Absolutely Despicable Conduct by Foley

[Drbio]

Florida Rep. Mark Foley's resignation came just hours after ABC News questioned the congressman about a series of sexually explicit instant messages involving congressional pages, high school students who are under 18 years of age.In Congress, Rep. Foley (R-FL) was part of the Republican leadership and the chairman of the House caucus on missing and exploited children.
He crusaded for tough laws against those who used the Internet for sexual exploitation of children.
THE BLOTTER RECOMMENDS

• Read an instant message exchange a former page says he had with Rep. Foley in 2003. Warning: sexually explicit language, reader discretion advised.
• Sixteen-Year-Old Who Worked as Capitol Hill Page Concerned About E-mail Exchange with Congressman
• Check out the World News Report on Foley on the Brian Ross Home Page

"They're sick people; they need mental health counseling," Foley said.
But, according to several former congressional pages, the congressman used the Internet to engage in sexually explicit exchanges.
They say he used the screen name Maf54 on these messages provided to ABC News.
Maf54: You in your boxers, too?
Teen: Nope, just got home. I had a college interview that went late.
Maf54: Well, strip down and get relaxed.
Another message:
Maf54: What ya wearing?
Teen: tshirt and shorts
Maf54: Love to slip them off of you.
And this one:
Maf54: Do I make you a little horny?
Teen: A little.
Maf54: Cool.
The language gets much more graphic, too graphic to be broadcast, and at one point the congressman appears to be describing Internet sex.
Federal authorities say such messages could result in Foley's prosecution, under some of the same laws he helped to enact.
"Adds up to soliciting underage children for sex," said Brad Garrett, a former FBI agent and now an ABC News consultant. "And what it amounts to is serious both state and federal violations that could potentially get you a number of years."
Foley's resignation letter was submitted late this afternoon, and he left Capitol Hill without speaking to reporters.
In a statement, he said he was "deeply sorry" and apologized for letting down his family and the people of Florida.
But he made no mention of the Internet messages or the pages.
One former page tells ABC News that his class was warned about Foley by people involved in the program.
Other pages told ABC News they were hesitant to report Foley because of his power in Congress.
This all came to a head in the last 24 hours. Yesterday, we asked the congressman about some much tamer e-mails from one page, and he said he was just being overly friendly. After we posted that story online, we began to hear from a number of other pages who sent these much more explicit, instant messages. When the congressman realized we had them, he resigned.

Click here to read an exclusive 2003 Internet exchange between Congressman Foley and a former congressional page, according to the young man. Warning: sexually explicit language, reader discretion advised.

Click here to read more Internet exchanges between Foley and former congressional pages.

[FishForLunch]

Compared to Politicians Lawyers are like Mother Theresa. I dont see why there is no term limits, purge these f..ks every 2 terms.

[kg_veteran]

Foley E-Mails 1st Reported in Fall '05
Sep 30, 7:12 PM (ET)
By DEVLIN BARRETT

link

WASHINGTON (AP) - Rep. Thomas Reynolds, head of the House Republican election effort, said Saturday he told Speaker Dennis Hastert months ago about concerns that a fellow GOP lawmaker had sent inappropriate messages to a teenage boy. Hastert's office said aides referred the matter to the proper authorities last fall but they were only told the messages were "over-friendly."

Reynolds, R-N.Y., was told about e-mails sent by Rep. Mark Foley and is now defending himself from Democratic accusations that he did too little. Foley, R-Fla., resigned Friday after ABC News questioned him about the e-mails to a former congressional page and about sexually suggestive instant messages to other pages.

The boy who received the e-mails was 16 in the summer of 2005 when he worked in Congress as a page. After the boy returned to his Louisiana home, the congressman e-mailed him. The teenager thought the messages were inappropriate, particularly one in which Foley asked the teen to send a picture of himself.

The teen's family contacted their congressman, Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-La., who then discussed the problem with Reynolds sometime this spring.

"Rodney Alexander brought to my attention the existence of e-mails between Mark Foley and a former page of Mr. Alexander's," Reynolds, chairman of the National Republican Congressional Committee, said in a written statement Saturday.

"Despite the fact that I had not seen the e-mails in question, and Mr. Alexander told me that the parents didn't want the matter pursued, I told the speaker of the conversation Mr. Alexander had with me," Reynolds said.

