Mark Foley

steve11 · 10-09-2006, 03:09 PM

I can�t believe there isn�t a thread on Foley here yet so might as well have one.

So far the situation stands with it being fairly certain Foley did send sexually charged messages to the pages, however if he had any contact other then IM sex is not known yet, and quite honestly of little relevance to the far greater problem surrounding this.

The evidence is starting to point to some sort of cover-up, and if not an outright cover-up at least people would have looked the other way while this conduct was going on right under everyones nose. This is a dicey issue as covering up (or even ignoring for that matter) a child potential child molester within the House is disgraceful. If so it�s going to thouroughly tarnish the Republicans. Interestingly enough the republicans level the accusation that Democrats sat on the evidence that they had for 3 years only to release it in perfect timing for a major election season.

My personal views-

I should start this off with a preface. Having worked in DC and in the government (all be it briefly) I find it hard to believe that one side could have known about his personal life, while the other remained ignorant of it. It�s hard to say who found out about it first (though all details point to the republicans back into 2000), but it�s safe to say both knew about it for at least 3 years prior to this �leak�

Frankly I think we are in a position where both parties are guilty. The Republicans for engaging in a quasi cover-up, and the Democrats for looking the other way till the opportunity to go forward and cause the most damage reared it�s head.

Political predictions-

The republicans might not in as much trouble as one would think. The fact that signs strongly hint at a democratic leak, and prior democratic knowledge gives them some wiggle room. The danger is that the core religious right that is very much anti-homosexual will simply not show up and vote. The fact that several prominent gay republicans are now leaving their office might be an effort to get around this and help �purge� the party prior to elections to win voters back. It�s an uphill battle but I think t he damage has been done.

The democrats really should just sit back and avoid pushing to hard on this issue if they want to remain clean. The republican party is already tearing itself apart in contradicting statements over who knew what when, which makes them seem dishonest and hints at a cover-up. Democrats getting to involved just opens up they questions of why they waited for the leak, who knew what when on their end.

TheSpacePope · 10-09-2006, 03:23 PM

Quote:

The danger is that the core religious right that is very much anti-homosexual will simply not show up and vote. The fact that several prominent gay republicans are now leaving their office might be an effort to get around this and help �purge� the party prior to elections to win voters back. It�s an uphill battle but I think t he damage has been done.

That is so completely abhorrent, so devoid of soul, and so callous. I am surprised that Any party would take part in that. That will almost certainly damage their swing-vote capability. It will also damage their reputation with moderate republicans as well.
*shakes head*

Akamaz · 10-09-2006, 03:28 PM

one of the funny things is that apparently on the state that the kids were in, they were above their local age of consent for their area (it states on the wikipaedia for this guy that tey were both over and under the age of 18.

some sources i've seen state that in the physical area the pages were in when this happened, the age of consent was 16.

Lockeownzj00 · 10-10-2006, 02:27 PM

This is a non-issue. The guy's a perv, but really, has anybody explained why this was a bad thing? The kid was 16. Not 11. Not 8. Not pre-natal. If anything, it's a moral grey-area. Everybody, on both sides, just kind of spasmed in response to this, to look like the 'least bad guy--' (and soon the game begun to point the finger at the less sympathetic and more perverse side).

Okay: unprofessional, yeah. Perverted? Yeah. I still don't see how this is a matter of national importance. We're letting it get in the way of other things. I mean, hey, I'm all for the Republican party crumbling, but christ, for this? Not for the other egregious crimes it's committed? Not for brazen gerrymandering? Not for blatant hypocrisy? For a dirty old man? Jesus.

katsielyonz · 10-10-2006, 07:55 PM

What lockeownzj00 said. I couldn't have said it better meself.

ArlanKels · 10-10-2006, 08:45 PM

The real issue is perhaps not his messages, but the subsequent alledged attempt at covering it up.
Rumors abound of money being traded between politicians to keep it all hush hush.

If that part of this whole thing is true then that is the main issue, it demonstrates the weakness of our political system that bribery can so readily be used and accepted.

ZERO. · 10-10-2006, 08:57 PM

Mark Foley is a perverted old man.

