i had a friend in the senate page program about 12 years ago and i stayed with him for a weekend while he was there. most of the kids in the program had personal ties to a senator or congressmen, who hooked them up with the job. for that reason, its unbelievable that Foley would take the risk of going after several of these kids.
what was he thinking??!!?? these pages could not have been overwhelmed by his power/celebrity status, because almost all of them had prior relationships with congressmen or at least people in power, not to mention the fact that in their jobs as pages, they dealt with congressmen on a daily basis. a lot of them (including my friend) were even the sons/daughters of members of the senate and house. it just seems like one of those situations where the guy wanted to get caught.
uhh, I have told you once before, shitbreath, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GO AWAY.
No one even gets a modicum of entertainment nor enlightenment from your posts. No one likes you. No one cares about you. You are a sad individual. Your alias sucks. At least take a cue from our other interesting aliases. I am quite aware that your posts are meant to angry up the blood, but at this point the anger is turning into apathy.
NOTE TO EVERYONE: just add this oxygen waster to your "ignore this user", and the problem will be rectified.
Thank you and now back to the Republican peder-ass thread.
Foley still logging into chat account with screen name linked to scandal[/b] 10/03/2006 @ 10:58 am Filed by RAW STORY
Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) was still using the America Online screen name now associated with attempts to solicit underage boys, RAW STORY has learned.
As recently as 10:50 AM EST today, users of the AOL Instant messaging were surprised to find Foley signed briefly onto the chat service, using the screen name Maf54.
The login was used in now-public emails and instant messages with underage boys.
Foley signed on only briefly this morning, but has reportedly continued to use the screen name occasionally as the scandal surrounding it unfolds publicly.
BlogActive has taken a screen capture of Foley's online status this morning, available here.
The republicans and their bizzarre rituals with underage boys... Its been going on for thousands of years. The anunnaki walk amongst us. I wouldnt have believe this conspiracy garbage if it the same thing didnt keep repeating itself.
I mean, we all know these Republicans are descendants of albino chromosone caucasoid mutations ostracized by the original asiatic black G-d man, right? do folls on this board even KNOW the meaning of the Thanksgiving holiday!?!? put a gerbil on your Christmas list.
You know, I really don't think it's too ridiculous to suggest that homophobia has a large impact on why this is such a scandal. Obviously, if dude was doing this shit with young girls, there'd most certainly be a lot made of it as well, but I highly doubt we'd have as many folks saying things like "Ughh.... I couldn't even read that whole thing!" if he was talking about getting a handjob from a 15 year old girl instead of a 15 year old boy.
You know, I really don't think it's too ridiculous to suggest that homophobia has a large impact on why this is such a scandal. Obviously, if dude was doing this shit with young girls, there'd most certainly be a lot made of it as well, but I highly doubt we'd have as many folks saying things like "Ughh.... I couldn't even read that whole thing!" if he was talking about getting a handjob from a 15 year old girl instead of a 15 year old boy.
-e
I agree. I totally would want to read about a 15 year old girl jerking some old dude off. So in your vastily more liberal mind garden you where able to read that and not be disgusted?
sure. people may read the e-mails, but I don't think there'd be any less outrage/disgust directed at Foley and the GOP.
the indignation you see in this thread at the suggestion that homophobia is involved stems from the fact that this theory was originally posted by the board's number one GOP cheerleader. an obvious attempt to flip the script and make us all seem bigoted for expressing disgust at what is/was a disgusting event.
Foley is a corrupt sicko not because he is attracted to men but because he abused his power to seduce underage boys and relied on an extensive web of GOP corruption to keep the whole thing under wraps.
and to call us all homophobes for calling dude out is almost as pathetic/sick as what Foley did.
You know, I really don't think it's too ridiculous to suggest that homophobia has a large impact on why this is such a scandal. Obviously, if dude was doing this shit with young girls, there'd most certainly be a lot made of it as well, but I highly doubt we'd have as many folks saying things like "Ughh.... I couldn't even read that whole thing!" if he was talking about getting a handjob from a 15 year old girl instead of a 15 year old boy.
