I guess Foley will most probably get away with it because he knew the law inside out and he knew just how far he could go before he breached it. Baron, if you do not have a problem with a 52 year old man trying to get into the pants of children, and doing all he can do it but just stopping short (or managing to stop it so he doesn't get caught), then that is your perogative. Maybe you partake in that kind of thing as well and so will find every excuse you can to defend it, who the hell knows. But it seems you, who is always upset when your hard earned tax dollars isn't being put to good use, have been duped. Because your tax dollars have been paying for a 52 year old pervert to try and use his position, wage and privileges to get off hitting on teenagers. Hell he's even gone so far as to cyber during a voting session in Congress. But hey, again, if you're into that kind of thing, of course you're not going to have a problem with it. You tell me. You think it is inappropriate for anyone to have sex unless they're doing so to have a child. But Foley sending emails and text messages to a child discussing the length of the kids penis and whether he was horny or not, and how he wants to take those pants off him and help him relieve himself of his 'horniness', hell that's fine as far as you are concerned. Not inappropriate or bad at all. After all, as far as you are concerned, it's all good as long as 1) he does not get caught and 2) if he does get caught, as long as he has gone as far as he can have but has not broken the law. And again with the witch hunts? Salem was not about 'inappropriate' behaviour you ignorant fool. It was about religious nutters who had had some bad wheat and who assumed that anyone who was slightly different or who say for example had a birthmark, was somehow a witch and therefore should be put to death. Hey again, if you think it's fine for a 52 year old man to send children emails asking for naked photos of themselves, penis measurements, discussing the kids penis length and asking them to measure it for him, asking them if he's making them horny and wishing he could take their pants off, is not somehow 'inappropriate' for you, then you obviously approve of said behaviour. If you think that a political party trying to hide such actions by one of their members, all the while touting family and religious righteousness as being the norm or what is right and appropriate, then that is again your prerogative. If you think that an elected member of Congress should be able to use the tax dollars he's paid with to send children such emails and messages, again, good for you. However, it would seem that you are in a minority. Because anyone in their right mind would see such actions and behaviour as being not only inappropriate but also down right sick and disgusting. What does that have to do with this issue? How does a girl wearing a skimpy outfit have anything to do with a 52 year old man hitting on kids on the internet? Refer to above as to how this is related to the present discussion. Again, how does a girl going to a party to give a boy a blowjob have anything to do with the present discussion. No not everyone will agree on what is appropriate and what is not. However I can say it's a pretty safe bet that the majority of people think that what Foley has done is inappropriate and kind of sick and perverted. Unless that person is Baron it seems. LOL! You really want me to delve into your posting past in here and from some other forum you have participated in and remind you of all the crap you've come out with against people's rights even if the law is on their side? Trust me Baron, you do not. Read through this thread Baron and read through the opinions of people in the papers in regards to this issue. You appear to be the only one defending Foley. That says a lot about you Baron.