That just about covers what I have to say on the subject.

neyo the king · 10-10-2006, 10:50 PM

Mark Foley is a Republican.

And that is all that needs to be said.

No, I kid. I kid.

But, seriously, one does have to wonder what brought this all out in such rapid succesion as this. It bogles the mind.

Raiden · 10-10-2006, 11:56 PM

Like it has been said, it truly wasn't THAT bad a thing. It was like Clinton. It wasn't so much that he had sex with Lewinsky and the other girls. It was him lying while under oath that really had the shit thrown at him.

And Neyo, it's been pointed out pretty heavily that the Democrats decided to wait until a major election time, and then release this information to greatly ruin the Republican reputation to throw the vote in their favor. While not proven, I don't think, it's heavily shown for them. Which is why it's made such big news, since they wanted a big tiff to be made in an attempt to score themselves more votes.

If the pages were both above the age of consent, and consented, there is NO real problem in that department. While somewhat perverted, if they were the right age and consented, then it was all legal and as such shouldn't have been shoved into the light so much.

Honestly, while this does look bad for Foley, it in my opinion looks even worse on the Democrats that initiated the "leak". I mean, how childish can you honestly get? In an attempt to win some votes, you decide to use information against your opposing party to try and ruin a man's life. Granted, a perverted man's life, but still. It's sickening when they use tactics like that. They probably believe it's some cunning plan and they're patting themselves on the back for it, but if you can't win an election without pulling out dirt like that...then you shouldn't BE in the election.

Keep in mind, this isn't me bashing Democrats. This is me bashing anyone childish enough to pull a stunt like that. Now, if they weren't the ones that "leaked", then fine. If they were, then I stand by what I said.

Solid Snake · 10-11-2006, 12:32 AM

I think what Foley did was a horrific abuse of his position of power, personally, and I damn well believe he should resign from public office and never, ever try to do anything political in nature again.

Also, I think Hastert should have resigned, even if he didn't know a damn thing about what Foley was doing, because as the majority leader of the Republicans in the House it was his professional responsibility to keep Foley in line. He failed in doing so.

That being said, what aggravates me about this is all the swing voters out there who decided to vote Democrat solely because of the Foley scandal. The reason I say this is largely because, in my home state of Connecticut for example, the incumbent Republican House members (Nancy Johnson, Chris Simmons) have no affiliation whatsoever with Foley and certainly were disgusted with what they heard. Why in the hell should Nancy Johnson be held personally responsible for what Foley did? Unlike Hastert, there's no way Johnson had prior knowledge of Foley's misdeeds. And her election platform, the issues she's campaigning for in Connecticut, have absolutely nil to do with Foley.

The problem here is the media is shouting "Foley did bad things...and he's a Republican!" And, what, am I supposed to feel ashamed for being a Republican voter now? What Foley did was against the core principles of conservatism (hell, forget conservatism specifically, how about just the core principles of civilized society?) I believe in, that's for sure. And I don't think the entire Republican party is 'guilty by association.' If some no-name Democratic representative was caught sleeping around with a male stripper, does that mean every Democrat deserves to lose an election?

The bottom line is, I find myself in a sort of awkward agreement with Locke, despite being on the opposite side of the political spectrum. If the Democrats sweep the House and the Senate, I want them to defeat my guys on the issues. If the Democrats win because Bush is mismanaging Iraq and certain social services in our country are in horrible shape, I can accept that. Hell, I'd even find myself in the position of partially agreeing with many of the Democratic voters, because I'm not terribly fond of the direction of our Congress these days either.

But if the Democrats win because of this? If Foley dominates the election and overshadows the issues we should be talking about? I'd be disappointed.

Oh, and Raiden; as a conservative myself I'd love to have the courtesy of believing that the Dems were behind the release of this information in some horrible left-wing conspiracy, but eh, I can't personally buy into that. I think this would have been a devastating hit to the Republicans regardless of when the information was released and if the Dems really knew about it beforehand, they would have gained a lot more by releasing it before the 2004 elections (when the Presidency was also on the line.)

