It's not the offense, it's the cover-up

[mburbank]

Okay, the fact that the offense is sexually explicit harrassment of minors by the co chair of the comitte that's supposed to protect sexually exploited children means the foofense is a pretty big deal too.

Plus, it's gay harrassment, which wouldn't be more fuel to the fire than was already there if this guy wern't a Republican, or anyway shouldn't be.

Oh, and it's election time, that ought to magnify things a little.

But the cover up looks kind of like the Republicans were trying to keep the info under wraps until the elections were over so they could hold onto the seat. So maybe the cover up is bigger.

But isn't this really just an ugly, tawdry little sex story? Yes, it's bad, but is it significant and something the whole country ought to get in an uproar about when there are really much more importnat things going on in the world? I mean, it's not as if there's a blue dress involved here.

[Grislygus]

Whoah. I haven't been following the news for a while. What the hell did I miss?!

[mburbank]

MIAMI, Florida (CNN) -- Former Rep. Mark Foley is in an alcoholism treatment center three days after resigning from Congress amid allegations that he sent inappropriate messages to teenage pages.

A letter containing the information was faxed by Foley to WPBF-TV in West Palm Beach, said David Roth, Foley's attorney, on Monday.

"Painfully, the events that led to my resignation have crystallized recognition of my longstanding significant alcohol and emotional difficulties," Foley wrote. "I strongly believe that I am an alcoholic and have accepted the need for immediate treatment for alcoholism and related behavioral problems."

Foley said he deeply regrets and accepts "full responsibility for the harm that I have caused."

He said in the letter that "with the loving support of my family and friends," he made arrangements on Saturday to enter "a renowned in-patient facility to address my disease and related issues."

He said he has instructed Roth to cooperate "fully and completely" regarding "any inquiries that may arise during my treatment."

The fax was apparently sent from Clearwater, Florida, but Roth would not say Monday if that's where Foley is being treated.

Meanwhile, the Florida Department of Law Enforcement said Monday it was launching an investigation into allegations Foley sent sexually suggestive e-mails to pages.

FDLE spokesman Tom Berlinger said that the agency on Sunday contacted the FBI -- which is looking into whether any federal laws were broken in the matter -- to inform federal authorities of the Florida probe.

The state agency will be trying to determine whether any of Foley's alleged communications originated in Florida.
Justice Department considering investigation

The Justice Department, at the request of House Speaker Dennis Hastert, also is considering an investigation of how lawmakers handled the allegations against Foley. (Watch how and when House leaders found out about alleged e-mails -- 2:05)

The rare move by Hastert followed calls by Democratic leaders in the House and Senate for a swift inquiry, questioning whether the GOP leadership in the House had improperly squelched concerns about Foley's contacts with pages.

The Florida Republican resigned Friday after his e-mail and instant-message contacts with pages were reported by the media.

Foley, a six-term Florida congressman, was co-chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus and a prominent backer of legislation to crack down on online predators and criminalize child pornography on the Internet. (Watch how politics inspired Foley at age 6 -- 2:44 Video)

The House voted to launch an investigation of his dealings with pages. But in a letter to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, Hastert urged the Justice Department to look into who knew about the content of any sexually explicit messages involving Foley "and what actions such individuals took, if any, to provide them to law enforcement." (Watch why the speaker wants an investigation -- 2:34 Video)

Justice Department spokesman Brian Roehrkasse said the department will review "whether we can conduct an investigation."

Hastert, an Illinois Republican, also asked the Justice Department and Florida Gov. Jeb Bush to investigate whether the former lawmaker violated federal or state law.

Earlier Sunday, White House Counselor Dan Bartlett said he expected a criminal investigation. The administration was unaware of the Foley allegations until last week, he said.
Replacing Foley on ballot

Top House Republicans have said they were aware months ago of e-mail contact between Foley and a teenage male page, but that they had no knowledge of sexually explicit messages that have subsequently come to light.

House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi said House Republican leaders knew of the Foley allegations and "chose to cover it up rather than to protect these children."

In a letter to the leaders of the Ethics Committee, the California Democrat said that GOP leaders should be questioned under oath immediately and that a preliminary report should be issued within 10 days.

After Hastert's request for an investigation, she said the Ethics Committee still needs to look into the actions of the GOP leadership. "Congress must not pass the buck on investigating this cover-up," she said.

In a brief resignation statement, Foley apologized to his own family and constituents but did not mention the allegations.

After the e-mails were publicized, ABC News released instant text messages allegedly sent by the congressman to other teenage male pages in 2003. (More details)

The scandal comes just weeks before the November 7 midterm elections. Republicans are hurriedly trying to find someone to replace Foley. (Watch how the handling of the scandal puts the GOP on the defensive -- 2:40 Video)

Foley had been favored to defeat Democratic candidate Tim Mahoney and win re-election to a seventh term.

"The Republican leadership knew this was going on, and they had to make a choice," Mahoney said. "They decided to try to hold on to a seat."
Reynolds informed Hastert

Rep. Tom Reynolds, R-New York, said during the weekend that he told Hastert about the initial complaint -- that Foley had been e-mailing a 16-year-old Louisiana boy who had served as a page, asking for a picture of the teen and asking what he wanted for his birthday.

Reynolds chairs the National Republican Congressional Committee, which is the election campaign arm for House Republicans.

Reynolds said that when Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-Louisiana, told him about the e-mails, he said the teen's parents didn't want the matter pursued. Alexander was the boy's sponsor.

After an initial denial, Hastert's office said Reynolds brought up the issue of the e-mails in a meeting with the speaker earlier this year.

Reynolds told Hastert in that meeting that an investigation had been done by Rep. John Shimkus and the clerk of the House, who manages the work-study program for youths under 18. Shimkus is an Illinois Republican and chairman of the House Page Board.

Rep. Dale Kildee, the only Democratic member of the House Page Board, insisted Saturday the board did not investigate Foley.

Boehner learned about allegations against Foley from Alexander in the spring, said Kevin Madden, the majority leader's spokesman.

