and talking about it. Makes me wonder….hmmmmmm….
You can’t help making this stuff up, can you. It’s very pathological and I suggest you learn to control yourself before it’s too late. Look what happened to Bruce. 🙂
monty
Oh….is that what I meant?? Guess it had nothing to do with his “Hollywood” remark.
Comparing what V the K was talking about from Hollywood to the masterpieces of the Greek tragedians is roughly on the same level as comparing hamburger to filet mignon.
Oh yeah….libs supporting that incest and kiddy sex stuff too?? Thanks for clearing it up for me. Do you really think you are sounding rational, except to the other loonies there in the asylum with you??
Yup.
Mainly because it’s liberals who push to repeal age of consent laws, who demand that parental notification rights be stripped, and who require that sex be taught in elementary and high school classrooms.
Oh, jeez. Silly me.
And here I thought it was all about the hypocritically perverted GOP and that very tiny church closet they all roll around in.
Nice shell game, NDT. I hope you can sell some of those strawmen for Halloween. 🙂 🙂 LOL
monty
And here I thought it was all about the hypocritically perverted GOP and that very tiny church closet they all roll around in.
Why are you calling people “perverted” for doing something that you yourself support and champion?
Mainly because it’s liberals who push to repeal age of consent laws, who demand that parental notification rights be stripped, and who require that sex be taught in elementary and high school classrooms.
And don’t forget the ACLU (libs), defending NAMBLA’s right to distribute instructions on how to rape and murder children, or Nancy Pelosi (Alpha Lib) marching in a gay pride parade with man-boy sex advocate Harry Hay.
I also understand that Dakota Fanning (age 12) is set to do a nude scene in her new movie. The Oscar’s as good as hers.
First, Studds did not have sex with an underage page but with a 17 year old which is one year above the age of consent. Nor are there any underage pages in the Foley incident as all are 16 or old and that is the age of consent.
Second, thankfully I’m not a Republican or a Democrat. Both suck and both were using this to attack gays. Both! I have covered examples from both camps at my blog. Yes, Republicans are pushing the accusations and so are Democrats. Republicans can’t admit they are gay and Democrats can’t admit they are bigots. You decide which is better. I think they both stink.
The Kolbe attack is just one such attack. (freestudents.blogspot.com/2006/10/anonymous-voices-from-trash-can.htm) We also have the Democrats running ads on Christian radio ( freestudents.blogspot.com/2006/10/democrats-gay-bait-for-christian-vote.html) attacking a pro-gay Republican for being “friends” with Foley — that’s all — just friends. But apparently enough for Democratic bigots.
This whole thing stinks.
Why are you calling people “perverted” for doing something that you yourself support and champion?
Comment by North Dallas Thirty
____________________________
It figures that you’d make up some more crap in order to win “Brownie Points” in your own irrational mind. The Great Debater. Bwahaha!
Oh brudda!! What a maroon. LMAO. Stop! Yer killin’ me! 🙂
monty
CLS, if you had been paying attention, you’d know that we’ve moved beyond the legal technicalities. A 17 year old is still a minor. A middle aged man hitting on a 17 year old is still a creep. A middle aged man who beds a 17 year old is morally repugnant. Whether it’s technically legal for him to do so doesn’t matter. Just because bestiality is legal in several states doesn’t mean it’s not repugnant or disgusting.
CLS, if you had been paying attention, you’d know that we’ve moved beyond the legal technicalities.
Comment by V the K
____________________
In other words, CLS:
VtK would like you to know that he is now tired of dealing with facts, reason and any kind of intellectual thought behind something as simple and “black and white” as human sexuality.
He has now mandated that the board is ready to hear his “The World According To VtK” god-given message, because… since he speaks from experience, he is, indeed, the expert on all things perverted.
I’ll sure grant him that. 🙂
monty
monty, you’ve grown tedious and without purpose –as has been noted elsewhere.
Why comment here if you can’t add constructively to the discussion? Try to keep your inner 4 yr old in check, ok?
Mish-Mash.
You dare use the terms “constructively” and “discussion” to insinuate what goes on here, on this blog.
Bwahahahaha!!
Gawd…I wish we had a picture of you in that dime store Terminator costume. I’ll bet it’s even funnier than I imagine. At least Spandex, probably, wasn’t involved, thank god.
“Ahh….(fart) be baak.” LMAO. Oh, brudda!! (snort)
monty
monty, you have a definite knack for snide and snarky… and irrelevant. You’ve created yourself in a final image and that is one ripe with dishonesty, deceitfulness and duplicity.
Time to reinvent yourself; the gig is up here for you… for now.
Ah….Mish-Mash.
I see you drooling but I didn’t hear a bell.
So….. I think I’ll stick around a while longer, mkay?
Capt. America?!! (snicker) Such sweet irony. (snort) (choke) 🙂 🙂
monty