Tuesday, October 03, 2006

March of Foley 2

Hotair says that Congressman Foley's lawyer will announce a “bombshell” at coming newsconference. Among the teasers are that he was molested by a priest as a child. He also claims that he never had sex with children and may name other Congressmen involved in shennanigans. If you have to go down, why not take whoever you can with you?

43 Comments:

Blogger 49erDweet said...

Most carnival sideshow pitchmen show more class than these 'freaks'. Sad, sad, sad.

10/03/2006 04:42:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

Incidents like this shed light in radiating concentric circles. First the incidents of Foley's email and IM themselves. Then the page system. Then outward to Congress and the culture of mutual coverup. Then the whole government/media carnival. Then down the rungs up through which these fellers climbed hand over hand, from their schooldays to a pinnacle then down to some hazy twilight in a rehab, run if some are to be believed, by a Scientologists. And we are not yet within the Seventh Circle.

10/03/2006 04:55:00 PM  
Blogger Mr. K said...

no problems here with homosexual behavior, but leave the kids alone. I don't care what excuse he claims...he is disgusting, and has digraced the Congress.

10/03/2006 04:55:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

Incidents like this shed light in radiating concentric circles.

While the search for blame sinks in concentric dark pits. First the booze made Foley do it. Now it's because he was molested by a man of the cloth when he was a teenager. Next he will point the finger at the constituents in his Republican district forcing him to cover up his true self because they would never re-elect a gay man.

10/03/2006 06:11:00 PM  
Blogger Kinuachdrach said...

In the interests of multi-culturalism, would it not be appropriate for the Media & the Dems to insist on punishing former Rep Foley according to Sharia law?

Now, is the appropriate Sharia penalty throw the homosexual off of a high building, or push a wall down on top of the homosexual? I forget, but surely someone at the New York Times must know the proper etiquette.

10/03/2006 06:32:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

Now, is the appropriate Sharia penalty throw the homosexual off of a high building, or push a wall down on top of the homosexual?

I dunno, maybe the Supreme Court can shed light on this since they upheld the establishment of Islam in public schools today.

10/03/2006 06:49:00 PM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

The consequences of an undisciplined life.If the Foley follies bring down the Republican House,Rep Charles Rangel(D,NY) is on record as cutting off funds for the Iraq war if he is Chairman of the House Ways and Means committee.Shades of Watergate leading to the Democrat Congress kneecapping the South Vietnamese in the glow of bringing down Tricky Dick.How many hundred thousand Asians took it in the shorts(sorry bad choice of words there)?
The Dems better be careful they don't demonize Foley too much or they may lose the support of the North American Man Boy Love Assn. .

10/03/2006 06:54:00 PM  
Blogger 3Case said...

It's 4 days later and Drudge is screaming ABC's latest revelation that the drunken closeted Republican gratified himself at the keyboard while waiting for a House vote. Four days later!!!

Once again, keyboard diddlin' 'pub = Taliban treatment while unit-polished Dem (name your variation) = Emily Litella treatment ("Never mind!").

Boy! It's a good thing those ABC people stood up to the Dems over that 9/11 movie thing a couple weeks ago...it makes them so much more credible now....

10/03/2006 06:59:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

Rep Charles Rangel(D,NY) is on record as cutting off funds for the Iraq war if he is Chairman of the House Ways and Means committee.

Well, I guess this means Dubya will get out his ol' veto pen finally for something other than blocking the march of science.

10/03/2006 07:15:00 PM  
Blogger Sonspot said...

I was killing time today at Wikipedia and happened across Rip Taylor's Bio. It noted that as a young man he worked as a senate page. It explains alot about the page system, and Mr. Taylor.

The page systems needs to die the death. The world has seen enough confetti already.

10/03/2006 07:26:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

What is it with some guys? If it ain't while eating pizza, it's while voting. Well nobody every said politicians couldn't multitask. If it ain't a cigar it's a keyboard. Kinda makes you wonder about shaking hands with public officials.