Shimkus said Foley told him he was only mentoring the teen in the first complaint and was concerned about his fate after Hurricane Katrina.

Shimkus said he warned Foley "to cease all contact with this former House page" -- and he said Foley assured him the e-mails would stop.

Approximately 100 youths age 16 and older serve as congressional pages at any one time. Both boys and girls may serve, usually for a semester or two or a summer session, according to congressional documents.





I read the instant message texts ABC put out. While you can certainly make the argument that they are not harassment, they are far more graphic than the emails that started the ball rolling on this scandall. He taks at length about masturbation with the page, tals about how hard he is, misspells the word 'bulge', asks him to measure his erection, etc, etc.

[El Blanco]

Do the transcripts really need to be read? Ugh, someone on the radio this morning was reading them while I was having breakfast.

Telling me this asshole was trying to have sex with underage boys working in his office (or Congress, whatever) is pretty much enough to make me think he belongs out of office and in jail.

[mburbank]

As far as 'The Public's need to Know', I totally agree with you.

Unfortunately, the precedent for this kind of stuff getting published was set back when every news outlet in America told us what Clinton was using as a humidor.

[El Blanco]

Thank you, Ken Starr.

I really don't need to know more than 'there was sexual miscodnuct with underage interns." Even that is pushing it. I'm willing to put my faith in the investigators or whoever is the proper authorities in this case that they can judge what is and isn't proper.

[Preechr]

Oh, so you were expecting actual journalism rather than tabloid-style entertainment coverage of the events.

Yeah... Sorry, that doesn't exist anymore. You might want to check the 1990's.

[mburbank]

If I was Ken Starr, I'd accept your thanks. Or is that what you meant, that he's the one who deserves it?

Actually, Blanco, I agree with you, but I think the public hunger for purient details more than justifes the media's approach if you think of it in terms of free market capitalism.

[Geggy]

Maaaan. I quit politics. It's so much bullshit.

[mburbank]

Sure, but what are you wearing?

[Preechr]

I'm pretty sure he was thanking Ken Starr, not calling you Ken Starr.

The media wasn't protected under the First to assure it's profitability. A profitable press has always meant a sensationalist one, at best, corrupt and dishonest at worst. I'm a die-hard capitalist fanboy, but even I see the need for regulating principle over profit in this one case. Unfortunately, that's just not something we can safely rely on government to do, as the media's primary function is to keep tabs on the government.

The teeming masses want to be entertained, not informed, and the government we are supposed to be wary of would want that, too. Maybe First Amendment protections need to be re-evalutated so as to apply only to actual principled journalists and not everybody even indirectly linked to the media. Is there possibly a measure of integrity we could come up with everyone could trust?

[Preechr]

Just to be clear, I'm only commenting on the sub-topic here... I am in no way in favor of Max or anyone else sexually molesting Geggy or any other teenager.

[Geggy]

Psst I'm 30 y/o so it wouldn't count as molesting ;)

You have a point though. The media benefits from all of this. But why is it a such big deal? Maybe there was a reason for the coverup. Someone wanted to withhold the information until the time is right to blackmail the person or to release the info to turn it into a larger issue to distract everyone from other more serious, emerging issues that'd inflict the responsibles.

[El Blanco]

If I was Ken Starr, I'd accept your thanks. Or is that what you meant, that he's the one who deserves it?

I'm giving him the "credit" for this type of shit.

You should remember, did the whole Monkey Bussiness fiasco get this much attention and detail?

Actually, Blanco, I agree with you, but I think the public hunger for purient details more than justifes the media's approach if you think of it in terms of free market capitalism.

But shouldn't the demand for a reliable and honest press balance that? Or am I putting too much faith in people?

[El Blanco]

The teeming masses want to be entertained, not informed, and the government we are supposed to be wary of would want that, too.

See why I am less and less fond of democracy?

Maybe First Amendment protections need to be re-evalutated so as to apply only to actual principled journalists and not everybody even indirectly linked to the media.

No, the Constitution uses the phrase "right of the people", not "large newspapers" or "responsible media". It is our job to keep the media in check.

Is there possibly a measure of integrity we could come up with everyone could trust?

Nope, because you'd essentially have the government watch dogging its own watchdog. Somewhat a conflict of interests.

[mburbank]

I'm just being sarcastic, Blanco. I completely agree with you on this issue, and I also agree there's no way at all to do it. If people stopped buying sensationalist crap, people would stop selling it. An when nobody rubbernecks at an accident, there will be fewer traffic jams.

The issue I see here (beyond the one coverd by Foley's resignation) is if there was indeed an effort to ignore this by leadership. And you don't need the 'get a ruler' quotes to investigate that.

On the other hand, I'd feel I got gyped if I hadn't read the transcripts of Bill Oreilly's phone sex harrassment calls. So go figure.

[kahljorn]

I know I mentioned this in another thread but didn't thomas jefferson say that the newspaper is the most important part of a democracy? lol :(

It's kind of ridiculous to have a system based on giving stupid people the right to involve themselves in an issue that requires a certain amount of intellect. Newspapers are supposed to inform the democratic masses so that they can make "reasonable" decisions. This is why democracy, among many other reasons, fails. As long as we have stupid people making decisions then we are going to have stupid decisions with bad results.
The only remedy is intelligent, informed people, but for the most part that's not really in the "Government's" "best interest". It's also not in the interest of the masses who are more interested in sex than anything else. I guess that's what happens when you have a system of government not only based on stupid people's decisions but also on providing their animal instincts with everything it could possibly desire for personal profit and self gain. Our country is basically ran by animals.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Drudge claims that the Washington Times will call for Hastert's resignation tomorrow.

[Preechr]

Our country is basically ran by animals.

[El Blanco]

I also want to say how wonderful it is that scumbag predators like this are writing these laws and also want to tell me how to be a moral, upstanding adult.

These are the assholes that take a much needed port security law and attach a rider that makes online gambling next to impossible. Why? To protect the children. Actually, its to stir up some votes with their uber-Christian far right wing base.