Hastert said he does not remember talking to Reynolds about the Foley e-mails, but did not dispute Reynolds' account.

"While the speaker does not explicitly recall this conversation, he has no reason to dispute Congressman Reynolds' recollection that he reported to him on the problem and its resolution," Hastert's aides said in a preliminary report on the matter issued Saturday.

The report includes a lengthy timeline detailing when they first learned of the worrisome e-mail in the fall of 2005, after a staffer for Alexander told Hastert's office the family wanted Foley to stop contacting their son. Alexander's staffer did not share the contents of the e-mail, saying it was not sexual but "over-friendly," the report says.

Hastert's aides referred the matter to the Clerk of the House, and "mindful of the sensitivity of the parent's wishes to protect their child's privacy and believing that they had promptly reported what they knew to the proper authorities," they did not discuss it with others in Hastert's office - including, apparently, their boss.

After the issue was referred to the clerk, it was passed along to the congressman who oversees the page program, Rep. John Shimkus, R-Ill.

Shimkus has said he learned about the e-mail exchange in late 2005 and took immediate action to investigate.

He said Foley told him it was an innocent exchange. Shimkus said he warned Foley not to have any more contact with the teenager and to respect other pages.

Democrats charged Reynolds did far too little and said more digging should be done.

"Congressman Reynolds' inaction in the face of such a serious situation is very troubling, and raises important questions about whether there was an attempt to cover up criminal activity involving a minor to keep it from coming to light before Election Day," said Democratic National Committee spokeswoman Karen Finney.

New York Democrats hoping to unseat Reynolds blasted the congressman, saying they call into question the Republican's values.

"Mr. Reynolds knew about these allegedly inappropriate e-mails from a fellow congressman to a minor for months and didn't lift a finger," said Blake Zeff, a spokesman for the state Democrats.

[u2sarajevo]

What a sicko....

http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/print?id=2509586

[Flacolaco]

freaking sick bastard.

and instant messaging? what a moron, of course it's going to get saved somewhere.....

[MavsX]

this stuff is pretty nasty...but i do love it when dateline does those catching predators thing..and they always catch those idiots

[George Gervin]

Originally Posted by MavsX

this stuff is pretty nasty...but i do love it when dateline does those catching predators thing..and they always catch those idiots

I confess I'm a dateline predator...

Pretty bad stuff if you ask me (no doubt many of you are thinking you haven't asked) but I would be concerned with what the House Leadership knew and when. If all they knew about were the questionable emails I think their safe. If they knew about the IM 'stuff' then I think they are in big time trouble.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by George Gervin

If all they knew about were the questionable emails I think their safe. If they knew about the IM then I think they are in big trouble.

I tend to agree with that.

[MavsX]

Originally Posted by George Gervin

I confess I'm a dateline predator...

Pretty bad stuff if you ask me (no doubt many of you are thinking you haven't asked) but I would be concerned with what the House Leadership knew and when. If all they knew about were the questionable emails I think their safe. If they knew about the IM 'stuff' then I think they are in big time trouble.

ya know george gervin...you might not want to confess that your a dateline predator...thats probably why all of your reputation blocks are red....sucker!

[Mavdog]

Ex-Rep. Foley checks into alcohol rehab By LARA JAKES JORDAN, Associated Press Writer

Former Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record), under FBI investigation for e-mail exchanges with teenage congressional pages, has checked himself into rehabilitation facility for alcoholism treatment and accepts responsibility for his actions, his attorney acknowledged Monday.

The attorney, David Roth, would not identify the facility, but told the Associated Press in West Palm Beach, Fla., that Foley had checked in over the weekend.

"I strongly believe that I am an alcoholic and have accepted the need for immediate treatment for alcoholism and other behavioral problems," Foley said in a statement, Roth told the AP.

Foley, a Republican, abruptly quit Congress on Friday after reports surfaced that he'd sent sexually charged electronic messages to boys working as pages. In the statement, Foley said the "events that led to my resignation have crystalized recognition of my long-standing and significant alcoholism and emotional difficulties."

"I deeply regret and accept full responsibility for the harm I have caused," Foley said. He also expressed "gratitude for the prayers and words of encouragement that have been conveyed to me."

