But Der Baron! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! What shall I do without your little turds of wisdom each day! Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Please don't leave me Der Baron!
OK we can agree that there is "The Law" and that one shouldn't do something against "The Law" so as not to be charged with a "Crime". To answer your question: Yes because there was, according to my ideals, an abuse of power to gain sexual gratification. I don't like it when my servants use the power I have entrusted them with to do something other than serve the USA. Like trying to get blowjobs when they should be working for example. Anyway, following the Law is a minimum bases for electing our servants/representatives agreed??? One would expect that Law abiding as a given to work huh??? That then said I think we can agree that we elect our representatives to represent our ideals. Surely they should try to do this? That should be 99% of governing huh??? I, as citizen, think that a Law abiding USA Representative who covers up the actions of a Law-abiding pedophile (who has a penchant for viewing little boys at the pool) and looks the other way while said Pedophile sends "naughty emails" to pool-boys and other male children in the hopes of lining up a blowjob – well they would step-down. I only hope my fellow citizens in Florida agree. I also find it disconcerting that they were more than happy to look-the-other-way while this Law abiding pedophile sat on a committee that writes the Laws that govern what is and is not Lawful behavior in regards to sexual acts towards children. Again, I should hope my fellow citizens in Florida would agree. Lastly I would not have a problem with ex-Senator Foley having a relationship or just one off sex with adult men, women or transgenders (so long as they were not under his direct supervision). The point here is that ex-Senator Foley was attempting to solicit sex from a child, and even worse - one under his direct care. Those who knew of his inappropriate behavior should resign. I only hope my fellow citizens in Florida agree. Then again, do you Baron Max find it inappropriate for a Pedophile to solicit sex from children under their care? Do you find it inappropriate for those who knew ex-Senator Foley was attempting to solicit sex from children and did nothing about it as negligent in the duties as servants to our republic? Maybe therein lies the rub? Michael
Der Baron must think it's OK for men to lust for minor boys and sexually harrass them. Not quite a conservative position! Never thought of Baron as a pro-gay, pro sexual harrassing minors type. I bet he's a NAMBLA member too! WAIT till boys come out and report being molested by this pervert. The Repubs are burning on this one. I can't stop smiling!
First, there's two issues ...the law and proper justice. Then there's the ideals of morality. You've stated that you understand the law, I think, but morality is an entirely different issue. And whether you and I agree is also not at issue. Let me ask you something; if a bunch of friends and I found someone doing something that we thought was "inappropriate", would you agree that we should tar and feather him and run him out of town????? Please try to put this issue in simple terms and see how far you'd let us go. And, worse, Michael, what if you didn't agree with us that it was "immoral" behavior???? I'm not so sure, Michael, how well our congressmen can legislate and control "morality", do you? Would you like the government to begin passing laws agaisnt things that they thought were "immoral"? Think about that one, Michael, before you jump to answer it. Baron Max
Michael, and if as it appears that Democrats knew about this for 3 years, should they also pay the price? In the past they protected Gerry Studds, one of their own from being thrown out of the house and reduced it to a censure, and as the House read their censure of him, Studds turned his back on the speaker and members in the chamber and ignored them. Later, at a press conference with the former page standing beside him, the two stated that what had happened between them was nobody's business but their own, so did the democrats ever force him to resign?, did he have the integrity to resign himself?, did the leadership of the democrats resign, even though they knew about his pedophilia? as for democrat can you say hypocrites?
Of course the Dems are hypocrits. But the story of the day is a REPUBLICAN was a very bad boy. The speaker of the house is about to RESIGN! The Christian Right is even distancing themselves from the scandal. It's October of 2006, the story is a Republican was caught sexually harrassing teen boys. A HOMO Republican at that! The RNC has power over the land, in all branches, this isn't the Dems fault. Time to take some knocks. The Party of God is indeed flawed. Can the Right do nothing but point at Democrats?? Is this disgusting scandal Clinton's fault too? Time for the Right to take responsibility.
And this is what other Liberal democrats want for your children, Other nuggets abound. For example, Ginsburg recommended that the age of consent for purposes of statutory rape be lowered from 16 to 12. [See pages 69-71 and the specific recommendation regarding 18 U.S.C. § 2032 on page 76.] Other nuggets abound. For example, Ginsburg recommended that the age of consent for purposes of statutory rape be lowered from 16 to 12. [See pages 69-71 and the specific recommendation regarding 18 U.S.C. § 2032 on page 76.] http://volokh.com/posts/1104181917.shtml To my surprise, the allegation seems largely accurate, though in the limited context of the federal territorial and maritime jurisdiction. (The report was referring only to federal law, and most sex crimes are covered by state law rather than federal law.) The report was Sex Bias in the U.S. Code, and it was prepared for the Commission by former ACLU lawyer Brenda Feigen-Fasteau, then-professor Ruth Bader Ginsburg, and 15 Columbia Law School students working under their supervision. But here's the suggestion on p. 102: 18 U.S.C. §2032 — Eliminate the phrase "carnal knowledge of any female, not his wife who has not attained the age of sixteen years" and substitute a Federal, sex-neutral definition of the offense patterned after S. 1400 §1633: A person is guilty of an offense if he engages in a sexual act with another person, not his spouse, and (1) compels the other person to participate: (A) by force or (B) by threatening or placing the other person in fear that any person will imminently be subjected to death, serious bodily injury, or kidnapping; (2) has substantially impaired the other person's power to appraise or control the conduct by administering or employing a drug or intoxicant without the knowledge or against the will of such other person, or by other means; or (3) the other person is, in fact, less than 12 years old. Under this proposal, it seems to me that sex with 12-year-olds and older would be legalized in the federal territorial and maritime jurisdiction, regardless of the age of the other party. This wouldn't be a "Romeo-and-Juliet" law aimed at preventing prosecution of young lovers — it would equally be a dirty-old-man-and-Juliet law. And while there are plausible debates about what the age of consent should be, it seems to me that simply lowering it to 12 would be quite a striking and unjustified change.
We do and if he hadn't resigned we would have forced him from office, unlike the Democrats who stood behind the Studds, Barny Franks, Bill Clinton, and a hundred others in their party, they tell us that we have no right to demand that when their leadership is caught in a scandal to demand that they resign, but how come ever time they yell scandal they try to tell the Republican leadership they have to resign?
Guess what, it turns out the perverted IM messages were, in fact, with someone over 18. So what we have now is an exchange between adults.
I'm sure the vital Christian Right voters will be satisfied now Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! Without them and their money and pet social issues the Republicans would never have been elected. Now the real question of the day: Did the RNC (Not Bill Clinton) cover up for Foley to hold a Florida seat? Would any conservative let him hang out with your teen boy??
Stunning isn't it! The CONTHERVATIVES! Defending a homo child stalker! I wonder how the Iranian branch of conservatives would react!
Your point? His own lawyer has admitted that Foley has had improper communications with teenagers who were pages or former pages. Hmm so because no stories that he performed the act has yet to surface, does not mean that he isn't one. Not for lack of trying it seems: Somehow I doubt that he wanted entry to the page residence hall to play charades. Here in lies the issue. The rumours. That he behaved innapropriately cannot be denied. He's admitted it himself. Did his fellow Republicans know? How convenient. Like all politicians, they will keep denying it. It seems that for quite a while, rumours abounded of Foley's escapades and messages, but the leadership and fellow party members prefer to turn a blind eye or simply tell him to 'stop' (like putting a jar of candy in front of a child after giving them one and then telling them to stop eating it while watching over the jar). One has to wonder, what is more worrying? That they allowed a man they most probably knew or at the very least suspected of behaving in a manner that was, in my opinion, disgusting, towards teenagers and did nothing about it? Or that they knew or suspected and turned a blind eye to protect the party name and their own collective political arses and that one vital seat. Hmm scary thought isn't it? But Baron is right (yes I know, I too am shocked). This man does have a right to justice and his day in court. So far investigations into his conduct still appears to be ongoing, but things might not look to be too promising for Foley. Now that this is in the public light for all and sundry to see and pore over, any sign of a cover up will be even more damaging for the Republican leadership and party as a whole. The cat is out of the bag and one has to be thankful I guess. Otherwise if this had remained secret, it might have gotten worse. His behaviour since this has emerged into the public realm has been pitiful. Blaming alcohol, being gay and having been allegedly abused as a child simply do not cut it. There is no excuse for his behaviour. Wether he has broken the law is yet to be determined by federal investigators, however child protection laws in the US are there for a reason. But one cannot deny that what he has done is wrong. Someone should point out to Foley that not all alcoholics, gays or abused people do what he did. There is nothing and no one to blame but Foley. Maybe his fellow politicians should also take note. That the privilege of their position should not protect them from laws and codes of conduct that affect everyone else.