10/03/2006 07:29:00 PM  
Blogger 2164th said...

wretchard, you dog. No one who reads this will ever go through a receiving line again and be the same. Shame on you man!

10/03/2006 07:49:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

Gentlemen, be like Foley and reserve such shenannigans for the "bottom of the page" (so to speak).

10/03/2006 07:56:00 PM  
Blogger 2164th said...

T_E_R_E_S_I_T_A...young lady, go to your room!

10/03/2006 07:58:00 PM  
Blogger Jamie Irons said...

The Iowa Electronic Markets show a rather marked decline in the shares for "Republican Hold" of the House in November...


Jamie Irons

10/03/2006 09:40:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

A outed Republican homosexual, especially one interested in young boys, is a double whammy because the Democrats will ostracize him for being Republican and Republicans will ostracize him for being what he is. Effectively nobody wants him. On the other hand a Democrat homosexual interested in young boys will not fare so badly because while Republicans will ostracize him for being a Democrat, many Democrats will continue to support him for being what he is. So he'll still pull in some votes.

The irony is that many Democrats must feign outrage at something they would have passed up, or even lauded in a Barney Franks or a Gary Studds. Because it's "hypocritical" of course, not because it's reprehensible. By ruling most every type of sexual behavior within bounds Democrats automatically innoculate themselves against sexual scandal. By describing certain types of sexual behavior as deviant, conservatives create huge opportunities for scandal unless they can live up to expectations.

Of course this creates a kind of race to the bottom, if you want to view homosexuality in that way. But it doesn't have to involve sexual preferences at all. Lowering the public's expectations in honesty and patriotism has the beneficial effect of making it hard for voters to be disappointed in you. It's possible to be flabbergasted by Jesse Jackson, for example, but never disappointed. And since there are already professions of which we expect so little yet use so much, why shouldn't politicians add themselves to the list?

10/03/2006 10:44:00 PM  
Blogger Ardsgaine said...

Of course this creates a kind of race to the bottom

...

10/03/2006 11:26:00 PM  
Blogger 2164th said...

Wretchard at 10:44,
Splendid, almost the perfect 10-4.

10/04/2006 12:41:00 AM  
Blogger 3Case said...

From The Prowler @ spectator.org:

"CREW, as the group likes to be called, is an organization funded by billionaire George Soros, as well as Daniel Berger, one of the Democrat Party's most prolific donors. Berger's Philadelphia law firm, Berger & Montague, is a well-known class action specialist...."

The party "of the people" is now the party of the billionaires and mega-millionaires and is engaged in non-stop political manipulations that Tricky Dick could not have concieived...what a proud group they must be....

Wretchard:
You are doing the 'apples n' oranges' thing in your "why" analysis up there. You have swallowed the Dem meme whole. Republicans are not turning away from Foley for his sexual orientation; the media accounts report they have known him as closeted for years and have accepted him as he, a fact which, interestingly, the Dems are trying to include as a measure of Republican failure in their illusions. The Republicans have sent Foley out for preying upon young people. Are you saying that is not right?!? Meanwhile, the Dems have people (Studds, Frank, Reynolds, 42) who prey upon children whom they handle with kid gloves lest they (Dems) lose votes, which means the Dems will trade the lives/bodies/psyches of the young (not their own) for votes...for their pursuit of power. Just the people I'd want in charge at the craven behest of a billionaire currency speculator...NOT!

10/04/2006 05:31:00 AM  
Blogger 3Case said...

BTW, there are only 3 places those IM conversations could have been found:

1. Foley's hard drive;
2. The young man's hard drive; or
3. the archives of the IM provider.

If it's Foley's, who invaded his privacy?

If it's the young man's, doesn't that put the lie to the "want to keep it private" riff of the parents?

If it's the IM provider...?

10/04/2006 05:45:00 AM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

If it's Foley's, who invaded his privacy?

There never was such a thing as "privacy" on the internet.

If it's the young man's, doesn't that put the lie to the "want to keep it private" riff of the parents?

No but the "want to keep it private" riff says the parents don't really care if their minor is being exploited in this way.

10/04/2006 06:34:00 AM  
Blogger Eggplant said...

It's interesting how the Democrat's October surprises were played out. First they trotted out the leaked NIE and selectively quoted it to make the case that the Iraq War had worsened the GWoT. That didn't pan out because Bush simply declassified other portions of the NIE to present an opposite conclusion. Then Bob Woodward brought out his book, no doubt timed to leverage off the leaked NIE. However there was enough errors of fact in Woodward's book that it could't stand on its own legs (it needed the NIE to have political traction). It seems almost with reluctance that the MSM/Democrats brought out Foley as their ultimate secret weapon. Unfortunately that particular weapon is double edged since there is plenty of history of Democrat sexual misconduct. No doubt the Republicans are looking in their black books now to come up with the creepiest known Democrat sexual pervert. My guess is the Republicans are weighing the pros-and-cons of simply taking the political hit about Foley versus making the situation worse by bringing out their Democrat scumbag. I find myself wondering what Rove's October surprise will be. It hasn't come out yet (Rove has a better sense for timing). Spengler insists it will be a military assault against Iran but I think that's too obvious. Also any operation against Iran will be messy and probably offer little short term political advantage. Maybe the North Koreans might unwittingly provide their own October surprise with a nuclear weapons test and hand the Republicans a gift?

10/04/2006 08:50:00 AM  
Blogger Clyde said...

Foley's actions were indefensible. He's gone, and good riddance. Republicans caught in sleazy behavior usually have enough decency left to resign (Nixon, Foley), unlike Democrats (Clinton, Studds, etc.), whose usual reaction is defiance.

What I find most disgusting is that some Democrats who are claiming that they are doing this For The Children! actually had the nasty e-mails for a long, long time and sat on them until the time they felt would be most propitious for them politically. Never mind that Foley might victimize more kids. They did this not out of concern for vulnerable kids, but for political advantage. Hypocrites!

10/04/2006 09:09:00 AM  
Blogger Clyde said...

Perhaps "decency" was the wrong word. Let's instead say that Republicans are capable of feeling shame and remorse for their bad behavior.

10/04/2006 09:11:00 AM  
Blogger the patriarch said...

"Once again, keyboard diddlin' 'pub = Taliban treatment while unit-polished Dem (name your variation) = Emily Litella treatment ("Never mind!")."

Lewinsky was an adult, the pages are minors. That's not to say what Clinton did wasn't sleazy, but it wasn't illegal.

"What I find most disgusting is that some Democrats who are claiming that they are doing this For The Children! actually had the nasty e-mails for a long, long time and sat on them until the time they felt would be most propitious for them politically."

Who had them?

10/04/2006 09:55:00 AM  
Blogger Mr.Atos said...

wretchard,

I couldnt agree with you more regarding the cultural race to the bottom. as I said in a recent post regarding the gravity of two serious matters,

Unlike animals, humans must choose to live. And in order to survive, they must decide that survival is moral, then institute a programming free of contradiction that renders its continuation. Virtue can be attributed to the programming that is most conducive to that end. And yet it is a word and an idea, rejected outright by the Left.

Their's is personal wretchedness bred of perpetual and collective self-loathing. They despise anything good and decent for the shame it cast upon them by comparison. Tossing aside those glowing jewels of virtue that do shine among us, they grope instead for the miserable and the wretched like sodden feces as their cherished treasure. They consume the poison of moral relativism for nourishment and spread anger, fear, hate, confusion, doubt, purposelessness, and malevolence like a virus infecting the soul of humanity and disintegrating mankind from the inside outward. The Left are like termites chewing the foundations out from beneath the structure of civilization. They have peddled their loathing for this nation and all that it stands for aggressively and consistently for nearly 4 decades, such that the chickens of thier discontent have indeed come home to roost, both with our most mortal enemies, and in the presence of our most cherished posessions... our progeny. America's children have become the sacrificial goats of a political party and ideological movement committed to misery and suffering as the noblest achievement of human virtue. What then do we expected to get as the highest reward for the attainment of such perfection, if not the most brutal of consecrations.