The FBI, meanwhile, "is conducting an assessment to see if there's been a violation of federal law," according to FBI spokesman Richard Kolko.

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement said Monday it was also investigating whether the e-mail communications violated state law. Spokesman Tom Berlinger called the state probe "a precursor to a possible criminal investigation."

The developments sent House Republicans into damage control mode amid charges by Democrats that some House leaders may have known for months about Foley's inappropriate overtures toward the young pages.

Democrats have questioned whether the GOP leadership, including House Speaker Dennis Hastert, R-Ill., tried to protect a House seat in an election year at the expense of the well-being of teenage pages.

Hastert issued his strongest statement yet on Monday, saying he was "outraged and disgusted with Congressman Mark Foley's actions."

The speaker was in Washington meeting with his staff, the House clerk and Rep. John Shimkus (news, bio, voting record), R-Ill., the congressman who oversees the page program, to review the procedures on protecting the teenage pages while they are working at the Capitol and after they finish their assignments, said Ron Bonjean, Hastert's spokesman.

White House press secretary Tony Snow, asked about that Monday on ABC's "Good Morning America," urged greater efforts to "figure out what happened here." He called it "a terrible story" and said he considered it unfortunate that "people are thinking, 'OK, can I get political advantage out of this'."

Hastert in a letter sent Sunday to Attorney General Alberto Gonzales, asked the Justice Department to "conduct an investigation of Mr. Foley's conduct with current and former House pages," including "any sexually explicit communications between Mr. Foley and any former or current House pages and what actions such individuals took, if any, to provide them to law enforcement."

Democrats demanded that investigators determine whether Republican leaders tried to cover up Foley's actions for political reasons.

"The attorney general should open a full-scale investigation immediately," Senate Democratic leader Harry Reid of Nevada said in a statement, including whether GOP leaders "knew there was a problem and ignored it to preserve a congressional seat this election year."

Foley's West Palm Beach district is largely Republican, but now may be won by a Democrat. Republicans are struggling to maintain their House majority in the upcoming election. Florida Republican leaders were meeting Monday to try to choose a candidate to replace Foley in the November election.

FBI cyber sleuths are looking into the text of some of the Foley messages, checking to see how many e-mails and instant electronic messages were sent and how many computers were used, according to a law enforcement official, who spoke on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.

The FBI also was trying to determine if any of the teenagers who received messages are willing to cooperate with the investigation, the official said.

Ironically, Foley, who is 52 and single, could be found to have violated a law that he helped to write as co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus.

Rep. Thomas Reynolds (news, bio, voting record) of New York, head of the House Republican election effort, said he told Hastert months ago about the allegations involving a 16-year-old boy from Louisiana.

Hastert acknowledged that his staff had been made aware of concerns about what they termed "over-friendly" e-mails Foley had sent to the teenager — including one requesting his picture — in the fall of 2005, and that they referred the matter to the House clerk.

But Hastert said those e-mails were not viewed as "sexual in nature" and that he was not aware of "a different set of communications which were sexually explicit ... which Mr. Foley reportedly sent another former page or pages."

Congressional pages, a staple of Washington politics since the 1820s, are high school students who serve as gofers in the House and Senate.

[u2sarajevo]

Alcohol doesn't make you gay, Mr. Foley.

[capitalcity]

Originally Posted by u2sarajevo

Alcohol doesn't make you gay, Mr. Foley.

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by capitalcity

Point well taken.....

[MavKikiNYC]

Originally Posted by u2sarajevo

Alcohol doesn't make you gay, Mr. Foley.

Alcohol doesn't make you a pedophile either, which is probably closer to what Foley's issue is.

[u2sarajevo]

Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC

Alcohol doesn't make you a pedophile either, which is probably closer to what Foley's issue is.

Point also well taken.....

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC

Alcohol doesn't make you a pedophile either, which is probably closer to what Foley's issue is.

Agreed. If he were having a gay relationship with an adult staffer, that would probably be scandalous (see James McGreevey as an example), but this is a completely different thing.

[MavKikiNYC]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

Agreed. If he were having a gay relationship with an adult staffer, that would probably be scandalous (see James McGreevey as an example), but this is a completely different thing.