I'm pretty certain 54 year old Cengressmen now pose a greater threat to children than BoDog.

Enough of this shit. I'm running for office. I'm old enough. I just need to find out where I can run and what I can run for.

I've even got a campaign slogan.

RAISE YOUR OWN DAMN KIDS!


sorry for the rant. I'm a little pissed this morning.

[mburbank]

I'll vote for you.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

Me too! Hell, I'll work in your campaign!!

[kahljorn]

Our country is basically ran by animals.

Were you agreeing with me or what? People who buy sensationalist shit are animals, animals place the entirety of their existence into their senses. Human beings are supposed to have a higher capacity :(

[El Blanco]

You may have to move to New Jersey.

My first two promises:

To push laws that actually effect the common good. There is no need to pay cops for enforcing retarded vice laws when there are crimes that actually harm people happening.

To use my position to pull in premium ass. No chubby interns for me. I'll be bagging women that will make you proud to say, "He is my elected official."*




* They will all be of legal age, unmarried (as far as I'll know), and not actually work for me.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

And they will be dudes.

[El Blanco]

Look, that was one time in college and I was really fucking drunk......er...I mean ...hahaha Kevin, what a clever jest...........ya, thats the ticket

[McClain]

Has anyone bothered to address the fact that just because you send a member of the same gender sexually-oriented jokes doesn't make you gay?

Attention all I-Mockery Males:
SO I WAS FUCKING THIS GUY DOGGYSTYLE, RIGHT!? I MEAN, I'M BALLS DEEP IN HIS ASS! SO THEN I GIVE HIM A REACH AROUND AND HE'S GOT A HARD-ON, SO I'M ALL LIKE, "FAG!"

That joke doesn't make me gay. It makes me (and anyone else who laughs at it) a bit twisted, but not gay. And if I told it to a 15 year old? Still not gay. Still not a perv.

By the time I was 12 I had heard a ton of filthy sexual jokes. Not a big deal. Guys tell other guys sick jokes. Doesn't make him a gay child molester. On the other hand, if he is ineed a deviant, punish the guy. Yeah, sure... He's held to a higher standard and all, but for the love of god people are turning this in to a three ring circus.

[El Blanco]

No, there are instances where he was trying to set up dates with the boys. As in, he wanted them to meet him in Washington and San Diego.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Ok, maybe you haven't read all of the AIM exchanges:

Maf54 (7:25:14 PM): hey
Auto response from Xxxxxxxxx (7:25:14 PM): scrounging for food...brb
Maf54 (7:25:25 PM): ok
Maf54 (7:25:35 PM): kep scrounging
Xxxxxxxxx (7:31:51 PM): boo
Maf54 (7:32:13 PM): bo dude
Xxxxxxxxx (7:32:17 PM): lol
Xxxxxxxxx (7:32:26 PM): whered ya go this afternoon
Maf54 (7:33:39 PM): i am in pensecola...had to catch a plane
Xxxxxxxxx (7:33:47 PM): oh well thats fun
Maf54 (7:34:04 PM): indeed
Xxxxxxxxx (7:34:14 PM): what are you doing in pensecola
Maf54 (7:34:21 PM): now in my hotel room
Xxxxxxxxx (7:34:39 PM): well ..like why did you go there
Maf54 (7:35:02 PM): for the campaign
Xxxxxxxxx (7:35:29 PM): have you officialy announced yt
Maf54 (7:35:45 PM): not yet
Xxxxxxxxx (7:36:06 PM): cool cool...
Maf54 (7:37:27 PM): how my favorite young stud doing
Xxxxxxxxx (7:37:46 PM): tired and sore
Xxxxxxxxx (7:37:52 PM): i didnt no waltzing could make you sore
Maf54 (7:38:04 PM): from what
Xxxxxxxxx (7:38:34 PM): what do you mean from what
Xxxxxxxxx (7:38:42 PM): from waltzing...im sore from waltzing
Maf54 (7:39:32 PM): tahts good
Maf54 (7:39:32 PM): you need a massage
Maf54 signed off at 7:39:37 PM. Maf54 signed on at 7:40:35 PM.
Xxxxxxxxx (7:40:44 PM): got kicked off?
Maf54 (7:41:24 PM): must have
Xxxxxxxxx (7:41:57 PM): ugh tomorrow i have the first day of
lacrosse practice
Maf54 (7:42:27 PM): love to watch that
Maf54 (7:42:33 PM): those great legs running
Xxxxxxxxx (7:42:38 PM): haha...they arent great
Xxxxxxxxx (7:42:45 PM): thats why we have conditioning
Xxxxxxxxx (7:42:56 PM): 2 days running....3 days lifting
Xxxxxxxxx (7:43:11 PM): every week
Xxxxxxxxx (7:43:14 PM): until the end of march
Maf54 (7:43:27 PM): well dont ruin my mental picture
Xxxxxxxxx (7:43:32 PM): oh lol...sorry
Maf54 (7:43:54 PM): nice
Maf54 (7:43:54 PM): youll be way hot then
Xxxxxxxxx (7:44:01 PM): haha...hopefully
Maf54 (7:44:22 PM): better be
Maf54 (7:46:01 PM): well I better let you go do oyur thing
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:07 PM): oh ok
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:11 PM): have fun campaigning
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:17 PM): or however you spell it
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:18 PM): lol
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:25 PM): ill see ya in a couple of weeks
Maf54 (7:46:33 PM): did any girl give you a haand job this weekend
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:38 PM): lol no
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:40 PM): im single right now
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:57 PM): my last gf and i broke up a few weeks agi
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): are you
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny
Xxxxxxxxx (7:47:29 PM): lol...a bit
Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:04 PM): no
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy
Maf54 (7:48:33 PM): wow...
Maf54 (7:48:34 PM): i am never to busy haha
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:51 PM): haha
Maf54 (7:50:02 PM): or tired..helps me sleep
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:15 PM): thats true
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:36 PM): havent been having a problem with sleep though..
i just walk in the door and collapse well at least this weekend
Maf54 (7:50:56 PM): i am sure
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:57 PM): i dont do it very often normally though
Maf54 (7:51:11 PM): why not
Maf54 (7:51:22 PM): at your age seems like it would be daily
Xxxxxxxxx (7:51:57 PM): not me
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:01 PM): im not a horn dog
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:07 PM): maybe 2 or 3 times a week
Maf54 (7:52:20 PM): thats a good number
Maf54 (7:52:27 PM): in the shower
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:36 PM): actually usually i dont do it in the shower
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:42 PM): just cause i shower in the morning
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:47 PM): and quickly
Maf54 (7:52:50 PM): in the bed
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:59 PM): i get up at 530 and am outta the house by 610
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:03 PM): eh ya
Maf54 (7:53:24 PM): on your back
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:30 PM): no face down
Maf54 (7:53:32 PM): love details
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:34 PM): lol
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:36 PM): i see that
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:37 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:53:39 PM): really
Maf54 (7:53:54 PM): do you really do it face down
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:03 PM): ya
Maf54 (7:54:13 PM): kneeling
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:31 PM): well i dont use my hand...i use the bed itself
Maf54 (7:54:31 PM): where do you unload it
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:36 PM): towel
Maf54 (7:54:43 PM): really
Maf54 (7:55:02 PM): completely naked?
Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:12 PM): well ya
Maf54 (7:55:21 PM): very nice
Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:24 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:55:51 PM): cute butt bouncing in the air
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:00 PM): haha
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:05 PM): well ive never watched myslef
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:08 PM): but ya i guess
Maf54 (7:56:18 PM): i am sure not
Maf54 (7:56:22 PM): hmmm
Maf54 (7:56:30 PM): great visual
Maf54 (7:56:39 PM): i may try that
Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:43 PM): it works
Maf54 (7:56:51 PM): hmm
Maf54 (7:56:57 PM): sound inetersting
Maf54 (7:57:05 PM): i always use lotion and the hand
Maf54 (7:57:10 PM): but who knows
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:24 PM): i dont use lotion...takes too much time to clean up
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:37 PM): with a towel you can just wipe off....and go
Maf54 (7:57:38 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:57:45 PM): where do you throw the towel
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:48 PM): but you cant work it too hard....or its not good
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:51 PM): in the laundry
Maf54 (7:58:16 PM): just kinda slow rubbing
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:23 PM): ya....
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:32 PM): or youll rub yourslef raw
Maf54 (7:58:37 PM): well I have aa totally stiff wood now
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:40 PM): cause the towell isnt very soft
Maf54 (7:58:44 PM): i bet..taht would hurt
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:50 PM): but you cn find something softer than a towell i guess
Maf54 (7:58:59 PM): but it must feel great spirting on the towel
Xxxxxxxxx (7:59:06 PM): ya
Maf54 (7:59:29 PM): wow
Maf54 (7:59:48 PM): is your little guy limp...or growing
Xxxxxxxxx (7:59:54 PM): eh growing
Maf54 (8:00:00 PM): hmm
Maf54 (8:00:12 PM): so you got a stiff one now
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:19 PM): not that fast
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:20 PM): hey
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:32 PM): so you have a fetich
Maf54 (8:00:32 PM): hey what
Xxxxxxxxx (8:00:40 PM): fetish**
Maf54 (8:00:43 PM): like
Maf54 (8:00:53 PM): i like steamroom
Maf54 (8:01:04 PM): whats yours
Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:09 PM): its kinda weird
Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:14 PM): lol
Maf54 (8:01:21 PM): i am hard as a rock..so tell me when your reaches rock
Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:23 PM): i have a cast fetish
Maf54 (8:01:27 PM): well tell me
Maf54 (8:01:32 PM): cast
Xxxxxxxxx (8:01:44 PM): ya like...plaster cast
Maf54 (8:01:49 PM): ok..so what happens
Maf54 (8:01:58 PM): how does that turn you in
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:02 PM): i dont know
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:04 PM): it just does
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:08 PM): ive never had one
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:16 PM): but people that have them turn me on
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:27 PM): and if i had one it would probably turn me on
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:29 PM): beats me
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:32 PM): its kinda weird
Xxxxxxxxx (8:02:50 PM): but along with that i like the whole catholic girl look....thats our schools uniform
Maf54 (8:03:02 PM): ha thats wild
Xxxxxxxxx (8:03:14 PM): ya but now im hard
Maf54 (8:03:32 PM): me 2
Maf54 (8:03:42 PM): cast got you going
Maf54 (8:03:47 PM): what you wearing
Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:04 PM): normal clothes
Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:09 PM): tshirt and shorts
Maf54 (8:04:17 PM): um so a big buldge
Xxxxxxxxx (8:04:35 PM): ya
Maf54 (8:04:45 PM): um
Maf54 (8:04:58 PM): love to slip them off of you
Xxxxxxxxx (8:05:08 PM): haha
Maf54 (8:05:53 PM): and gram the one eyed snake
Maf54 (8:06:13 PM): grab
Xxxxxxxxx (8:06:53 PM): not tonight...dont get to excited
Maf54 (8:07:12 PM): well your hard
Xxxxxxxxx (8:07:45 PM): that is true
Maf54 (8:08:03 PM): and a little horny
Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:11 PM): and also tru
Maf54 (8:08:31 PM): get a ruler and measure it for me
Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:38 PM): ive already told you that
Maf54 (8:08:47 PM): tell me again
Xxxxxxxxx (8:08:49 PM): 7 and 1/2
Maf54 (8:09:04 PM): ummmmmmmmmmmmmmmm
Maf54 (8:09:08 PM): beautiful
Xxxxxxxxx (8:09:38 PM): lol
Maf54 (8:09:44 PM): thats a great size
Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:00 PM): thank you
Maf54 (8:10:22 PM): still stiff
Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:28 PM): ya
Maf54 (8:10:40 PM): take it out
Xxxxxxxxx (8:10:54 PM): brb...my mom is yelling
Maf54 (8:11:06 PM): ok
Xxxxxxxxx (8:14:02 PM): back
Maf54 (8:14:37 PM): cool hope se didnt see any thing
Xxxxxxxxx (8:14:54 PM): no no
Xxxxxxxxx (8:14:59 PM): she is computer dumb though
Xxxxxxxxx (8:15:01 PM): it makes me so mad
Maf54 (8:15:04 PM): good
Maf54 (8:15:08 PM): haha
Maf54 (8:15:11 PM): why
Xxxxxxxxx (8:15:23 PM): cause she cant do anything
Maf54 (8:15:31 PM): oh well
Xxxxxxxxx (8:15:41 PM): she couldnt figure out how to download a file from an email and open it
Maf54 (8:15:53 PM): haha
Xxxxxxxxx (8:16:14 PM): and she only does it like a million times a day
Xxxxxxxxx (8:16:16 PM): oh well
Xxxxxxxxx (8:16:18 PM): whatever
Xxxxxxxxx (8:16:53 PM): well i better go finish my hw...i just found out from a friend that i have to finish reading and notating a book for AP english
Maf54 signed off at 8:17:43 PM.