To which gravity dare we respond in November, when working to shore up the foundations of Western Civilization?

If we choose wrong, the race to that bottom will be more of a catastrophic collapse, for want of sufficient structure.

http://mysandmen.blogspot.com/2006/10/gravity-of-unpleasantville.html

10/04/2006 10:29:00 AM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

Maybe the North Koreans might unwittingly provide their own October surprise with a nuclear weapons test and hand the Republicans a gift?

That could hardly be characterized a gift no matter which party is in power. It will lead to a nuclear arms race among several nations in East Asia, which by the way is the only place where nukes have been detonated in anger.

10/04/2006 11:06:00 AM  
Blogger Buddy Larsen said...

Damn, Mr. Atos--what a symphony. Every note true.

10/04/2006 11:45:00 AM  
Blogger Tarnsman said...

“Maybe the North Koreans might unwittingly provide their own October surprise with a nuclear weapons test and hand the Republicans a gift?”

It is long pass the time for President Bush to stand on the podium in front of the world’s press with Vice President Cheney and Madame Secretary Rice on his right and the Prime Minister of Japan on his left and announce to the world that the United States will not stand idly by while a rouge nation threatens one of our most trusted and valuable allies with nuclear missiles. Therefore, immediately the United States will transfer to the Japanese Self-Defense forces ten AGM-129 cruise missiles, each armed with a 100 kiloton tactical nuclear warhead, to act as a deterrent to North Korean aggression. How fast do you think before the Chinese and Russians, and everyone else in the region, would act to rein in Pajama Boy in order to stop the Japanese from joining the nuclear club? Which they may do anyways. If anything Kim has given the Japanese to seriously start thinking that it is long past due that Japan regain its right to have a real military capable of defending the nation on its own as well as project Japanese power. Going to be interesting to see how this all plays out especially given the rhetoric of the new Japanese premier.

10/04/2006 11:57:00 AM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

No can do, tarnsman, one major item in the nuclear non-proliferation treaty is that 'These 5 Nuclear Weapons States (NWS) agree not to transfer "nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices" technology to other states'

If we break the treaty, then Russia and China will start passing the damn things around too and then we'll be in a world of Shi'ite.

10/04/2006 12:10:00 PM  
Blogger 3Case said...

Teresita,

I was talking about Foley's own hard drive, not as to where the IM might exist out on the 'net. Reread the start of the post re: the 3 places those IMs would exist after the fact.

the patriarch,

So...keyboard consumation is worse than direct consumation as long as statutory age requirements are observed strictly? With age requirements met, it's just sleazy....

10/04/2006 12:24:00 PM  
Blogger 3Case said...

"...rouge nation...."

I thought NK was really poor, so poor as to not be able to afford makeup!

10/04/2006 12:26:00 PM  
Blogger the patriarch said...

"So...keyboard consumation is worse than direct consumation as long as statutory age requirements are observed strictly? With age requirements met, it's just sleazy...."

Yes, soliciting minors, particularly the ones that seemed a bit unwilling, via keyboard is worse than having an extramarital affair with a consenting adult. The former is illegal while the latter is merely sleazy. I'm not one to unconditionally support Clinton at all, but he was brought up as a comparison that I feel is not valid.

10/04/2006 12:39:00 PM  
Blogger wretchard said...

The page was 16 years old which is the age of consent in DC, so "technically" Foley is home free. Technically. But the voters have the privilege to use broader criteria. And by most standards Foley was a creep. Some people might say the same of the former President whether or not his acts conformed to the pre-agreed definition of "sex" as stipulated in the examination.

And there are those who think the broader standard should apply because in a political process it is fitness for office, not criminal guilt, which is at issue. What is amazing in today's atmosphere is that the mere absence of a criminal conviction is presented as fitness for office. Sometimes, not even that.

10/04/2006 01:56:00 PM  
Blogger the patriarch said...

I personally don't care about what Foley did. The pages in question were not little children, but intelligent young men from families of means. From all appearances, they handled the situation beautifully by either shrugging him off or by being mildly curious about it. I don't think anyone was exploited. It's just rather sordid. If the age of consent is as wretchard says, then I don't even see much of a problem. The guy is a dirty old man. DC is full of those.

As for "fitness for office," if we eliminate politicians who have sleazy affairs from that category, we lose a good portion of some of our better Presidents, and those are just the ones we know about.

This is mostly about the gay aspect. If the pages were 16 and 17 year old girls, then this story would not be as big.

10/04/2006 02:16:00 PM  
Blogger trangbang68 said...

Hey Patriarch,put your shirt on.You're grossing me out,not to mention scads of unwilling minors.

10/04/2006 03:50:00 PM  
Blogger 3Case said...

DC is full of those and...nobody, as of yet, has explained to me how NK affords makeup...was Foley buying it for them?...over the internet....

10/04/2006 03:51:00 PM  
Blogger istarious said...

.
.

The Begatting Of The President


Orson Welles tells The Old Testament version of LBJ's term, and then gives The New Testament treatment of Nixon's rise to power.

.
.

10/04/2006 06:33:00 PM  
Blogger 3Case said...

From The Drudge Report:

SEX CHAT WAS WITH 18 YEAR OLD

On Tuesday ABC news released a high-impact instant message exchange between Foley and, as ABC explained, a young man "under the age of 18."

ABC headlined the story: "New Foley Instant Messages; Had Internet Sex While Awaiting House Vote"

But upon reviewing the records, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned, the young man was in fact over the age of 18 at the time of the exchange.

A network source explains, messages with the young man and disgraced former Congressman Foley took place before and after the 18th birthday.

10/04/2006 06:46:00 PM  
Blogger Woman Catholic said...

This is mostly about the gay aspect. If the pages were 16 and 17 year old girls, then this story would not be as big.

Republicans make such a big deal demonizing homosexuals that any gays and lesbians with conservative economic or security values in positions of power must remain closeted at all costs, leaving them open to just this sort of "October Surprise" when they are at maximum vulnerability. Remember, these allegations are three years old. The only comparable hit that could be made on a Demo politician is if they went into a Wal-Mart once, or maybe one time they counseled their daughter to put her baby up for adoption rather than getting it ripped out.

10/04/2006 07:38:00 PM  
Blogger 3Case said...

I'm still having a hard time getting past the idea that it's all right to hit on the kids as long as they are past the statutory age minimum...that increased power and privilege from the people does not require increased responsibility.

But, I guess Gerry Studds and Tip O'Neill rest that standard and Frank, Clinton and Reynolds (with Clinton reprise) confirmed it...at least, for Dems.

10/04/2006 08:08:00 PM  
Blogger Doug said...

"Hey Patriarch,put your shirt on.
You're grossing me out,not to mention scads of unwilling minors
."
---
Ditto
---
3 Case,
The very ESSENCE of Sexual Harassment is ignored, having been besmirched for years by libs claiming to care, but truly caring only about their real agendas, whether socialist, monetary, abortion "rights", androphobia, or whatever.

10/04/2006 09:06:00 PM  
Blogger geoffb5 said...

Since there are only 3 places the IMs could have been originally and no one is saying where they came from then how does anyone know who even typed them. If I have someones user name and password I become them on the internet. Only the logs showing where the messages originated from and when they were posted could start to show how much if any of this is reality. I believe because he resigned that Foley did do at least some of what is alleged.
Right now the evidence has no providence. Who is vouching for it?

10/04/2006 09:17:00 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home


Powered by Blogger