Right. And the scandalous part of McGreevey's relationship was that it was an extra-marital relationship.

[mary]

Originally Posted by FishForLunch

Compared to Politicians Lawyers are like Mother Theresa. I dont see why there is no term limits, purge these f..ks every 2 terms.

I gagree with you

[u2sarajevo]

I also gagree....

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC

Right. And the scandalous part of McGreevey's relationship was that it was an extra-marital relationship.

That's true. Although a lot was made of the fact that he was the only openly gay governor, the fact that he was cheating on his wife of many years, IMO, was much more scandalous.

Now, whether he would have been elected had he been openly gay in the first place, I suppose, is another topic for another thread.

[MavKikiNYC]

Originally Posted by kg_veteran

That's true. Although a lot was made of the fact that he was the only openly gay governor, the fact that he was cheating on his wife of many years, IMO, was much more scandalous.

Now, whether he would have been elected had he been openly gay in the first place, I suppose, is another topic for another thread.

Unfortunate phrasing, KG.

It reads as if you're saying it was scandalous that he was an openly gay governor, but even more scandalous that he was involved in an extra-marital affair, the first premise asserting scandal either for being open, or merely for "being".

McGreevey was in fact a divorced Catholic, who had not received a marriage annullment from the church (big whoo) prior to marrying his second wife (similar to John Kerry), and who had been denied communion as a result. Ironically you never hear anyone alleging scandal at that generally overlooked/ignored nugget.

Back to Foley. The Foley thing is unfortunate all around. There's pretty much consensus that his actions were indefensible, alcoholism or sexual disorder (pedophilia) be damned.

But it would only make it worse for anyone to use Foley's gross personal misdeeds as a pretext for attempting to smear homosexuals generally or to suggest that homosexuals shouldn't be elected to a political office. Talk about a slippery slope.

[MavKikiNYC]

Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC

Unfortunate phrasing, KG.


McGreevey was in fact a divorced Catholic, who had not received a marriage annullment from the church (big whoo) prior to marrying his second wife (similar to John Kerry), and who had been denied communion as a result. Ironically you never hear anyone alleging scandal at that generally overlooked/ignored nugget.
.

I should correct that---actually, John Kerry DID get an annullment of his first marriage, after 18 years of marriage and 2 children, and about 7 years of separation, and despite his former wife's objections.

But the Catholic church decreed an annullment. Outcry anyone?

[dude1394]

Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC

Right. And the scandalous part of McGreevey's relationship was that it was an extra-marital relationship.

who was scanadlized? Couldnt' have been the dems, must have been the pubbies.

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC

Unfortunate phrasing, KG.

It reads as if you're saying it was scandalous that he was an openly gay governor, but even more scandalous that he was involved in an extra-marital affair, the first premise asserting scandal either for being open, or merely for "being".

Well, in truth he wasn't an openly gay governor, because he resigned at virtually the same time that he became "open" with his homosexuality.

As for whether it's scandalous for the governor of New Jersey to be gay, well, I don't see much use in us debating that. I respect your opinions, but we differ on the issue of homosexuality, and I don't think either of us is going to change his viewpoint.

McGreevey was in fact a divorced Catholic, who had not received a marriage annullment from the church (big whoo) prior to marrying his second wife (similar to John Kerry), and who had been denied communion as a result. Ironically you never hear anyone alleging scandal at that generally overlooked/ignored nugget.

Interesting. I didn't know that, so it obviously didn't receive a lot of coverage.

Back to Foley. The Foley thing is unfortunate all around. There's pretty much consensus that his actions were indefensible, alcoholism or sexual disorder (pedophilia) be damned.

But it would only make it worse for anyone to use Foley's gross personal misdeeds as a pretext for attempting to smear homosexuals generally or to suggest that homosexuals shouldn't be elected to a political office. Talk about a slippery slope.

I agree. I heard someone talking on the radio this afternoon about the need to consider whether homosexuals prey on underage boys. I thought that was a pretty broad and unfair generalization. There are plenty of pedophiles of both persuasions.

As for whether homosexuals should be elected to political office, well, I suppose that is up to the voters, right? (Assuming they know, of course.)

[FishForLunch]

Foley thinks going to rehab will help him, this rehab stunt only works for the Kennedy's and Democrats in general. If you are a republican and you are a sleaze bag you will be exposed.