[El Blanco]

I hate you so much right now, Kevin.

[kahljorn]

whatever that kid is obviously gay and likes older men. When I was a kid if older men tried to flirt with me I ignored them.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I hate you so much right now, Kevin.

Well you shouldn't have been talking to a congressman anyway.

[theapportioner]

Maf54 was actually signed on earlier this morning, for a few minutes. Didn't want to go on some FBI registry though, so I didn't txt him.

And is his lawyer stupid or what??? Blaming it on a priest molesting him as a teen... true or not, the timing is terrible.

[mburbank]

Kevin, you could hang coat on me right now.


Casts... Mmmmmmmmm....

[KevinTheOmnivore]

On this same story, you have to love RCCC chair Tom Reynolds. He decided to hold a press conference in Buffalo yesterday to deflect accusations that he has known and witheld this info for months now, but to make sure he didn't get any nasty questions, he surrounded himself with small children (http://www.buffalonews.com/editorial/20061003/1022748.asp).

http://www.buffalonews.com/graphics/2006/10/03/1003reynolds.jpg

[Cosmo Electrolux]

that was hilarious....some reporter actually asked him to make the kids leave so that they could discuss the "adult" topic....he, of course, declined. He wouldn't make any of his "supporters" leave...although I do think one crapped his pants while on stage.

[mburbank]

I thought that was quite hillarious.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

http://sweetjesusihatebilloreilly.com/images/Oreilly_Foley.jpg


Fox news has figured it all out....he's an undercover Democrat. :lol

[mburbank]

Wow. Is that Geggy enough for you?

[Cosmo Electrolux]

it IS a conspiracy..... :rolleyes

[theapportioner]

It's just fantastic how gay people, alcoholics, and even priests are now getting thrown under the bus because of this situation. Look guys, this just proves that all gay people are child rapists, too!

Fucking republicans.

[Preechr]

It does seem Democrats also managed a "cover up" in order to let this hit closer to the election.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

It does seem Democrats also managed a "cover up" in order to let this hit closer to the election.

Has there been any proof of this? All I've heard are idiots like Catherine Harris saying that no Republican leaders knew about it, even though Republican leaders admittied telling the Speaker about it two years ago.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Well, no, but it's a pretty logical assumption. Everyone knew the guy was gay, so no secret there. Secrets don't stay within party lines in this town.

As for the nasty stuff he did-- who knows. One ethics reform group (on the liberal side, supported by Democrats) claims they had the e-mail exchanges presented to them like two months ago and turned them over to the FBI. Is it likely that's the only place that info went?

Ultimately, I don't know that it matters if the Democrats knew. They are in no position, politically speaking, to play morality police. That's why they stayed relatively quiet on this until today.

But this should rightfully fall on the Republicans. One, they're the party in power. If The Dems leak this, it looks like partisan nastiness. Also, the Democrats aren't the party that claims the rights to morality, virtue, and spirituality. THat's the GOP, and this is now their problem. Everyone already expexts Democrats to be banging their interns in the office and smoking weed in the bathroom.

Novak is reporting today that Tom Reynolds may have pressured Foley to run again for re-election, even though he didn't really want to b/c he was tired of all the whispers about him on the Hill. This is very, very bad for the GOP, and could really piss off the base they're gonna need in four weeks.

To me, Reynolds is the biggest heel in all of this. He basically made it pretty clear that morality and virtue are great in 30 second spots and in mail pieces, but when it comes to keeping power and controling the House, that's the priority.

[Preechr]

XXXXX DRUDGE REPORT XXXXX THU OCT 5 2006 2:53:48 ET XXXXX

CLAIM: FILTHY FOLEY ONLINE CHATS WERE PAGE 'PRANK GONE AWRY'
**World Exclusive**
**Must Credit the DRUDGE REPORT**

According to two people close to former congressional page Jordan Edmund, the now famous lurid AOL Instant Message exchanges that led to the resignation of Mark Foley were part of an online prank that by mistake got into the hands of enemy political operatives, the DRUDGE REPORT can reveal.

According to one Oklahoma source who knows the former page very well, Edmund, a conservative Republican, goaded an unwitting Foley to type embarrassing comments that were then shared with a small group of young Hill politicos. The prank went awry when the saved IM sessions got into the hands of political operatives favorable to Democrats.

The primary source, an ally of Edmund, adamantly proclaims that the former page is not a homosexual. The prank scenario was confirmed by a second associate of Edmund. Both are fearful that their political careers will be affected if they are publicly brought into the investigation.

The prank scenario only applies to the Edmund IM sessions and does not necessarily apply to any other exchanges between the former congressman and others.

The news come on the heels that Edmund has hired former Timothy McVeigh attorney, Stephen Jones.

[mburbank]

If it was a prank, why resign within hours of the story breaking, check into alchahol rehab and have your lawyer tell everyone you'd been molested by a priest?