Plus, if the Dems really were keeping this secret, they should have released it days before the election, not a month before the election. As is the Dems are giving the Republicans just enough of a breathing space to feasibly close the gap -- I'm not convinced they will, but had this been released around Halloween instead, the Republicans wouldn't even have a prayer.

10-09-2006, 03:09 PM	#1
steve11 Troopa Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Washington DC Posts: 91	Mark Foley I can�t believe there isn�t a thread on Foley here yet so might as well have one. So far the situation stands with it being fairly certain Foley did send sexually charged messages to the pages, however if he had any contact other then IM sex is not known yet, and quite honestly of little relevance to the far greater problem surrounding this. The evidence is starting to point to some sort of cover-up, and if not an outright cover-up at least people would have looked the other way while this conduct was going on right under everyones nose. This is a dicey issue as covering up (or even ignoring for that matter) a child potential child molester within the House is disgraceful. If so it�s going to thouroughly tarnish the Republicans. Interestingly enough the republicans level the accusation that Democrats sat on the evidence that they had for 3 years only to release it in perfect timing for a major election season. My personal views- I should start this off with a preface. Having worked in DC and in the government (all be it briefly) I find it hard to believe that one side could have known about his personal life, while the other remained ignorant of it. It�s hard to say who found out about it first (though all details point to the republicans back into 2000), but it�s safe to say both knew about it for at least 3 years prior to this �leak� Frankly I think we are in a position where both parties are guilty. The Republicans for engaging in a quasi cover-up, and the Democrats for looking the other way till the opportunity to go forward and cause the most damage reared it�s head. Political predictions- The republicans might not in as much trouble as one would think. The fact that signs strongly hint at a democratic leak, and prior democratic knowledge gives them some wiggle room. The danger is that the core religious right that is very much anti-homosexual will simply not show up and vote. The fact that several prominent gay republicans are now leaving their office might be an effort to get around this and help �purge� the party prior to elections to win voters back. It�s an uphill battle but I think t he damage has been done. The democrats really should just sit back and avoid pushing to hard on this issue if they want to remain clean. The republican party is already tearing itself apart in contradicting statements over who knew what when, which makes them seem dishonest and hints at a cover-up. Democrats getting to involved just opens up they questions of why they waited for the leak, who knew what when on their end.

10-10-2006, 08:57 PM	#7
ZERO. Geek/Nerd extraordinaire Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: In my computer. Posts: 691	Mark Foley is a perverted old man. That just about covers what I have to say on the subject. __________________ p\|_\|7 \|_\|R h4\|\\|d 0\|\\| 4 H07 570\/3 Ph0R 4 \|\/\|I\|\\|\|_\|73, 4\|\\|D i7 533\|\/\|Z lIk3 4\|\\| h0\|_\|R. 5I7 \/\/I7h 4 pr377y GiRl Ph0r 4\|\\| h0\|_\|r, 4\|\\|D I7 533\|\/\|Z Lik3 4 \|\/\|i\|\\|\|_\|73. 7h47'Z r3l47i\/i7y. Albert Einstein leetified.

10-10-2006, 10:50 PM	#8
neyo the king Dr. Ivo Robotnik Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Mobius Posts: 674	Mark Foley is a Republican. And that is all that needs to be said. No, I kid. I kid. But, seriously, one does have to wonder what brought this all out in such rapid succesion as this. It bogles the mind. __________________ I am Doctor Ivo Robotnik, the greatest scientific genius in the universe! ~"Where There's Smoke, They Pinch Back."~