[Usually Lurkin]

[double post]

[Usually Lurkin]

A note on "pedophilia" posted at the Corner
I don't agree with everything in the post, but he makes some good points about who doesn't get vilified.

Pedophilia [Jonah Goldberg]
I am in no way shape or form a defender of Foley's. He's a sleazeball as far as I'm concerned. But the word pedophilia is being thrown around awfully promiscuously if you ask me. I know that asking people to use the word "ephebophilia" is a bit too much, but these pages weren't, strictly speaking, children. These kids were older than the legal age of consent to marry in most states - does that mean these states are carrying laws on the books countenancing child brides and, by extension, pedophilia?

The funny thing is that you would think the left - particularly the gay left - would be a bit more interested in not having 16 and 17 year old teenagers classified as young children for legal/sexual/political purposes. If that were the case, then a whole lot of dirty old men would need to be prosecuted for felonies when they pick up street hustlers. It would also mean that movies like Porky's and Fast Times at Ridgemont High were in fact ersatz kiddie porn. The former wouldn't bother me that much while I think the latter is ridiculous. Regardless the standard being used against Foley is one that I guarantee will bite back in all sorts of interesting ways. See Rich's point below on Boy Scouts, for example.

The distinction between pedophilia (an attraction to prepubescent children) and ephebophilia (an attraction to postpubescents) is clinically significant.

Rich's point on Boy Scouts was to question whether those claiming Hastert didn't do enough agree with the Boy Scouts decision not to allow gay troop leaders (or something to that effect).

[kg_veteran]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

A note on "pedophilia" posted at the Corner
I don't agree with everything in the post, but he makes some good points about who doesn't get vilified.




The distinction between pedophilia (an attraction to prepubescent children) and ephebophilia (an attraction to postpubescents) is clinically significant.

Rich's point on Boy Scouts was to question whether those claiming Hastert didn't do enough agree with the Boy Scouts decision not to allow gay troop leaders (or something to that effect).

Very interesting stuff, UL.

[u2sarajevo]

That little quoted tidbit you posted UL is filled with alot of nonsense. For one, why would the left or "particularly the gay left" be interested in NOT having 16 and 17 year old teenagers classified as young children? It sounds like whoever wrote this has some preconceived notions about the gay community, and the left in general (that a majority want to have legal/sexual/political dealings with a 16 or 17 year old). This is a mental health issue, an ethical issue, and yes a moral issue. This is NOT a Democrat or a Republican issue.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by u2sarajevo

That little quoted tidbit you posted UL is filled with alot of nonsense. For one, why would the left or "particularly the gay left" be interested in NOT having 16 and 17 year old teenagers classified as young children?

That's the part I don't necessarily agree with. I think his implication is that the gay left has some kind of implicit acceptance of [gay] street hustling by teenage boys. I have no idea if that is true. Maybe if you go to some kind of wierd extreme on either end, you might be more likely to find such acceptance on the left than the right.

I would wager a guess that there are fewer people on the left than on the right that object to the presentation of [promotion of?] teenage sexuality and promiscuity in movies like Porky's, American Pie, etc. and more generally on tv, and in music.

[Mavdog]

the problem hasert faces is the fact several people told him (and apparently reynolds) their concerns about foley, and the decision seems to have been made to not investigate. the most damaging admission they have made is their not involving the democrat counterpart to reynolds, leaving him totally in the dark about the accusations/e mails of foley. that just looks like their decisions on foley were made in a political connotation.

the issue seems to center around why that decision was made.

it is fair to say that the conduct of foley is reprehensible to everybody, no matter what sexual orientation they have. homosexuals as well as heterosexuals, at least those who are not stricken by pathological issues, see the acts of foley as predatory. unfortunately in our world today there is no place, including our congress, which is immune to this type of threat.

The funny thing is that you would think the left - particularly the gay left - would be a bit more interested in not having 16 and 17 year old teenagers classified as young children for legal/sexual/political purposes. If that were the case, then a whole lot of dirty old men would need to be prosecuted for felonies when they pick up street hustlers

a very odd comment to say the least...why is it this authors opinion that the "left-particularly the gay left" lacks the moral clarity to take the position that those under 18 do not need legal protection from these type of predators? this position by the author is one of clear prejudice, and uninformed prejudice imho. are there not any conservatives who are "dirty old men"? the answer is yes.

as it relates to the boy scouts and their position on gays as scout leaders, this has nothing to do with that issue. there is no proven study that shows gay americans are more likely to be pediphiles or ephebophiles (that's a new one for me btw, never heard of it) than heterosexuals are. for all we know, the use of heterosexuals as scout leaders could place the female siblings of scouts in greater danger than having a gay scout leader places the scouts in danger.

[Usually Lurkin]

also, to the point of the political left and the classification of 16-17 year olds as children for sexual/legal purposes: there are probably implications for the legality of abortion, and requirements for parental consent, and taking a mother-to-be across state lines, etc. that you would think the left would not want to get into.

[FishForLunch]

You know what hasert can do, make a big show about having a age limits on page's lets say 18, and accept the fact that congress is a bunch of horny toads, may he can pass a law to legally supply congressman with escorts on the people's dime. After all what would the country do without these noble souls, their happiness is paramount.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by Mavdog

a very odd comment to say the least...why is it this authors opinion that the "left-particularly the gay left" lacks the moral clarity to take the position that those under 18 do not need legal protection from these type of predators? this position by the author is one of clear prejudice, and uninformed prejudice imho. are there not any conservatives who are "dirty old men"? the answer is yes.

but I think the point about legal age of marriage (16 in most states according to the link) stands. The "moral clarity" involved is not so clear. If Foley could leagally marry a 17 year old girl, why would the left want to vilify him for being attracted to a 17 year old male? Wouldn't it be more beneficial for them to say, "look, this attraction should be just as legal as a heterosexual attraction." Or maybe we should raise the age of legal marriage? Or set a legal age differential?

as it relates to the boy scouts and their position on gays as scout leaders, this has nothing to do with that issue. ...

If Hastert should have initiated an investigation based on the description of "overly friendly emails," then should the BoyScouts also be expected to launch investigations of troop leaders based on complaints of "overly friendly emails?" Do you think such complaints would be more likely from parents who know that the troop leader is gay or by parents who know the troop leader is heterosexual?

[Mavdog]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

but I think the point about legal age of marriage (16 in most states according to the link) stands. The "moral clarity" involved is not so clear. If Foley could leagally marry a 17 year old girl, why would the left want to vilify him for being attracted to a 17 year old male? Wouldn't it be more beneficial for them to say, "look, this attraction should be just as legal as a heterosexual attraction." Or maybe we should raise the age of legal marriage? Or set a legal age differential?

it seems that both the left and the right is repulsed by foley.
is it the age of the pages, or is it that foley was able to use his position to perhaps force himself on the pages?

If Hastert should have initiated an investigation based on the description of "overly friendly emails," then should the BoyScouts also be expected to launch investigations of troop leaders based on complaints of "overly friendly emails?" Do you think such complaints would be more likely from parents who know that the troop leader is gay or by parents who know the troop leader is heterosexual?

yes, the scouts should investigate ANYONE who is a troop leader and is found to be sending "overly friendly emails" imho.

[purplefrog]

I believe that Hastert and Reynolds were both obligated (as soon as they knew of the complaint) to initiate at least an informal investigation to determine the seriousness and extent of Foley's behavior. It is not uncommon for victims of sexual predators or sexual harassment to request that the behavior be stopped but for no investigation to take place. Although this may be the victim's wish, those in charge have the responsibility to discreetly determine if others (in this case pages) are experiencing similar things. In this case, it seems like Foley was having these "overly friendly" correspondences with other pages, so imo Hastert and Reynolds lack of action has endangered the safety of others. You have got to take these things seriously and Hastert should step down as Speaker because he failed to recognize the ethical nature of the situation.

[MavKikiNYC]

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

but I think the point about legal age of marriage (16 in most states according to the link) stands. The "moral clarity" involved is not so clear. If Foley could leagally marry a 17 year old girl, why would the left want to vilify him for being attracted to a 17 year old male? Wouldn't it be more beneficial for them to say, "look, this attraction should be just as legal as a heterosexual attraction." Or maybe we should raise the age of legal marriage? Or set a legal age differential?