Any chance that Drudhe report is a prank and not actually a drudge report?

[KevinTheOmnivore]

The prank only suggests that the page isn't gay. So what? If nothing else, it wasa good sting operation. Foley still went for it.

[Preechr]

If it was a prank, why resign within hours of the story breaking, check into alchahol rehab and have your lawyer tell everyone you'd been molested by a priest?

Foley didn't know it was a prank, obviously.

Any chance that Drudhe report is a prank and not actually a drudge report?

Sure.

[Preechr]

The prank only suggests that the page isn't gay. So what? If nothing else, it wasa good sting operation. Foley still went for it.

But it also suggests that Foley might not be the raving pederant he was originally painted as, so the dominant news story designed to help the Democrats retake Congress is a red-herring, as the investigations everyone is calling for now only concern "What did they THINK they know, and when did they act on that mistake?"

The Democrats chose to run their campaigns united on a national level, where the Republicans planned to run their campaigns locally. The national media is wrapped up in covering what's turned out to be a prank where nobody was hurt instead of talking about Iraq, taxes or anything else the Dems wanted to debate. Unfortunately for the Dems, the Foley story invovles at least talk of perverted sex, so America's tuned in for at least another week.

The Dems also played this wrong. They're running around giving the impression that gay is inherently evil, nevermind that gays are largely Democrats. The original e-mails only looked bad in the context of Foley's homosexuality, so I guess Hastert was supposed to resign over not disciplining a gay congressman for talking to a kid. What, gay is the same thing as probable evil pedophile now?

Any investigation into the IMs is going to hinge on the fact that IM logs are easily edited text files, so nothing at all will come of it. Meanwhile, gay Democrats have every right to be really offended at their party and Joe-Six-Pack gets a nice reprieve from hearing about how shitty the Iraq war is going. Listening to his country music, only catching the news a few times a day, he's allowed to slip into the Republican fantasy world that he's safe, our soldiers are doing God's work, and homos, while evil, are getting caught before they get to our teenagers.

[ziggytrix]

The Dems also played this wrong. They're running around giving the impression that gay is inherently evil, nevermind that gays are largely Democrats. The original e-mails only looked bad in the context of Foley's homosexuality, so I guess Hastert was supposed to resign over not disciplining a gay congressman for talking to a kid. What, gay is the same thing as probable evil pedophile now?

So everything would have been cool if it had been a 16 year old girl instead of a 16 year old boy? What Dems ran around giving that impression?

[Preechr]

Huh?

Everything would have been different if the page had been a girl, sure... It would be a different story, but it's not. The story is that a male page seems to have initiated sex talk on AIM with a Congressman in order to get him to type embarrassing stuff, which he did. The text logs were shared among the pages as humorous, but eventually fell into the hands of Democrats that chose to use them as a weapon against Republicans during this year's election campaigns.

The IMs were released to the media, and the Democrats went after Hastert saying he should have done something about the situation way back when he was first notified of the original e-mails which were not near as serious looking as the IMs are. The implied "danger" of the e-mails is not what was said but who sent them. Foley's homosexuality was no secret, apparently, but the IMs were until last Friday. Democrats demanding Hastert's resignation because he didn't come down harder on Foley for sending some innocent e-mails to a former page doesn't make any sense unless Hastert was supposed to know Foley was a pedophile. Without the IMs, Hastert could only have assumed that based upon Foley's homosexuality.

The Democrats have put themselves into the position of demanding Hastert's resignation because he let a gay man talk to a teenage boy. The IMs, prank or not, are out of the picture... unless someone coughs up proof Hastert's office had knowledge of the IMs prior to last week.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

I think it was a Washington Post editorial that suggested that Hastert resign. And, if memory serves, Members of Hasterts own party were playing the finger pointing game well before any Democrat suggested that he resign.

[mburbank]

Did you ever hear Bill Marr's monologue about how doing Monica was one of the great sacrificies Clinton made for America? Putting up with what was basically Prison sex when he could have had almost any woman he wanted?

I don't think I agree, but it's very funny.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Preechr, were the e-mails that were handed over to the FBI also a prank?

[El Blanco]

I never really understood that. Why her? He was the most powerful man on Earth. He should have pulled in quality ass the likes of which Derek Jeter and Colin Farrell only dream about.

For Christ's sake, JFK snuck Maralyn Monroe into the White House.

Was he that addicted and she was right there?

[Preechr]

WASHINGTON, Oct. 5 /U.S. Newswire/ -- Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean issued the following statement following House Speaker Dennis Hastert's remarks at his press conference today:

"What Republicans don't understand is that this is about children, not politics. People are looking at this as concerned parents, not as Republicans or Democrats. It's disgraceful that Speaker Hastert and the Republican leadership didn't stand up for our children and do the right thing when they learned about the problem years ago, rather than a week after it became public. They chose to protect Congressman Foley and their party instead of the victims. Americans don't want to see finger pointing from the Republican leadership, they don't want to see the Speaker dodging tough questions. They want to see the people involved unequivocally stand up, take responsibility for their failures and investigate immediately."

The Buck Stops Where?

[Preechr]

Preechr, were the e-mails that were handed over to the FBI also a prank?

I'm not saying anything is or was a prank. Drudge is saying part of the IMs were a prank, and the fact is that there's no way to contest that. Foley's not around for another 2 weeks, and I can read through the IMs and believe he was getting rooked. No 16 year old straight kid is going to have those kinds of chats with an old sissy like Foley and not laugh about it with his friends. Even if it wasn't a prank, the possiblity that it was is too believeable to eliminate the rumor.

Long story short: The only damage done by this to the Republicans can be counteracted by Denny Hastert spending the next few weeks shoring up procedures to protect children from politicians in Congress. Who are the only potential people to not get behind that? Congressional pedophiles? Hastert's going to look like a champion of child victims, which will help the party, while the Dems will have to fight to squeeze around him in the headlines if they want to talk about anything else.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

You honestly believe that the American public will care if Denny Hastert pushes some resolution calling congressman-on-child pedophilia bad?

Whatever damage has been done is done. America smells a cover up. Even if the IM's were a prank, they weren't the only form of shady contact this guy has had with young boys. The chair of the RCCC pushed him to run again, even though Foley himself felt the pressure to get out.

Foley resigned almost immediately. Whether the exchanges were genuine or in jest, he had been made out. Whether they were real or a prank, Hastet, Reynolds, and perhaps others may have known about them. Wouldn't they still have warranted some type of action, even if they were maybe a joke? We know they may have been a joke now. Nobody knew that then.

[Preechr]

Until the IMs came out LAST WEEK, all Hastert had to move on was the e-mails, which were of decidedly less creepy character. As soon as the IMs came out LAST WEEK, Foley took off and the Republicans started taking it seriously. There's not even any way to prove the IMs weren't forged altogether, much less accurate or in context. The only thing that actually stands so far as real proof that Foley did anything at all wrong is his resignation, in fact. No proof means this is a scandal ripe for spinning, and it can spin much more easily in favor of the Republicans than it could help the Democrats. Any hit the Rs are taking in the polls due to this will be easily overcome if they rally behind some new effort to "think of the children" or something... If America smells a coverup, the Republicans are doing a fine job of pinning that on the Democrats while taking steps to protect pages in the future. Once again, the Dems are portrayed as living in the past and doing nothing to make the future better. America is a more hopeful country than that.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

I don't believe the Democrats are asking anything that the Washington Times already hasn't. Are they living in the past, too?

As I said before, the onus here is on the Republicans. The Democrats can be as cynical as they want to be here, b/c they're A) Out of power and B) Not the party of values, virtue, and piety.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Another way to look at it-- Congressman Gerry Studds did far worse than what Foley is even suspected of doing. Foley had to resign from his conservative district in shame, while Studds was allowed five more trips to the Hill by his liberal district. Why is this?

Because Democrats supposedly do this stuff, and Republicans supposedly do not. is it a double standard? Yes, but it's one of the GOP's own design.

[Preechr]

A Republican. This doesn't stain the party. The question is will the idea that Hastert could have done more to stop it affect the party in the elections, and I say no it won't... not at least near as much as were the Democrats allowed to manage the media cycle with whatever else they'd planned to put out there.

That we're still talking about Foley rather than some new scandal here on a Friday afternoon shows that this is still the headlining issue. Not Iraq. Not Iran. Not Afghanistan. No terror, just one more homo caught doing what most Americans believe all homos typically do: prey on our children. There will be no proof before the elections that Republicans did anything to hide anything... we'll have to wait on the investigations for any of that if it exists... So it's time to start a reform process and we can ring the All Clear bell in about a week or two. The Party of Family Values saves the day again!

The Foley scandal was ONLY ever an attempt by Democrats to manage the media cycle in their favor, just like the NIE thing from two weeks ago. They blew it. This was bad strategy, and they've given control of the media cycle over to the Republicans. As I said, Kev... MR. CAMPAIGN... The Rs set out to run on local issues this year, while the Ds planned to run on national issues. Had they waited to start Foley-gate for the first week in November, it would have really been more effective. Instead, they played it too early and lost probably two critical weeks of media attention that could have been more favorable for them had they spent this time letting failures in Iraq or pending war in Iran be the news, then throwing Foley on the fire at the last minute to show the party in power to be just a corrupt bunch of windbags that like to touch children innappropriately.

See, the war has no immediate end in sight, which makes it scary. Foley only lasted a week before it's started to, if not already turn in the Republicans favor, at least show signs of being neutralized and entirely spinnable. Foley is a nice smokescreen, because it puts national politics on Jerry Springer terms for the electorate. The problem highlighted by one dirty old bastard is at least something we can fix, and people vote for those that fix things. Had the Democrat strategy revolved more on highlighting the things it seems we might never fix, it would have been more effective... But , alas, they couldn't do that simply because THE DEMOCRATS HAVE NO PLAN FOR HOW TO FIX ANYTHING ANYMORE.

They've become the party of snot-nosed, bitchy, fingerpointing whiners that will seemingly complain about anything. There have been only a few issues they could have adopted in the last year to their benefit, and they've passed on every single one because they aren't interested in championing any progress, preferring instead to focus on tearing down and obstructing Republicans and any progress they might try to make.

[ziggytrix]

They've become the party of snot-nosed, bitchy, fingerpointing whiners that will seemingly complain about anything. There have been only a few issues they could have adopted in the last year to their benefit, and they've passed on every single one because they aren't interested in championing any progress, preferring instead to focus on tearing down and obstructing Republicans and any progress they might try to make.

Someone who's been around a few more years than me, tell me if that doesn't pretty much describe every minority party ever?

[mburbank]

Preech, I gotta agree with Kev here. Not because I think being a greasy old perv and masturbation in yur office while texting with a boy is at all out of the envelope for a Congressman, but because the GOP is holier than thou. A large part of the Republican base is all about their claim that they are Gods party. It hurts the party that the guy in charge of protecting kids is a perv, because that sort of irony is the R's achilles Heel.

Also, I think there is every chance that it will turn out Hastert is lying that he didn't know anything beyond the 'overly friendly' emails.

And I think that even totally gay active teens would have been laughing at foley more often than blowing him.

Is all of this fair? Do Foley's failings have anythig to do with his being an R? Of course not. Is D's righteous indignation an insulting charade? Mostly. But I think Kev is correct that R's worked very, very hard to create this particular vulnerability. Pride, even false pride, maybe particulalry false pride, goeth before a fall.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

Now the Republican "leaders" are bringing the Democrats before the house ethics committee asking what they knew about this before the press got hold of it. Why am I not suprised? Typical....

[KevinTheOmnivore]

ugh....

Okay, so a day ago I disagreed with Preechr. Initially I thought the Dems were handling it well, playing it cool, and allowing The Republicans to cannibalize themselves.

now they're running ads on it. Howard fuckin' Dean is talking about it.

