Hey Rob... How does it look under the Democrat Bus?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I'm just curious, since you, as a gay man, have spent more time under the Democrat Bus than most anyone. You will recall, the first thing Democrats blamed the 2004 presidential loss on, was Karl Rove's 'brilliance' in having Gay Marriage issues on the ballots. If only the Democrats hadn't been such ardent supporters of the unpopular initiatives, perhaps things would have been different... at least, that was the implication.

Then there is the Mark Foley deal, where Republican leadership is being harshly criticized by Democrats, for not recognizing Foley's homosexual tendencies and realizing he was a perverted pedophile. Again, the implication is, because Foley had a fondness for the physical attributes of young men, it should have been obvious he was a pervert, or at least prompted further investigation into his personal life.

Finally, there is the recent revelation of "The List" that Democrat operatives have prepared, to "out" homosexual republicans, just before the election. It seems the "intolerant" republicans have a few homosexuals in their midst, and this is seen as unacceptable by the "more tolerant" Democrats.

I realize that it's election season, and Democrats are desperate to regain some level of power in Washington, but I am really surprised at how well the gay/lesbian community is taking being thrown under the bus for political gain.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

bump

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

bump

[uscitizen]

How many times you gonna run the same titled thread Dixie ?

[Damocles]

The other was hijacked, the deleted his posts in it and reposted it.

[uscitizen]

Ahhh, ok, I had not looked at it since early yesterday. Ok.

[Connecticut Stud]

well to be fair you don't differentiate pedo from being gay... but i also saw the same thing on Foxnews, saw it on the daily show where republicans back in the day of newt didn't want to offend gay people by addressing foley or something like that, but you have to know that there is a difference between being gay and pedofiles... i like people my age...

republicans and democrats alike like to link us to besastilty and pedopylse etc... its not really a fair comparison and the sooner both republicans and democrats realize this issue the safer everyone will be...

its disgusting what this guy did to these kids.

[uscitizen]

I believe Newt has a gay sister Rob, so you should hear no anti gay stuff from him.

[Connecticut Stud]

what about bush he has a sister... i didn't ever know that.

[uscitizen]

Newt rob, keep up will ya ?
;)

[uscitizen]

what about bush he has a sister... i didn't ever know that.

she is the one they keep hidden upstairs, looks just like Hillary.

[Damocles]

His sister spoke at our State Assembly in 2004. She is very articulate and actually quite funny.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

well to be fair you don't differentiate pedo from being gay... but i also saw the same thing on Foxnews, saw it on the daily show where republicans back in the day of newt didn't want to offend gay people by addressing foley or something like that, but you have to know that there is a difference between being gay and pedofiles... i like people my age...

republicans and democrats alike like to link us to besastilty and pedopylse etc... its not really a fair comparison and the sooner both republicans and democrats realize this issue the safer everyone will be...

its disgusting what this guy did to these kids.

Do you not see inherent bigotry in the Democrats presumptions that republicans should have known about Foley's behavior, based solely on emails that indicated he was a homosexual? Does it bother you that they blamed their 2004 loss on their support of gay initiatives? And what about the "dirty trick" they supposedly plan to pull, of "outing" homosexuals in the republican party? Is this just typical politics, or are they using these people's personal sexual preferences, to infer a negative perception upon republicans?


I've just been thinking about this, and it would really bother me if I were gay, to think that the Democrats look at gay people as a tool to use against their opponents like that. I just wondered what your take was.

[Care4all]

Do you not see inherent bigotry in the Democrats presumptions that republicans should have known about Foley's behavior, based solely on emails that indicated he was a homosexual? Does it bother you that they blamed their 2004 loss on their support of gay initiatives? And what about the "dirty trick" they supposedly plan to pull, of "outing" homosexuals in the republican party? Is this just typical politics, or are they using these people's personal sexual preferences, to infer a negative perception upon republicans?


I've just been thinking about this, and it would really bother me if I were gay, to think that the Democrats look at gay people as a tool to use against their opponents like that. I just wondered what your take was.

Did you even READ the FRICKING emails, the ones that congress haqd, even the one back to 2000, not just this one where Foley is hitting on the Louisianna kid?

YOu and YOur party leaders ar FULL OF SHIT, calling these original emails as "freiendly" emails...

you are an idiot and they are too, for them NOT TO SEE THE PROBLEM WITH THEM....these emails showed VERY CLEAR SIGNS OF A PREDATOR...

FRIENDLY is, ''hi how are you, hope all is going well with you since you were in DC, and if there is anything i can do to help you with your career let me know....''

NOT WHAT FOLEY'S EMAILS SAID.

JUST SHUT UP Dixie....you look like an ass on this....

care

[Connecticut Stud]

Do you not see inherent bigotry in the Democrats presumptions that republicans should have known about Foley's behavior, based solely on emails that indicated he was a homosexual? Does it bother you that they blamed their 2004 loss on their support of gay initiatives? And what about the "dirty trick" they supposedly plan to pull, of "outing" homosexuals in the republican party? Is this just typical politics, or are they using these people's personal sexual preferences, to infer a negative perception upon republicans?


I've just been thinking about this, and it would really bother me if I were gay, to think that the Democrats look at gay people as a tool to use against their opponents like that. I just wondered what your take was.


well i happen to agree that the democrats lost b/c of gay issues... i think people like maineman and jeepers (hard core leftists) are more insulting than conservatives... maines called me some pretty choice words with regard to my sexuality... but claims he's for gay rights... i don't understand it and i don't care to either... everyone gets used dixie by politicians, even the religiouis right gets used by republicans...