-e
I'd agree with this, but I'd add that part of the reason this has the glare that it does is because
a) of the Right's hostility to gay rights (such as marriage)
b) as well as it's backing of the repression of sexual content (see Janet Jackson's titty.)
c) People love to see a hypocrite go down, (no homo) even more so when they're a pedophile.
The political narrative here has to be read in the context of Clinton's being punished how he did by the Right for willfully accepting a blowjob from a consenting (if chubby) grown lady. that was playerhatin at its worst.
I mean, we all know these Republicans are descendants of albino chromosone caucasoid mutations ostracized by the original asiatic black G-d man, right? do folls on this board even KNOW the meaning of the Thanksgiving holiday!?!? put a gerbil on your Christmas list.
You know too much. Your life may very well be in danger.
seriously thoough are there folks on here who really beleive a political leaning may coincide with a pedophilia or hmoosexuality?
I've also heard that only rapists watch sports, can anyone confirm?
I agree. I totally would want to read about a 15 year old girl jerking some old dude off. So in your vastily more liberal mind garden you where able to read that and not be disgusted?
Look... I just don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that homophobia has some influence here. I'm not pointing fingers at anybody calling them bad people for not being able to read the whole thing. Frankly, I couldn't get through it either, but I'm not going to get all defensive and vociferously try to claim that it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it's homosexual activity that's being talked about here.
Perhaps I'm an awful human for even admitting this, but if this were a heterosexual exchange, I'd certainly be disgusted and uncomfortable, but not to the point that I was while reading this shit. I think if most of the board is brutally honest with themselves, they'd agree with that sentiment.
Which basically is just an aknowledgment of the fact that, yes, for many of us--like it or not--we do have somewhat homophobic tendencies. The least we can do is be honest about that shit to ourselves so we can unlearn these tendencies, no?
the indignation you see in this thread at the suggestion that homophobia is involved stems from the fact that this theory was originally posted by the board's number one GOP cheerleader.
But let me ask this question: apart from the legal definition of pedophilia, socially speaking, do we really treat people who are trying to engage in sexually explicit email/IMs with 16 year olds as "pedophiles" in the same way we would if we knew the youth being targeted were 10?
Obviously, this is a very gray area but I was thinking about the recent "myspace sluts" thread on Soul Strut and the admission by several Strutters that they have no problem trying to elicit sexually explicit emails from "skanky" teenagers and though a few people raised a disapproving eyebrow, I definitely didn't seen anyone accuse [OMITTED] or [OMITTED] of being pedophiles with the same revulsion that Foley's earned. (Just to be clear, my biggest issue with Foley is the abuse of power here rather than strictly an issue around age difference. If his pages had been over 18, it would still be problematic to me).
Is this a double standard b/c their targets were teenage girls instead of teenage boys? Maybe Dolo actually had a point (loath as I am to admit it). Or do we just cut "our own" more slack when their behavior is questionable?
But let me ask this question: apart from the legal definition of pedophilia, socially speaking, do we really treat people who are trying to engage in sexually explicit email/IMs with 16 year olds as "pedophiles" in the same way we would if we knew the youth being targeted were 10?
i hope not! this story is worth talking about ONLY because it seems as though several members of the house (all republicans) knew about creepy emails Foley sent to a different page and they chose to do nothing about it. however, those emails werent even that creepy from what we know (he asked the kid for a picture of himself).
As for the dirty instant messages, yes, they are creepy as fuck, but as Odub pointed out, Foley is not accused of pedofilia. He sent gay instant messages to a 16 year old gay kid. Was any harm done? Maybe, but more so on the larger scale of trusting our politicians, abuse of power, etc. Was any REAL harm done to this kid? Yes, but probably not until the press outed him. Before then, he was a 16 year old (now 18) gay dude who had a creepy older man hit on him. not too life altering.
Obviously, this is a very gray area but I was thinking about the recent "myspace sluts" thread on Soul Strut and the admission by several Strutters that they have no problem trying to elicit sexually explicit emails from "skanky" teenagers and though a few people raised a disapproving eyebrow,
I think those people were joking and it only seeemed like they were being serious becuase gullable people like myself continued to ask them if they were serious...to which they responded by continuing to clown them (and me) by acting like they were. that could have been written clearer, but
Is this a double standard b/c their targets were teenage girls instead of teenage boys? Maybe Dolo actually had a point (loath as I am to admit it). Or do we just cut "our own" more slack when their behavior is questionable?