10-11-2006, 12:32 AM	#10
Solid Snake Erotic Esquire Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 5,563	I think what Foley did was a horrific abuse of his position of power, personally, and I damn well believe he should resign from public office and never, ever try to do anything political in nature again. Also, I think Hastert should have resigned, even if he didn't know a damn thing about what Foley was doing, because as the majority leader of the Republicans in the House it was his professional responsibility to keep Foley in line. He failed in doing so. That being said, what aggravates me about this is all the swing voters out there who decided to vote Democrat solely because of the Foley scandal. The reason I say this is largely because, in my home state of Connecticut for example, the incumbent Republican House members (Nancy Johnson, Chris Simmons) have no affiliation whatsoever with Foley and certainly were disgusted with what they heard. Why in the hell should Nancy Johnson be held personally responsible for what Foley did? Unlike Hastert, there's no way Johnson had prior knowledge of Foley's misdeeds. And her election platform, the issues she's campaigning for in Connecticut, have absolutely nil to do with Foley. The problem here is the media is shouting "Foley did bad things...and he's a Republican!" And, what, am I supposed to feel ashamed for being a Republican voter now? What Foley did was against the core principles of conservatism (hell, forget conservatism specifically, how about just the core principles of civilized society?) I believe in, that's for sure. And I don't think the entire Republican party is 'guilty by association.' If some no-name Democratic representative was caught sleeping around with a male stripper, does that mean every Democrat deserves to lose an election? The bottom line is, I find myself in a sort of awkward agreement with Locke, despite being on the opposite side of the political spectrum. If the Democrats sweep the House and the Senate, I want them to defeat my guys on the issues. If the Democrats win because Bush is mismanaging Iraq and certain social services in our country are in horrible shape, I can accept that. Hell, I'd even find myself in the position of partially agreeing with many of the Democratic voters, because I'm not terribly fond of the direction of our Congress these days either. But if the Democrats win because of this? If Foley dominates the election and overshadows the issues we should be talking about? I'd be disappointed. Oh, and Raiden; as a conservative myself I'd love to have the courtesy of believing that the Dems were behind the release of this information in some horrible left-wing conspiracy, but eh, I can't personally buy into that. I think this would have been a devastating hit to the Republicans regardless of when the information was released and if the Dems really knew about it beforehand, they would have gained a lot more by releasing it before the 2004 elections (when the Presidency was also on the line.) Plus, if the Dems really were keeping this secret, they should have released it days before the election, not a month before the election. As is the Dems are giving the Republicans just enough of a breathing space to feasibly close the gap -- I'm not convinced they will, but had this been released around Halloween instead, the Republicans wouldn't even have a prayer. __________________ *WARNING:* Snek's all up in this thread. Be prepared to read massive walls of text.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

10-10-2006, 07:55 PM	#5
katsielyonz Troopa Join Date: Aug 2006 Posts: 88	What lockeownzj00 said. I couldn't have said it better meself.

10-10-2006, 08:45 PM	#6
ArlanKels <-- Pickle Eater Join Date: Oct 2006 Posts: 1,244	The real issue is perhaps not his messages, but the subsequent alledged attempt at covering it up. Rumors abound of money being traded between politicians to keep it all hush hush. If that part of this whole thing is true then that is the main issue, it demonstrates the weakness of our political system that bribery can so readily be used and accepted.

10-10-2006, 11:56 PM	#9
Raiden Just a passing through veteran Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: On your couch. Yes? Posts: 5,327	Like it has been said, it truly wasn't THAT bad a thing. It was like Clinton. It wasn't so much that he had sex with Lewinsky and the other girls. It was him lying while under oath that really had the shit thrown at him. And Neyo, it's been pointed out pretty heavily that the Democrats decided to wait until a major election time, and then release this information to greatly ruin the Republican reputation to throw the vote in their favor. While not proven, I don't think, it's heavily shown for them. Which is why it's made such big news, since they wanted a big tiff to be made in an attempt to score themselves more votes. If the pages were both above the age of consent, and consented, there is NO real problem in that department. While somewhat perverted, if they were the right age and consented, then it was all legal and as such shouldn't have been shoved into the light so much. Honestly, while this does look bad for Foley, it in my opinion looks even worse on the Democrats that initiated the "leak". I mean, how childish can you honestly get? In an attempt to win some votes, you decide to use information against your opposing party to try and ruin a man's life. Granted, a perverted man's life, but still. It's sickening when they use tactics like that. They probably believe it's some cunning plan and they're patting themselves on the back for it, but if you can't win an election without pulling out dirt like that...then you shouldn't BE in the election. Keep in mind, this isn't me bashing Democrats. This is me bashing anyone childish enough to pull a stunt like that. Now, if they weren't the ones that "leaked", then fine. If they were, then I stand by what I said.