Would it in fact have been legal for Foley to marry a 17 year old girl? Wouldn't it depend on the jurisdiction? I think though that the thing about Foley is not just the age differential--it's the sort of predatorial abuse of his position of authority relative to the pages.

Also, don't legal age differentials exist already for the purposes of defining statutory rape?

Originally Posted by Usually Lurkin

If Hastert should have initiated an investigation based on the description of "overly friendly emails," then should the BoyScouts also be expected to launch investigations of troop leaders based on complaints of "overly friendly emails?" Do you think such complaints would be more likely from parents who know that the troop leader is gay or by parents who know the troop leader is heterosexual?

Similarly, shoud high school administrators be concerned about having heterosexual males serving as coaches for underage heterosexual females? Shouldn't they be concerned as well about heterosexual female teachers being in positions of authority over underage heterosexual males? How about church officials and youth ministers? How about the pastors themselves? I know of more (far more) instances of heterosexual abuse in all of these categories than of homosexual adults abusing children or post-pubescent minors.

Given the higher frequency of heterosexuals in all four of those populations (high-school age males, high-school age females, heterosexual male coaches/teachers, heterosexual female coaches/teachers) the potential for cases of heterosexual abuse should rationally be a cause for greater concern. And yet you still find people talking about the Boy Scouts and gay troup leaders.

[Usually Lurkin]

Originally Posted by MavKikiNYC

Would it in fact have been legal for Foley to marry a 17 year old girl?

According to the website linked above, the age of sexual consent in DC is 16.

Similarly, shoud high school administrators be concerned about having heterosexual males serving as coaches for underage heterosexual females? ... How about church officials and youth ministers? How about the pastors themselves?

YES! Especially if they're going camping together a lot. I've talked to a few high school coaches who claim that sex with female students is alarmingly common.
As for churches, I think any church should be able to say we want only [males/heterosexuals/homosexuals/females/transgendered/whatever] to be minister or pastor. People have a truly free choice in what church they attend.


Mavdog,
I think the age of the pages has a *lot* to do with this. I think if this were some female his own age, not much would be made of it. Nothing illegal has been done, right? Just some guy being very inapropriate. Because it's a teenager, the word "pedophilia" springs up everywhere, which is damaging, whether you think it's applied correctly or whether you think the ages are of ethical issue. I also think that the sexual orientation has a *lot* to do with this thing blowing up. The fact that the advances are of a homosexual nature resonates among voters in Foley's own party in a way that is not good for him (and in a way that would probably not affect him so much if he were Democrat)

[purplefrog]

Lawyer: Foley was abused as a teen

His attorney also acknowledges that former lawmaker is gay

Lawrence Jackson / AP file

WEST PALM BEACH, Fla. - As Congress continued to feel the fallout from Rep. Mark Foley's resignation over a scandal with male pages, Foley's lawyer announced Tuesday that the Florida Republican had been molested by a clergyman as a teenager and that he was under the influence of alcohol when he sent lurid messages to congressional pages.

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 salacious e-mails he sent to teenage congressional pages.

“This is part of his recovery,” attorney David Roth said of Tuesday's news conference. He declined to identify the clergyman or the church, but said the abuse happened between the ages of 13 and 15.

Foley is a Catholic and attended Sacred Heart School in Lake Worth, Fla.

Roth insisted that Foley, who entered a mental health and alcohol rehab center on Sunday, never had sexual contact with a minor.

"Mark was the under the influence of alcohol at the time he sent the alleged e-mails and IMs that I have been informed of," Roth said.

Roth also announced for the first time that Foley was gay. "Finally, Mark Foley wants you to know that he is a gay man," Roth said in concluding his prepared remarks.

Earlier Tuesday, House Speaker Dennis Hastert brushed aside demands for his resignation, even as the Republicans' No. 2 House leader contradicted Hastert in the page scandal.

President Bush gave Hastert a vote of confidence as the party struggled to contain pre-election fallout.

Hastert, an Illinois Republican, said he wouldn't resign as speaker, the top official in Congress and second in the line of succession to the presidency, in the controversy.

"I'm not going to do that," Hastert said when asked by conservative talk show host Rush Limbaugh whether he would resign.

Hastert sought to blame Democrats for leaking sexually explicit computer instant messages between Foley and former pages from 2003.