If this were one of our 16-year-old daughters/sisters/nieces that Foley was trying to procure a handjob from, I'm sure we would have all been fine with it.
Personally, I thought Dolo was claiming "rampant homophobia" based on people's reactions to the transcripts, not to the case itself.
You give him too much credit. His was a thinly veiled attempt to make us feel bad for bashing this GOP scumbag. No doubt this argument went out in the weekly GOP dickrider talking points e-mail.
To be 100% honest the thought of gay underage sex does disgust me a little more than the thought of straight underage sex. There, I said it. But to suggest that this is the reason all the strutters were coming down (no homophobo) on Foley is preposterous.
It's a well known fact that the Strut likes to bash the GOP. Here was a Republican that did something heinous. The fact that what he did was gay-related, given the obvious anti-gay leanings of the GOP, was just the icing on the cake.
Lawyer says Foley was molested as a teen AP - 8 minutes ago[/b]
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Former Rep. Mark Foley's attorney said Tuesday that his client was molested between the ages 13 and 15 by a clergyman. Foley had represented the West Palm Beach district for 12 years and was seeking re-election until his sudden resignation last week after the disclosure of lurid online communications with teenage congressional pages.
Personally, I thought Dolo was claiming "rampant homophobia" based on people's reactions to the transcripts, not to the case itself.
You give him too much credit. His was a thinly veiled attempt to make us feel bad for bashing this GOP scumbag. No doubt this argument went out in the weekly GOP dickrider talking points e-mail.
To be 100% honest the thought of gay underage sex does disgust me a little more than the thought of straight underage sex. There, I said it. But to suggest that this is the reason all the strutters were coming down (no homophobo) on Foley is preposterous.
It's a well known fact that the Strut likes to bash the GOP. Here was a Republican that did something heinous. The fact that what he did was gay-related, given the obvious anti-gay leanings of the GOP, was just the icing on the cake.
Actually the "dickrider talking points email" made a very different talking point than the one raised by Dolo. It went something like this: When a Democratic Congressman, Gerry Studs, have affairs with underage boys, they are re-elected and welcomed in the party. When the GOP finds a pederast, Mark Foley, we kick him out of the party and call for the FBI to investigate. I know this not from being on the email list, but from interviewing a few people in the Jesus freak-Gun nut-Gay bashing cabal that currently runs the country. I will have to inform them however that rootlesscosmo of the strut considers these memos to be akin to the reverse cowgirl position.
As for the Clinton analogy, Dub, a question. So your issue is not so much the age as the abuse of power. Don't you think the Monica matter was an abuse of power, maybe not an impeachable offense, but an abuse of power nonetheless? This is no mention of the lengths White House apparats went to assasinate the woman's character in anonymous leaks--see Sidney Blumenthal. For the record, I did not think the Clinton imbroglio was impeachable. But I did find it hilarious that a White House that went out of its way to punish an intern who kept a dress would complain about hardball tactics from the right, and make this Sorkinesque appeal to a higher tone in the national discourse. I mean we can put the lie to all of that by watching the dems in the last six years.
But back to Foley. It's inexplicable and tragic. He's a scumbag. The Republicans now are having a much bigger problem with their preachy base than with Democrats. The Washington Times has already called for Hastert to go based on the fact that he knew about tamer emails. The national review comes close to that as well. And social conservatives are threatening to not turn out for the election.
On top of all this, dude wrote the law he could be prosecuted under.
Lawyer says Foley was molested as a teen AP - 8 minutes ago[/b]
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Former Rep. Mark Foley's attorney said Tuesday that his client was molested between the ages 13 and 15 by a clergyman. Foley had represented the West Palm Beach district for 12 years and was seeking re-election until his sudden resignation last week after the disclosure of lurid online communications with teenage congressional pages.
Personally, I thought Dolo was claiming "rampant homophobia" based on people's reactions to the transcripts, not to the case itself.
