• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!
  • Welcome to our archives. No new posts are allowed here.

Foley Resigns Over Sexually Explicit Messages to Minors

Kandahar said:
Umm yes. If the page was of age, then it's just a consensual sexual relationship. Nothing wrong with that.
Click to expand...

Are you serious? In Studd's case it was a 17 year old, of legal consenting age. And you think it is the proper behavior for a congressmen to seek and engage in sexual relationships with young people sent to Washington of such an honorarium? Well why did they censure him then?

Hmm...Well I don't know anything about that incident, but the way you worded that makes me think that he wasn't actually involved. Am I right?
Click to expand...

Out of his apartment, run on his phone, by his lover, for whom he had used his power to get 33 parking tickets torn up. Make up your own mind.
 
Navy Pride said:
They just read the e-mails on Hardball and they were really not that bad......The worse thing he asked him was for a picture and his age...:confused: There must be more to it.............
Click to expand...

I agree. I can see how the emails could be interpreted as a sexual advance, but they aren't necessarily so. Perhaps there was more incriminating stuff coming that WASN'T reported on the news yet.

Navy Pride said:
As far as Franks goes he actually had sex with his pages......
Click to expand...

The repeated attempts to drag Barney Frank into this (assuming his page was of legal age) is irrelevant. Your analogy practically drips with homophobia, and you know it.
 
Kandahar said:
Why? There's nothing illegal about having sex with an 18 year old. The fact that you feel that a congressperson should resign because of YOUR self-righteous moral judgments is absurd.
Click to expand...

Quite frankly I find you opinon that congressmen are free to seek sexual realtions with young pages absurd. But if that is the ground you want to defend have at it. Obviuosly you have much lower standards that I do.

Your completely subjective judgment about his "character" is irrelevant. Should Ru$y Giuliani have resigned for having an affair?
Click to expand...

Was it with a young page or intern under his supervision? If so, yes he should have resigned.

Should Dick Cheney have resigned for saying the F-word?
Click to expand...

What does that have to do with this?
 
Stinger said:
Are you serious? In Studd's case it was a 17 year old, of legal consenting age.
Click to expand...

I was referring to Barney Frank.

Stinger said:
And you think it is the proper behavior for a congressmen to seek and engage in sexual relationships with young people sent to Washington of such an honorarium?
Click to expand...

I really don't care who congressmen have sex with, as long as they aren't breaking any laws. The fact that you do is disturbing.

Stinger said:
Well why did they censure him then?
Click to expand...

How should I know? I'd never even heard of Gerry Studs until five minutes ago. But it isn't like the US Senate is above censuring/impeaching/prosecuting people for political gain...

Stinger said:
Out of his apartment, run on his phone, by his lover, for whom he had used his power to get 33 parking tickets torn up. Make up your own mind.
Click to expand...

Make up my mind? I've never heard of this, so I'm not rendering any judgment at all.

If that is the case, Barney Frank probably should've known about it. But what does this have to do with having sex with a page?
 
Stinger said:
Was it with a young page or intern under his supervision? If so, yes he should have resigned.
Click to expand...

Define "young." What should the cutoff age be? Isn't that why we have an age of consent in the first place?


Stinger said:
What does that have to do with this?
Click to expand...

It has to do with the fact that everyone has different moral standards, and it's ridiculous to try to force YOUR lifestyle and morals on other people. How do YOU like it when congressmen try to force THEIR morals on you?

As long as they aren't breaking any laws, I don't give a **** who they have sex with. If, say, Rick Santorum wants a little man-on-dog action, far be it from me to criticize him for it. :lol:
 
Stinger said:
Are you serious? In Studd's case it was a 17 year old, of legal consenting age. And you think it is the proper behavior for a congressmen to seek and engage in sexual relationships with young people sent to Washington of such an honorarium? Well why did they censure him then?



Out of his apartment, run on his phone, by his lover, for whom he had used his power to get 33 parking tickets torn up. Make up your own mind.
Click to expand...

About the parking tickets - Was he charged or did he admit doing it?
 
Captain America said:
Moral corruption is not monopolized by either party. For every GOP you can name getting kinky with one of their pages boys, I can name you a Democrat stickin' cigars up..... well, you know. :3oops:
Click to expand...

The difference being is that the Democrats don't go around to religious right conventions telling the Fundies that Jesus wants them to vote for them, nor are they proposing Constitutional Amendments to ban gay marriage, nor do they attempt to legislate religious morality. So really, there is a difference here as Democrats are just as immoral as Republicans are, but unlike Republicans, they are not damn hypocritical about it.