"We have a story to tell, and the Democrats have -- in my view have -- put this thing forward to try to block us from telling the story. They're trying to put us on defense," Hastert said.

Electronic evidence
ABC News, which first reported the exchanges, says it received the contents of e-mail and instant messages from former pages. It said its initial report last Thursday about e-mails between Foley and a Louisiana teenager prompted other former pages to come forward with more sexually graphic electronic messages.

On Tuesday, ABC News published more exchanges.

"Can I have a good kiss goodnight," Foley was said to have messaged in one. A boy responded with cyber symbols and "<kiss>."

In another message, Foley invited the teenager to his Capitol Hill townhouse "for a few drinks" even though he knew the boy was under the legal drinking age. "we may need to drink at my house so we dont get busted," Foley messaged.

Speaker contradicted
Hastert told reporters on Monday that he was not aware of the complaint against Foley until last Friday. He acknowledged his staff was made aware of it last fall, but he said there was "no reason to bump it up to me at that time."

However, both Majority Leader John Boehner and New York Rep. Tom Reynolds, who heads the House Republicans' re-election campaign, said they had spoken with Hastert about a complaint concerning a former page from Louisiana last spring after being hold about it by Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-La., who had sponsored the teen.

"I believe I talked to the speaker and he told me it had been taken care of," Boehner said in an interview Tuesday on radio station WLW in Cincinnati. "My position is it's in his corner, it's his responsibility."

Reynolds insisted several times in a Monday night news conference in his Buffalo-area district that "I took it to the speaker" this spring when Alexander also mentioned the inappropriate e-mail to him.

Resignation leaves answered questions
Foley's departure left behind a trail of questions concerning the e-mails and instant messages he had sent pages over an extended period of time. Beyond the details of his actions, Republican leaders fear the impact on the Nov. 7 elections, and the possible loss of their House majority.

Bush weighed in for the first time Tuesday. Speaking at a Stockton, Calif., elementary school, he said he was disgusted by the Foley revelations and voiced support for Hastert.

"I know that he wants all the facts to come out," the president said.

A call for Hastert's resignation
Meanwhile, The Washington Times, a newspaper with a consistently conservative editorial page, called for Hastert's resignation Tuesday, saying he was either grossly negligent "or he deliberately looked the other way in hopes that a brewing scandal would simply blow away."

Conservative activist Richard A. Viguerie kept up the drumbeat from the right, calling for Hastert to step down. "The fact that they just walked away from this, it sounds like they were trying to protect one of their own members rather than these young boys," Viguerie said on Fox News' "Studio B."

Boehner and Reynolds said that while they learned of overly friendly e-mails from Foley to the one Louisiana page this spring, they had no idea that the congressman had sent other, sexually explicit messages, to additional pages.

Neither lawmaker said they read the 2005 message from Foley, described as "sick" by the boy. The message asked for a photograph and mentioned a different teen who was in "great shape."

Federal investigation
Foley had been originally confronted in the fall of 2005 about his communications with the one page. According to a weekend statement issued by Hastert's office, Page Board Chairman John Shimkus, R-Ill., and the House clerk met with the Florida lawmaker and told him to "immediately cease any communication" with the page.

The FBI announced over the weekend it was opening a preliminary investigation into the matter, but that, like much else, was a matter of confusion.

One law enforcement official said the FBI originally was given some Foley-related e-mail correspondence in July, but concluded that no federal law had been violated.
__________________________________________________ __________________

This is why if you are Hastert or Reynolds you have to act and not just say "well I had no idea there were OTHER pages?" You need to go out and investigate yourself in order to determine the extent that Foley was acting unethically. The timeline on when Foley sent emails to the other pages is critical. If any of those instances occured AFTER the Louisiana case was brought to the Republican leadership, then there is clear negligence that, in the end, affected the safety of others. I think there is negligence regardless, but the timeline may make this case even bigger. The conservatives that are asking for Hastert's resignation are right on target and Bush needs to support that view. If the Republican leadership sit on the sidelines (and not ask for Hastert's resignation) I am betting the Dems win big in November. It will be interesting to sit back and watch what happens.

[kg_veteran]

Hastert should resign, and Bush is making a mistake by supporting his decision not to resign.