Sort of. He was trying to claim that we were coming down on Foley because of homophobia, not because it was pursuit of a minor and/or the power issue you mention. I read it as an extension of hardcore conservatives' unfortunate habit of constantly linking homosexuality and pedophilia in an "A therefore B" sort of arrangement. If you take this "logic" (I use the word loosely here) and apply it to the situation...well, Foley's after youngsters because he's gay. Therefore, if we come down on him for his pursuit of minors, what we're really coming down on him for is being gay. This was an attempt at a "hoisting liberals on their own petard" kind of thing--liberals are supposed to be accepting of gays, yet here are a bunch of liberals chastising a guy for being gay--but, of course, Dolo's just a shit-stirrer and not any kind of thinker, so you can drive a truck through the gaps in his logic.
But I did find it hilarious that a White House that went out of its way to punish an intern who kept a dress would complain about hardball tactics from the right, and make this Sorkinesque appeal to a higher tone in the national discourse. I mean we can put the lie to all of that by watching the dems in the last six years.
I don't even know how to handle your existence at this point. Picking John Edwards--a man who lived in a time when "lascivious carriage" was on the national consciousness--for your avatar. OK...
What are we going to learn next? Foley's favorite word is buggery?
I have no sympathy for the GOP, even in light of the opportunistic Democrats. What goes around comes around, and if you're platform served up big portions of "restoring integrity to Washington" in 2000 and 2004, you might want to be prepared when someone finally comes along and tugs out the tablecloth.
Maybe I'm not up on all the issues, but how is Foley getting his card pulled an opportunistic move by the Democrats? The fucker was doing some low-down maneuvers and he got caught.
"HOW DARE THOSE DEMS CATCH US RED HANDED DOING SOMETHING TERRIBLE AND HAVE THE NERVE TO LET THE AMERICAN PUBLIC KNOW!!!!"
Comments
what was he thinking??!!?? these pages could not have been overwhelmed by his power/celebrity status, because almost all of them had prior relationships with congressmen or at least people in power, not to mention the fact that in their jobs as pages, they dealt with congressmen on a daily basis. a lot of them (including my friend) were even the sons/daughters of members of the senate and house. it just seems like one of those situations where the guy wanted to get caught.
uhh, I have told you once before, shitbreath, SHUT THE FUCK UP AND GO AWAY.
No one even gets a modicum of entertainment nor enlightenment from your posts. No one likes you. No one cares about you. You are a sad individual. Your alias sucks. At least take a cue from our other interesting aliases. I am quite aware that your posts are meant to angry up the blood, but at this point the anger is turning into apathy.
NOTE TO EVERYONE: just add this oxygen waster to your "ignore this user", and the problem will be rectified.
Thank you and now back to the Republican peder-ass thread.
10/03/2006 @ 10:58 am
Filed by RAW STORY
Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) was still using the America Online screen name now associated with attempts to solicit underage boys, RAW STORY has learned.
As recently as 10:50 AM EST today, users of the AOL Instant messaging were surprised to find Foley signed briefly onto the chat service, using the screen name Maf54.
The login was used in now-public emails and instant messages with underage boys.
Foley signed on only briefly this morning, but has reportedly continued to use the screen name occasionally as the scandal surrounding it unfolds publicly.
BlogActive has taken a screen capture of Foley's online status this morning, available here.
This politician seems to have some real mental issues (obviously).
Are these folks even being screened before they take these positions?
He's here all night folks!
The republicans and their bizzarre rituals with underage boys... Its been going on for thousands of years. The anunnaki walk amongst us. I wouldnt have believe this conspiracy garbage if it the same thing didnt keep repeating itself.
Jeff Gannon wasnt the only one.
COME HERE LITTLE SLAVE BOY
-e
I agree. I totally would want to read about a 15 year old girl jerking some old dude off. So in your vastily more liberal mind garden you where able to read that and not be disgusted?
gtfoohwtbs
the indignation you see in this thread at the suggestion that homophobia is involved stems from the fact that this theory was originally posted by the board's number one GOP cheerleader. an obvious attempt to flip the script and make us all seem bigoted for expressing disgust at what is/was a disgusting event.