If Hugh Hefner picked up a prostitute, no one would think anything of it. However, if Jerry Falwell picked up a prostitute, it would be on the front page, and for good reason.
 
Do you see how quickly the Republicans derailed this thread about Foley into one about Barney Frank? That is how they defend people on their side, including this child molester. Just point the finger at someone else.

And why pick at Frank? What about these other gays?

Roy Cohn, who was Joseph McCarthy's chief legal counsel.

James Guckert aka Jeff Gannon, male prostitute.

Homosexual child molester Rev. Billy James Hargis.

Arizona Congressman James Kolbe.

Virginia Congressman Ed Shrock.

Andrew Sullivan, Editor of the New Republic magazine.

Jim West, leader of the Washington State Senate.

I'll tell you why not. They are all gay REPUBLICANS. :rofl
 
danarhea said:
That you would blindly support him, without even examining the evidence is reprehensible. That you make excuses for him, and call this a political witch hunt is equally reprehensible. ...This episode amply demonstrates the "See no evil", admit nothing, and support the party at all costs, no matter what, attitude of the Bushneviks nowadays. Simply disgusting.
Click to expand...

Are we talking about Clinton here or Foley? Just replace Foley's list of mis-deeds with Clintion's affair, perjury, Chinagate, travelgate, Filegate, etc....and you have a mirror image, only possibly worse...so spare the lecture about one party having ownership of the title 'morally corrupt' over the other!

Just replace 1 word, and you would be correct either way you say it, depending on the politician/crime/instance:


danarhea said:
By their own actions, Democrats/Republicans have shown just how morally bankrupt they really are.
Click to expand...
 
easyt65 said:
Are we talking about Clinton here or Foley? Just replace Foley's list of mis-deeds with Clintion's affair, perjury, Chinagate, travelgate, Filegate, etc....and you have a mirror image, only possibly worse...so spare the lecture about one party having ownership of the title 'morally corrupt' over the other!

Just replace 1 word, and you would be correct either way you say it, depending on the politician/crime/instance:
Click to expand...

I dont give a crap out Clinton. We was a complete disgrace, and your side raked him over the coals for it. BTW, nice job of it too. :)

Now when the shoe is on the other foot, you choose to point the finger at someone else? That is the same as supporting this child molester.
 
Navy Pride said:
It really shows the integrity of the 2 partys............Mark Foley a Republican gets caught messing around with a page and resigns.......Barney Frank gets caught messing around with a page and refuses to resign.....

Does anyone but me see the hypocrisy of the Democratic party?
Click to expand...

Did I call that or what? :mrgreen:

In post #2 when I wrote:

I suspect they will soon make Foley a hero for "doing the right thing" and resigning.
Click to expand...


Do I know my GOP hacks :spin: or what!?!?!?

You guys are too easy! :neener
 
Last edited:
Stinger said:
Actually I believe you have confused him with Gerry Studds and no he was not forced to resign

Heck Frank had a prostitution ring being run out of his apartment and used his political power to get 33 parking tickets his gay lover recieved torn up. And he didn't resign.
Click to expand...
How about providing some proof about your charges? A creditable link would be appreciated...is that too much to ask?
 
Quote(Foley's aides initially blamed Democratic rival Tim Mahoney and Democrats with attempting to smear the congressman before the election.)

It would seem that Foley or at least his aides initially rejected the allegation and stated it was a smear by his Democratic rival for Foley's seat.

Additional emails then came out to prove that in essence the initial accusation had some basis for having been made.

At this point, it seems that Mr. Foley decided he would resign and promptly did just that.

Ok he was caught fair and square, did the decent thing, now what?

By sending indecent e-mails he has committed an offence, so will he be charged with this offence or, as seems likely, will the GOP pull in some favors so as to get this episode swept under the carpet as soon as possible?

It will be interesting to see what if anything happens next?
 
jujuman13 said:
Quote(Foley's aides initially blamed Democratic rival Tim Mahoney and Democrats with attempting to smear the congressman before the election.)

It would seem that Foley or at least his aides initially rejected the allegation and stated it was a smear by his Democratic rival for Foley's seat.

Additional emails then came out to prove that in essence the initial accusation had some basis for having been made.

At this point, it seems that Mr. Foley decided he would resign and promptly did just that.

Ok he was caught fair and square, did the decent thing, now what?

By sending indecent e-mails he has committed an offence, so will he be charged with this offence or, as seems likely, will the GOP pull in some favors so as to get this episode swept under the carpet as soon as possible?

It will be interesting to see what if anything happens next?
Click to expand...