Firstly no one should be tarred and feathered and ran out of town. As to the “inappropriate” behavior – this is for society to decide. GW Bush could get dressed as a tranny, pierce his newly implanted tits nipples and attend the next UN meeting only wearing a leather thong. I think we can agree that while legal this really is inappropriate?!?!?!? Secondly, we as a society deem that sexual predation in the work place is inappropriate. Grooming an underage male child to suck ones cock post-18th birthday is also, by most civilized society’s standards, inappropriate. It should be noted that the now disgraced Republican ex-Senator Foley started grooming two of his male prey at the ages of 16 and 17. While I am sure each individual grooming technique may in and of themselves have been legal – as well all know the impressionable teenage mind combined with the power garnished simply by being in an authority position (such as a Senator) makes such grooming practices sick by most peoples standards. For example: while this SMS exchange maybe technically legal, I do not think it is appropriate for ex-Senator Foley to have had this conversation while he should have been attending to the Senate’s business: Which at the time was a vote on the HR 1559, Emergency War Time supplemental appropriations. Here we see Foley using his alias Maf54. Maf54: I miss you Teen: ya me too Maf54: we are still voting Maf54: you miss me too Maf54: ok..i better go vote..did you know you would have this effect on me Teen: lol I guessed Teen: ya go vote…I don't want to keep you from doing our job Maf54: can I have a good kiss goodnight Teen: :-* Teen: <kiss> Teen: are you going to be in town over the veterans day weekend Maf54: I may be now that your coming Maf54: who you coming to visit Teen: haha good stuff Teen: umm no one really Maf54: we will be adjourned ny then Teen: oh good Maf54: by Maf54: then we can have a few drinks Maf54: lol Teen: yes yes ;-) Maf54: your not old enough to drink Teen: shhh… Maf54: ok Teen: that's not what my ID says Teen: lol Maf54: ok Teen: I probably shouldn't be telling you that huh Maf54: we may need to drink at my house so we don't get busted I simply believe that those who knew Foley (whether they be Democrat or Republican) was doing this sort of shit with the teenage male pages should resign in disgrace. I should hope that Floridians feel the same. Baron Max, most of our laws are legislated based on what is perceived as common morality. Of course these must not impinge upon the Bill of Rights nor the Constitution. However, at some point common morality is legislated and then becomes common law. For example: It is illegal to kill ones daughter for having sex outside of marriage. While in some countries not to kill is the immoral act - in ours it is the killing which is immoral and hence we have a law against it. Therefore when someone from another culture comes to the USA, while they may think it they have every moral right to kill their daughter for her perceived sexual misdeeds – it is against the law here. Michael
Guilty until proven innocent, huh??? Or guilty for trying something? ...without benefit of trial? Hmmm? Would you be suggesting that all of us begin calling the police, turning in our neighbors, for what we perceive as "inappropriate" behavior? And you DON'T find that scary? Oooh, let's all have a Friday night witch hunt! Yeah! Or better yet ....."Get Elected ...You, Too, Can Hunt Witches!" Nice election slogan, huh? ...LOL! Yeah, Bells, that's great ...anyone can make accusations about the behavior of anyone else, then when we start digging deeper, we can uncover any and all "inappropriate" behavior, and even possible cover-ups! Hey, Bells, how would you like it if your neighbor or co-worker began to make accusations about you, which prompted an indepth investigation into all of your past behavior? Would you approve of that kind of "law and order"? And yet, apparently the Justice Dept nor the FBI have found anything illegal in any of Foley's acts ....and yet we're here publically crucifying him?! You say that, yet you continued to publically crucify him?! The courts are likely to find him innocent of any illegal act, and yet he's now publically ruined and his family has been "fucked royally" .....and your post seems to indicate that you think that's just fine and dandy??? I'm surprises at you, Bells. Baron Max
Yeah, and the main issue here is ....whose "morality"? Yeah, you say "common morality", but is there such a thing in a nation that is so divided by just such "morality"? No, Michael, what you're suggesting is that YOUR morality be used to determine the "common morality", which is a little selfish and ego-centric, ain't it? Baron Max
Baron Max, isn't amazing how the liberals demand the full protection of the law for their perverts, and terrorist, and democrat homosexuals, that we need to understand, but let the same thing happen on the other side of the political spectrum and the vigilantly pack is off in full cry, hang em high!, they demand that people be thrown from their jobs, especially when they are politically effective against them, can you say hypocrite, fish wife, rumor mongering trash! The only time they need the Flag is to wrap themselves up in it to claim their trashing of the military is patriotic, and the rest of the time they wipe there ass with it, they want the Constitution to protect them, but if some one who doesn't agree with them, the lynching party is on, does it matter if the accused actually broke the law, not to a liberal, it only matters that they can be used to send a political message, if there are ever Gulags in this country they will come from the Left, the Liberals, the friends of the Communist, and terrorist of the world!!
Well, Buffalo, you're mostly correct, but I've never viewed this issue in terms of political party at all. And to be honest, I think that's where all the ranting and violent bullshit is coming from ....political sensationalism and political assassination. If Foley were just a regular guy on the street, no one would have made such a major issue out of it. I'd be willing to bet that we all know someone personally who has done similar things at one time or another. I'd be willing to bet that if they were "investigated", we'd find more shit-under-the-bed than you could shake a stick at! The Internet porno site popularity is just one good example of our hypocrisy ...there are billions and billions of hits a day on those sites. Surely that says something about us all, doens't it? Or are we all innocent of such "inappropriate behavior", and it's only the other guy who's doin' it???? Baron Max