Foley is a corrupt sicko not because he is attracted to men but because he abused his power to seduce underage boys and relied on an extensive web of GOP corruption to keep the whole thing under wraps.
and to call us all homophobes for calling dude out is almost as pathetic/sick as what Foley did.
I'd agree with this, but I'd add that part of the reason this has the glare that it does is because
a) of the Right's hostility to gay rights (such as marriage)
b) as well as it's backing of the repression of sexual content (see Janet Jackson's titty.)
c) People love to see a hypocrite go down, (no homo) even more so when they're a pedophile.
The political narrative here has to be read in the context of Clinton's being punished how he did by the Right for willfully accepting a blowjob from a consenting (if chubby) grown lady. that was playerhatin at its worst.
You know too much. Your life may very well be in danger.
seriously thoough are there folks on here who really beleive a political leaning may coincide with a pedophilia or hmoosexuality?
I've also heard that only rapists watch sports, can anyone confirm?
Look... I just don't think it's ridiculous to suggest that homophobia has some influence here. I'm not pointing fingers at anybody calling them bad people for not being able to read the whole thing. Frankly, I couldn't get through it either, but I'm not going to get all defensive and vociferously try to claim that it has absolutely nothing to do with the fact that it's homosexual activity that's being talked about here.
Perhaps I'm an awful human for even admitting this, but if this were a heterosexual exchange, I'd certainly be disgusted and uncomfortable, but not to the point that I was while reading this shit. I think if most of the board is brutally honest with themselves, they'd agree with that sentiment.
Which basically is just an aknowledgment of the fact that, yes, for many of us--like it or not--we do have somewhat homophobic tendencies. The least we can do is be honest about that shit to ourselves so we can unlearn these tendencies, no?
Oh, I didn't know that.
-e
You just about killed me with that Ras Kass line.
Who says dude isn't relevant any more?
But let me ask this question: apart from the legal definition of pedophilia, socially speaking, do we really treat people who are trying to engage in sexually explicit email/IMs with 16 year olds as "pedophiles" in the same way we would if we knew the youth being targeted were 10?
Obviously, this is a very gray area but I was thinking about the recent "myspace sluts" thread on Soul Strut and the admission by several Strutters that they have no problem trying to elicit sexually explicit emails from "skanky" teenagers and though a few people raised a disapproving eyebrow, I definitely didn't seen anyone accuse [OMITTED] or [OMITTED] of being pedophiles with the same revulsion that Foley's earned. (Just to be clear, my biggest issue with Foley is the abuse of power here rather than strictly an issue around age difference. If his pages had been over 18, it would still be problematic to me).
Is this a double standard b/c their targets were teenage girls instead of teenage boys? Maybe Dolo actually had a point (loath as I am to admit it). Or do we just cut "our own" more slack when their behavior is questionable?
unfrotunately yes. Like I said "the shit was a bad look". and one of the few times I felt embarassed being apart of this community.
i hope not! this story is worth talking about ONLY because it seems as though several members of the house (all republicans) knew about creepy emails Foley sent to a different page and they chose to do nothing about it. however, those emails werent even that creepy from what we know (he asked the kid for a picture of himself).
As for the dirty instant messages, yes, they are creepy as fuck, but as Odub pointed out, Foley is not accused of pedofilia. He sent gay instant messages to a 16 year old gay kid. Was any harm done? Maybe, but more so on the larger scale of trusting our politicians, abuse of power, etc. Was any REAL harm done to this kid? Yes, but probably not until the press outed him. Before then, he was a 16 year old (now 18) gay dude who had a creepy older man hit on him. not too life altering.
I think those people were joking and it only seeemed like they were being serious becuase gullable people like myself continued to ask them if they were serious...to which they responded by continuing to clown them (and me) by acting like they were. that could have been written clearer, but
If this were one of our 16-year-old daughters/sisters/nieces that Foley was trying to procure a handjob from, I'm sure we would have all been fine with it.
Oh, wait....
and the turn this thead has taken just made me embarrased, again, to be a soulstruttin' internet nerd
You give him too much credit. His was a thinly veiled attempt to make us feel bad for bashing this GOP scumbag. No doubt this argument went out in the weekly GOP dickrider talking points e-mail.
