Rep.Foley

[Sonny]

I missed the part in the Laura Bush article where she left the scene of the accident, swam across the channel, returned to her hotel and discussed the incident with her family and lawyers; waiting more than 10 hours to report it...

You're right. Its more comparable to hearing about a congressman having inappropriate relations with teenage boys, discussing it with people in your own party, then never reporting it to the authorities.

You have proof of that the GOP covered up illegal activity? I'd love to see that.

If you think the people that knew about Foley's actions and did nothing didn't do anything wrong (whether what they did was legal or not), you're not even worth talking to about this. There's a difference between being loyal to your side, and being blind.

And if the left side of the aisle conveniently ignored the issue until a politically opportunistic time (5 weeks away from the Nov. elections) does that make them equally guilty or just AOK politics (business as usual)?

[sohotrightnow]

Then they are just as guilty!

[peterwho]

I find it interesting that we've "evolved" into a discussion of semantics.

I believed that Stryker's post understated his point and in my post was attempting to differentiate between the two accidents. Is there anyone, here, who believes that the circumstances surrounding the two accidents are in any way similar or equivalent other than the result? If so, we should move that discussion to another thread.

Back on topic (I will repeat myself):

Former Rep. Foley's actions are offensive. We need to investigate to find out who knew what, when they found out and what actions they took. If ANYONE acted in a way that put politics before the protection of a congressional page (I don't care if the page is 21 - they should be protected from predatory congresspersons), they should be hung out to dry.

[Tim Whitehead]

I missed the part in the Laura Bush article where she left the scene of the accident, swam across the channel, returned to her hotel and discussed the incident with her family and lawyers; waiting more than 10 hours to report it...

You're right. Its more comparable to hearing about a congressman having inappropriate relations with teenage boys, discussing it with people in your own party, then never reporting it to the authorities.

You have proof of that the GOP covered up illegal activity? I'd love to see that.

If you think the people that knew about Foley's actions and did nothing didn't do anything wrong (whether what they did was legal or not), you're not even worth talking to about this. There's a difference between being loyal to your side, and being blind.

And if the left side of the aisle conveniently ignored the issue until a politically opportunistic time (5 weeks away from the Nov. elections) does that make them equally guilty or just AOK politics (business as usual)?

Yes, if they ignored it, it makes them equally as guilty. That's not the situation though, as far as we know right now. What we DO know is that it certainly looks like certain republicans knew of this, and tried to sweep it under the rug. Which is something you can't even seem to admit.

[Campbell]

I missed the part in the Laura Bush article where she left the scene of the accident, swam across the channel, returned to her hotel and discussed the incident with her family and lawyers; waiting more than 10 hours to report it...

You're right. Its more comparable to hearing about a congressman having inappropriate relations with teenage boys, discussing it with people in your own party, then never reporting it to the authorities.

You have proof of that the GOP covered up illegal activity? I'd love to see that.

If you think the people that knew about Foley's actions and did nothing didn't do anything wrong (whether what they did was legal or not), you're not even worth talking to about this. There's a difference between being loyal to your side, and being blind.

And if the left side of the aisle conveniently ignored the issue until a politically opportunistic time (5 weeks away from the Nov. elections) does that make them equally guilty or just AOK politics (business as usual)?

Yes, if they ignored it, it makes them equally as guilty. That's not the situation though, as far as we know right now. What we DO know is that it certainly looks like certain republicans knew of this, and tried to sweep it under the rug. Which is something you can't even seem to admit.

We can take the Republicans out of the discussion and just accept that maybe the House leadership (and when I say leaderhip I mean Hastert et al.) failed to do the right thing. This whole thing is pretty sad and the fact that it is boiling down to a partisan pissing contest is even more disturbing. Just because the Democrats have their fair share of moral shortcomings doesn't make Foley's actions any less reprehensible. Maybe the leadership screwed up, even some Republicans are recognizing this.

[Sonny]

I missed the part in the Laura Bush article where she left the scene of the accident, swam across the channel, returned to her hotel and discussed the incident with her family and lawyers; waiting more than 10 hours to report it...

You're right. Its more comparable to hearing about a congressman having inappropriate relations with teenage boys, discussing it with people in your own party, then never reporting it to the authorities.

You have proof of that the GOP covered up illegal activity? I'd love to see that.

If you think the people that knew about Foley's actions and did nothing didn't do anything wrong (whether what they did was legal or not), you're not even worth talking to about this. There's a difference between being loyal to your side, and being blind.

And if the left side of the aisle conveniently ignored the issue until a politically opportunistic time (5 weeks away from the Nov. elections) does that make them equally guilty or just AOK politics (business as usual)?

Yes, if they ignored it, it makes them equally as guilty. That's not the situation though, as far as we know right now. What we DO know is that it certainly looks like certain republicans knew of this, and tried to sweep it under the rug. Which is something you can't even seem to admit.

Tim,

I want to be clear. If anyone violated the law - I would expect no less then to see them prosecuted to the full extent of the law. OK?

[peterwho]

To be just as clear as Sonny (I repeat myself, again):

We don't KNOW much. We have heard a lot of accusations. In fact, Dick Morris (Clinton Whitehouse Aid) has stated that several Democratic Party leaders knew about Foley's actions when the Republican leadership was informed.

We need an investigation to determine who knew what and when. ANYONE found to be putting politics over the well-being of those kids should be run out of office.

Is this clear?

I hope so.

P.S. It sounds as if congress is already backing off of their call for ethics reform and focusing only on the investigation. Call, write or email your congresspersons - don't let them off the hook!

[sohotrightnow]

Hahahahhahaha! Dick Morris! Are you kidding me? You better do your research buddy. The guy is a nutjob now and his life calling is to slander Bill and Hillary left and right. And speaking of ethics and Dick Morris...he needs a course or two in that.

[peterwho]

Since you have nothing to add to the discussion other than criticism, would you prefer the Christian Science Monitor?

The group Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington, run by former Democratic congressional aides, got copies of Foley's overfriendly e-mails in July, and forwarded them to the FBI, which chose not to act.

http://www.csmonitor.com/2006/1006/p02s01-uspo.html

Do you believe there was no communication with anyone in a leadership role in the Democrat Party at that time?

Or is this another example of a Right-Wing Conspiracy where the FBI was directed by the President to ignore the issue and threaten the source in order to keep the issue quiet?

Finally, am I the only one who wonders why the leadership of the House didn't take action to prevent preying on House Pages in reaction to the actions of Dan Crane, Gerry Studds, etc.? Aren't many of them the ones expressing such outrage, now?

[cjwilhelmi]

Has anyone actually defended him? I'm disappointed that anyone would be dismissive of what he has done and would love to see a united Republican Party condemming this behavior.

I actually heard Bill O'Rielly say yesterday that Rep. Foley is not a pedophile since he allegedly never had any physical contact with the pages. First, I can't believe that someone can actually come out and practically defend him. Second, his notion of a pedophile is off. Pedophinilia(sp?) is about a sexual preference, not an act.

Sorry to bring up an old post, I have been away for a while.

Bill O'Rielly is technically right on this matter but wrong about the reason. Pedophilia, according to the DSM IV-R, is liking prepubescent children usually around age 13.