He didn't do 'the decent thing.' He left because he had to. He is a sexual predator who didn't want cameras trained on him every morning on his way to work.
 
tryreading said:
He didn't do 'the decent thing.' He left because he had to. He is a sexual predator who didn't want cameras trained on him every morning on his way to work.
Click to expand...
Exactly! ABC News interviewed an ex-FBI agent who said that Foley will probably be arrested for soliciting sex from a minor over the Internet. He can get from 3-10 years for his lovely IMs.
 
Kandahar said:
Define "young." What should the cutoff age be? Isn't that why we have an age of consent in the first place?
Click to expand...

So if your 17 year daughter wanted to go to work for a 50 year old congressman known to try and entice young pages and intern into sexual relationships you'd be OK with that, you'd encourage her? You think that is the proper behavior for our halls of congress and our elected officials?


It has to do with the fact that everyone has different moral standards, and it's ridiculous to try to force YOUR lifestyle and morals on other people.
Click to expand...

Not if they are elected officials and I can still vote.

It's ridiculous to support this kind of behavior by our elected officials with young people who go to Washington to work as pages and interns to learn about how our government functions. In fact it's quite sick.


How do YOU like it when congressmen try to force THEIR morals on you?
Click to expand...

Do you know how stupid a question that is.

As long as they aren't breaking any laws, I don't give a **** who they have sex with. If, say, Rick Santorum wants a little man-on-dog action, far be it from me to criticize him for it. :lol:
Click to expand...

Do you realize how stupid that statement is.

You've staked your ground and I am more than happy to let you wallow in it.
 
tryreading said:
He didn't do 'the decent thing.' He left because he had to. He is a sexual predator who didn't want cameras trained on him every morning on his way to work.
Click to expand...

Oh he's a sick person, but he did the decent thing as opposed to Gerry Studds and since the Dems and the left kept him in office there is very little they can say here.
 
SouthernDemocrat said:
The difference being is that the Democrats don't go around to religious right conventions telling the Fundies that Jesus wants them to vote for them, nor are they proposing Constitutional Amendments to ban gay marriage, nor do they attempt to legislate religious morality. So really, there is a difference here as Democrats are just as immoral as Republicans are, but unlike Republicans, they are not damn hypocritical about it.
Click to expand...

Oh so Democrats don't object to immoral behavior then. Don't go to churches that teach such nor urge others to live moral lives. And that gives them a higher moral standing or something>

The difference is Democrats don't object to immoral behavior when it's one of their own so they have very little standing here. It's a Republican, he will leave congress in disgrace and it will be over. As opposed to if it were a Democrat and we'd have to live with it.
 
danarhea said:
I dont give a crap out Clinton. We was a complete disgrace, and your side raked him over the coals for it. BTW, nice job of it too. :)

Now when the shoe is on the other foot, you choose to point the finger at someone else? That is the same as supporting this child molester.
Click to expand...

You miss the whole point of the issue. When it is a Republican caught in disgrace it is dealt with quickly to the betterment of government and the moral standards our society should adhere to. When it is a Democrat they are admired and put on pedestals.
 
Navy Pride said:
They just read the e-mails on Hardball and they were really not that bad......The worse thing he asked him was for a picture and his age...:confused: There must be more to it.............
Click to expand...

There is and the guy needs to leave office as soon as possible and seek help. I feel sorry for what his family will have to go through because of his reprehensible behavior.


As far as Franks goes he actually had sex with his pages......
Click to expand...

Again I think people are confusing Studds with Frank. Studds and Rep. Philip Crane both got caught in a sex scandal concerning pages. Studds a homosexual one Crane with a young female page. Crane resigned in disgrace. Studds said it was no bodies business. Gingrich tried to get Studds remove but the Democrats backed him and forced the congress to settle for just a censure.

That's why is such "incidents" Republicans and conservatives can hold thier heads high knowing that such things are dealt with while Democrats wallow in the dirt because they would rather keep political power than to keep and kind of standards.
 
danarhea said:
I dont give a crap out Clinton. We was a complete disgrace, and your side raked him over the coals for it. BTW, nice job of it too. :)

Now when the shoe is on the other foot, you choose to point the finger at someone else? That is the same as supporting this child molester.
Click to expand...

I think that a fist has landed squarely on Foley, he is gone and had he resisted it would have been to no avail. The matter is over and dealt with. Unlike Democrats scandals where we are forced to live with.
 
Stinger said:
Oh he's a sick person, but he did the decent thing as opposed to Gerry Studds and since the Dems and the left kept him in office there is very little they can say here.
Click to expand...

Captain America was right. Here is someone trying to defend a child molester.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom