Liberals didn't assassinate Foley, he did that himself, and it was a lifelong republican that made his behavior known. No liberal I know or read about is calling for the suspension of due process. Innocent until proven guilty applies to the judicial system. As a private citizen, I can have my own opinion, and it doesn't affect justice whatsoever. Is that so hard to understand? I admit, I am enjoying the effects of this scandal, Hastert isn't being invited to Republican fundraisers anymore, and they will have a harder time winning in Florida, especially since Foley's name will still be on the ballot.
Hmm, so you're really enjoying the public torment of Foley and Hastert, huh? Is that something like enjoying "torture", Spider? I mean, often "torture" includes just such personal embarrassment and ridicule. Surely, you, of all people, wouldn't admit to enjoying such a horrid torment. Baron Max
Sorry, but yes. What's "poetic justice"? Is that where a person is forced to sit through some poetry reading for a whole fuckin' hour and is ready to kill the fuckin' poet after only a couple of minutes? Baron Max
In the conversation, the teen said he was under the age of 18 yet Foley still continued to do what he did. It doesn't matter if the so-called victim (whether a prank or not as the righties suggest) is legally over 18, but that Foley thought he was under 18 at the time. You can still get busted for that as it's called intent. How do you think police always bust online stalkers and kiddie porn people? They set up fake conversations where they think they'll meet up with a kid or somesuch and then they make their move even though the bait may not always be who they thought it was. God, party loyalists are disgusting. Just suck it up and concede that Foley is fucked up. You guys are grasping at straws big time trying to spin this like a DJ. It'll make you guys look a lot better and not like fools blindly trying to protect this guy. Be a man and admit he's wrong to save whatever respect you may have left. - N
And your point is? Do you see me defending those names? Nope! Wrong is wrong. I don't give a shit what party you belong to. Both your guys' sides are friggin' lame always trying to pull the comparison lists of red vs blue trying to think that because one person did it, others can too. Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! The only reason why these politicians get away with what they do is because they're powerful people. If you were the one having that conversation with that teen, you'd have been busted right on the spot for being an online predator. Intent is all it takes because there are strict laws regarding that behaviour. This dude Foley knows he's in big shit especially since he was the head of the group to protect those kiddies. He wrote the rules and he screwed himself. It doesn't require a blowjob to get busted with online chats with people who think are kids, all it takes is intent. And the punishment should be 10x due to the position he holds. His position is worse and more damaging than if he were president doing this. - N
So? These people got a censure or a reprimand, Franks was even reelected after that. I'd be satisfied with such an approach. The acts of this one man aren't the most interesting part of this issue. It's the cover-up, the lying, the blame game, ect...
But you stand with them in their calls, the Republicans would have forced him out of office if he had not resigned, they have done it before, besides it isn't for Democrats to determine who the Republican leadership is, as they paid no attention to the Republican calls for Democrats to be punished when they have committed crimes.
Correct, Republicans could keep Foley in congress, it's up to them, as long as he stays out of jail. I think he might be a liability for them, so I would support keeping him in.
spidergoat, and the Democrats supported their re-election runs, so what punishment did they really suffer? they didn't lose their chairmanships, they didn't loose their party funding, Gerry Studds even received 3 standing ovations in the House after he had been reprimanded, and that was for the fact that he turned his back on the Speaker in defiance when the reprimand was read into the record, in the end did the Democrats do a dammed thing to really punish these people for real crimes?, or did they turn the into heroes, and support them?
spidergoat, were did in the hell did you come up with that interpretation of what I posted? The Republicans would never have let him keep his seat, and they would have cut him off from party fund for his election run, unlike your butt bumping friends the Democrats.
Hey, if they got re-elected, how bad could they be? In light of Foley's admissions, and Bush's gay prostitute friend in the "press" Jeff Gannon, I'd be careful which party you characterize as butt bumping. Not that there's anything wrong with that.
Hey, since most of y'all are really concerned about this type of activity, why don't y'all want to use wiretapping and cell phone listening, etc to catch these horrid "criminals" in the act? I mean, if this minor breach of ethics is so bothering to you, surely you'd approve any and all listening-type devices, right? If not, why not? Baron Max
Baron Max I did not say MY morality. And like it or not all countries, including ours, are governed mainly by a set of social norms. Our laws reflect perceived common morality so long as such Laws do not impinge upon the Bill of Rights or the Constitution. Take the ban in some states on same-sex marriages, the prohibition of certain recreational drugs while others are legal, the age of consent, the minimum driving age, the ban on human euthanasia, the cruelty to animals ban, the ban on dumping some chemicals into rivers, the law against advertising the legal drug called tobacco to children, the example I gave about honor killing, men can walk topless down the street while woman can not, etcetera…. The Law reflects common morality and that’s a simple fact. To say otherwise really doesn’t make any sense so I am not sure what you are talking about... MY morality? I don’t get it? I think we can agree that it is a commonly held belief in the USA that adult men should not use their appointed position in the government as a citizen- servant and representative to groom young impressionable male children into sucking their cock. I am 100% sure that here in the USA that would not be an accepted norm and most Americans would be against that sort of behavior. That said, the Sentor himself choose to resign, as he should. He has not been charged with a crime. I simply said anyone who covered up for him should do likewise. Further, while the Law can not govern the grooming behavior itself, if it comes to light that the Republican ex-Senator had sex with a child he will go to jail. I truly hope that such is not the case. Michael
Sounds a whole lot like witch hunts to me, Michael, don't it to you? I mean, should we all start turning in our friends, families and neighbors for any little breach of whatever-it-is that we consider "unethical" or "inappropriate" behavior? Baron Max