Cosmo, the Dems invited this. They tried to control the fire, get it t drift to certain districts maybe, rather than just watching it burn.

[Preechr]

Now the Republican "leaders" are bringing the Democrats before the house ethics committee asking what they knew about this before the press got hold of it. Why am I not suprised? Typical....

Of course they are. Citizens for Responsibility and Ethics in Washington is a Democrat group, and they seem to be the folks that sat on the story until election time. The investigation panel was formed to find out exactly who covered up what. Talking to Democrats as well as Republicans is not only typical for such a thing it's responsible.

[Preechr]

Someone who's been around a few more years than me, tell me if that doesn't pretty much describe every minority party ever?

Doesn't have to. The "Contract with America" Republicans worked to be a better, more functional group.

[KevinTheOmnivore]

Yeah, it didn't take that long to go to the shitter.

But I sort of agree with you on Democrats....unfortunately.

[Preechr]

But I think Kev is correct that R's worked very, very hard to create this particular vulnerability. Pride, even false pride, maybe particulalry false pride, goeth before a fall.

If they clean their house of anyone that actually did cover this up, that will make them stronger and prove that the party's moral stance is intact. America doesn't require leaders that never screw up, just leaders that own up to their mistakes.

Keep in mind, I'm not talking about real things here, just impressions. I have on my special glasses that filter all this through campaign politics and voter perceptions. Elections are my football.

[Ant10708]

It's just fantastic how gay people, alcoholics, and even priests are now getting thrown under the bus because of this situation. Look guys, this just proves that all gay people are child rapists, too!

Fucking republicans.

Democratic strategist Bob Beckel suggested this week that the mere fact Foley is gay should have “raised questions” about his friendships with pages.

Those damn republicans. :)

[mburbank]

I think the fact that he's gay AND a Republican should have raised red flags about his sanity.

Q.) What do og Cabin Republicans do in their spare time?

A.) hate themselves.

[Cosmo Electrolux]

ugh....

Okay, so a day ago I disagreed with Preechr. Initially I thought the Dems were handling it well, playing it cool, and allowing The Republicans to cannibalize themselves.

now they're running ads on it. Howard fuckin' Dean is talking about it.

Cosmo, the Dems invited this. They tried to control the fire, get it t drift to certain districts maybe, rather than just watching it burn.

You're probably right. It's going to be interesting to see how this plays out..

And Preechr...I wasn't aware that the group you mentioned had actually released those transcripts. But, in all honesty, do you believe that had Foley been a democrat and a Republican group had that info, they wouldn't have done the same thing? We all know for a fact they would have. Fox news would have rode the wheels off of that train and we all know it.

[Preechr]

Well, of course.

It's no secret I hate politicians. As far as I'm concerned, it's just a matter of time before one of those lowlifes gets caught doing something truly disgusting once again, be they Republicrat or Demolicant.

[mburbank]

I think North Korea may have just nuked this scandal.

[Preechr]

THINGS i DID NOT RESPOND TO:

(not that it matters)


The teeming masses want to be entertained, not informed, and the government we are supposed to be wary of would want that, too.

See why I am less and less fond of democracy?

Yes I do. I am totally opposed to democracy as a form of government. It is nothing more than mob-rule. If I didn't drink so much, my IQ would be well within the range of the kind of folk I like to refer to as "us," and we make up about 20% of the world. I am scared to death of the 80% of the rest of the world being able to control what we do.

That being said, I am currently re-reading "Atlas Shrugged" in order to discuss it with a friend of mine, so when I say "we," I am referring to the minority of the actual honest producers of the world, even if my drinking may leave the actual me out of that group.

America is not, as you know, of course, a democracy. It is, as you know, a representative republic. When I say the word "democracy," I am generally speaking of some sort of representative government, but I guess I would also include any lesser form of government where at least everybody gets an honest vote on what's going on.

Maybe First Amendment protections need to be re-evalutated so as to apply only to actual principled journalists and not everybody even indirectly linked to the media.

No, the Constitution uses the phrase "right of the people", not "large newspapers" or "responsible media". It is our job to keep the media in check.

So, basically, you are saying that the media doesn't and shouldn't really have the freedom to say whatever it wants?

Your literal comment leads me to think of an America where the speach of any free individual is protected, but any other sort of speech is not actually prtected by the first.

I think that's interesting.

I have an objectivist work ethic. I believe that I sell some of my free time to an employer in exchange for money. I believe that money is a unit of time, not evil, so this sort of thing is a fair trade.

When a newspaper reporter, for instance... and from my point of view, is writing a story as a function of her job, I don't consider her to be free. Working is not actually freedom, though it is a function of freedom. The writing journalist is not functioning as a free individual. Is she, therefore, not necessarily protected by the first amendment?

Please, let me sketch this out for you guys: Pretend you are a left wing journalist, working for a right wing newspaper. You would know it is incumbent upon you to please your employers, in order to keep your job, by, if allowed by the marketplace (which it is,) filtering your telling of the story through some sort of ideological lens, right?

Simply put, if you want to keep your job, you do whatever it is you are asked to do for whatever reason. You are not free when you are acting like this, are you?

Biased journalism should, at leat in my opinion, be subject to no more protection than is advertising.

We can sue for false advertising.

Is there possibly a measure of integrity we could come up with everyone could trust?

Nope, because you'd essentially have the government watch dogging its own watchdog. Somewhat a conflict of interests.

Think please, as I often do, of the German Beer Purity Laws. Is truth not an objective standard? Do we live by a standard of reason, or one of baseless conjecture? Geggy COULD be right, but yet you always require proof of him. You do not let him get away with what might be, demanding instead that he back up his statements.

Is it so hard to imagine a press constrained only it's ability to prove, concretely, what it prints? The worst that could happen is a newspaper full of quotes from random, but named, people. That would be subject to the laws of supply and demand, and I don't think most of us would be buying papers if that's allwe got for 50 cents.