To be 100% honest the thought of gay underage sex does disgust me a little more than the thought of straight underage sex. There, I said it. But to suggest that this is the reason all the strutters were coming down (no homophobo) on Foley is preposterous.
It's a well known fact that the Strut likes to bash the GOP. Here was a Republican that did something heinous. The fact that what he did was gay-related, given the obvious anti-gay leanings of the GOP, was just the icing on the cake.
AP - 8 minutes ago[/b]
WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - Former Rep. Mark Foley's attorney said Tuesday that his client was molested between the ages 13 and 15 by a clergyman. Foley had represented the West Palm Beach district for 12 years and was seeking re-election until his sudden resignation last week after the disclosure of lurid online communications with teenage congressional pages.
Actually the "dickrider talking points email" made a very different talking point than the one raised by Dolo. It went something like this: When a Democratic Congressman, Gerry Studs, have affairs with underage boys, they are re-elected and welcomed in the party. When the GOP finds a pederast, Mark Foley, we kick him out of the party and call for the FBI to investigate. I know this not from being on the email list, but from interviewing a few people in the Jesus freak-Gun nut-Gay bashing cabal that currently runs the country. I will have to inform them however that rootlesscosmo of the strut considers these memos to be akin to the reverse cowgirl position.
As for the Clinton analogy, Dub, a question. So your issue is not so much the age as the abuse of power. Don't you think the Monica matter was an abuse of power, maybe not an impeachable offense, but an abuse of power nonetheless? This is no mention of the lengths White House apparats went to assasinate the woman's character in anonymous leaks--see Sidney Blumenthal. For the record, I did not think the Clinton imbroglio was impeachable. But I did find it hilarious that a White House that went out of its way to punish an intern who kept a dress would complain about hardball tactics from the right, and make this Sorkinesque appeal to a higher tone in the national discourse. I mean we can put the lie to all of that by watching the dems in the last six years.
But back to Foley. It's inexplicable and tragic. He's a scumbag. The Republicans now are having a much bigger problem with their preachy base than with Democrats. The Washington Times has already called for Hastert to go based on the fact that he knew about tamer emails. The national review comes close to that as well. And social conservatives are threatening to not turn out for the election.
On top of all this, dude wrote the law he could be prosecuted under.
I would like to think that the reaction here would have been the same if he was a Democrat.
Irony of all ironies....they should make him the "example" of just how strict this law can be.
What next?
"Foley dyslexic!"
"Spanking a reference to athletic triumph!"
Sort of. He was trying to claim that we were coming down on Foley because of homophobia, not because it was pursuit of a minor and/or the power issue you mention. I read it as an extension of hardcore conservatives' unfortunate habit of constantly linking homosexuality and pedophilia in an "A therefore B" sort of arrangement. If you take this "logic" (I use the word loosely here) and apply it to the situation...well, Foley's after youngsters because he's gay. Therefore, if we come down on him for his pursuit of minors, what we're really coming down on him for is being gay. This was an attempt at a "hoisting liberals on their own petard" kind of thing--liberals are supposed to be accepting of gays, yet here are a bunch of liberals chastising a guy for being gay--but, of course, Dolo's just a shit-stirrer and not any kind of thinker, so you can drive a truck through the gaps in his logic.
I don't even know how to handle your existence at this point. Picking John Edwards--a man who lived in a time when "lascivious carriage" was on the national consciousness--for your avatar. OK...
What are we going to learn next? Foley's favorite word is buggery?
I have no sympathy for the GOP, even in light of the opportunistic Democrats. What goes around comes around, and if you're platform served up big portions of "restoring integrity to Washington" in 2000 and 2004, you might want to be prepared when someone finally comes along and tugs out the tablecloth.
Personally, I find this ongoing saga hilarious.
Maybe I'm not up on all the issues, but how is Foley getting his card pulled an opportunistic move by the Democrats? The fucker was doing some low-down maneuvers and he got caught.
"HOW DARE THOSE DEMS CATCH US RED HANDED DOING SOMETHING TERRIBLE AND HAVE THE NERVE TO LET THE AMERICAN PUBLIC KNOW!!!!"