[OrnotBitwise]

well i happen to agree that the democrats lost b/c of gay issues... i think people like maineman and jeepers (hard core leftists) are more insulting than conservatives... maines called me some pretty choice words with regard to my sexuality... but claims he's for gay rights... i don't understand it and i don't care to either... everyone gets used dixie by politicians, even the religiouis right gets used by republicans...I'll agree that everyone gets used by politicians. That's a given. Two points I'd like you to consider though:

1) I think it's fair to say that far more homosexual Americans are generally liberal than are generally conservative. I submit that this is not a coincidence.

2) Whatever you may have experienced from individuals, consider where most of the really ugly, virulently anti-gay organizations are on the political spectrum. Fred Phelps, obviously, but also the slightly less insane but even more dangerous Focus on Family and the like.

[Care4all]

there are +/- 20 states that have initiatives to ban gay marriage in this november's election to pull the religious right out to vote and another dozen or so states that have banning abortion initiatives on the ballot....

this is the republican campaign leadership that got these controversial things on the ballot because THEY KNOW THEY CAN ''USE'' the supposedly ''religious'' voters for their purpose.....

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

but you have to know that there is a difference between being gay and pedofiles...

Not according to Democrats, they think Republicans should have seen "red flags" on Foley, based solely on emails which suggested he might have a fondness for young men. Because he was "overly-friendly" to former pages, not because he was saying suggestive things, or even in a sexual nature, just the fact that he was curiously friendly toward young men. Granted, the sick perverted instant messages were evidence of pedophilia, but those only surfaced recently, the Democrats claim Republican leadership should have known about Foley, based on his supposed homosexuality alone.

Let me make something else clear here, I have never likened homosexuals to pedophiles, with the exception of both conditions being considered 'deviant' sexual behavior from a clinical standpoint. I stand behind that analysis, because it is correct, there are many deviant sexual behaviors in humans, and none of them are totally by choice. People who like kids, didn't just choose to be that way, there is something inside of them that causes this to be their sexual attraction, and in general, people do not have much control over what turns them on. Sometimes it might be the result of genetics, childhood experience, or circumstances of life that are just beyond their control.

We establish certain laws based on human decency, like laws against pedophilia, public masturbation, or sex slavery. We also allow laws to protect certain rights to be individual and enjoy our personal preferences. Homosexuality is a personal lifestyle choice for many, and society is acceptance of it, because it doesn't seemingly harm anyone. Societal acceptance of a behavior or condition, does not change or alter what that behavior or condition is, or why it happens. Laws or lack of law, doesn't change what a behavior is, or why it occurs. Necrophilia, Pedophilia, Bestiality and Homosexuality, are all human sexual behaviors which deviate from the clinical norm, and it doesn't matter that society is accepting or non-accepting of them.

Now, am I comparing Homosexuals to Necrophiliacs? No, because society has established the boundaries of decent human behavior, and there is a distinct difference between these two behaviors. There is also a distinct difference between Homosexuals and Pedophiles, and I am sure there are probably just as many Peds as Homos in the world, and some who are both. Pedophilia is similar to Homosexuality, in that it's a sexual preference that can't be suppressed, people can't help that they have those feelings sexually, they can only chose to act upon them or not. Choosing to act upon a sexual feeling that is illegal, is much less likely than acting upon a sexual feeling that isn't illegal, for obvious reasons. Society has constructed the boundaries and laws, but it doesn't alter human sexuality or desires within individual humans, that still remains. So we see a society that is accepting of 'victimless' deviance, like homosexuality, or general sexual promiscuity, nymphomania, whips & chains, etc... yet, non-accepting of deviant human sexual behaviors which might cause harm or trauma to others.

I know of no one, who thinks gays are pedophiles, except Democrats. I don't see anyone comparing gays to perverts, except Democrats. I am open-minded and honest enough to recognize homosexuality for what it is, and not try to hide behind some false pretense or politically correct testament. I am also open-minded enough to accept societal boundaries on decent human behavior, and have no problem allowing individuals the right to enjoy their indulgent sexual desires, as long as no one is getting hurt by it.

[Care4all]

but you have to know that there is a difference between being gay and pedofiles...

Not according to Democrats, they think Republicans should have seen "red flags" on Foley, based solely on emails which suggested he might have a fondness for young men. Because he was "overly-friendly" to former pages, not because he was saying suggestive things, or even in a sexual nature, just the fact that he was curiously friendly toward young men. Granted, the sick perverted instant messages were evidence of pedophilia, but those only surfaced recently, the Democrats claim Republican leadership should have known about Foley, based on his supposed homosexuality alone.

Let me make something else clear here, I have never likened homosexuals to pedophiles, with the exception of both conditions being considered 'deviant' sexual behavior from a clinical standpoint. I stand behind that analysis, because it is correct, there are many deviant sexual behaviors in humans, and none of them are totally by choice. People who like kids, didn't just choose to be that way, there is something inside of them that causes this to be their sexual attraction, and in general, people do not have much control over what turns them on. Sometimes it might be the result of genetics, childhood experience, or circumstances of life that are just beyond their control.

We establish certain laws based on human decency, like laws against pedophilia, public masturbation, or sex slavery. We also allow laws to protect certain rights to be individual and enjoy our personal preferences. Homosexuality is a personal lifestyle choice for many, and society is acceptance of it, because it doesn't seemingly harm anyone. Societal acceptance of a behavior or condition, does not change or alter what that behavior or condition is, or why it happens. Laws or lack of law, doesn't change what a behavior is, or why it occurs. Necrophilia, Pedophilia, Bestiality and Homosexuality, are all human sexual behaviors which deviate from the clinical norm, and it doesn't matter that society is accepting or non-accepting of them.

Now, am I comparing Homosexuals to Necrophiliacs? No, because society has established the boundaries of decent human behavior, and there is a distinct difference between these two behaviors. There is also a distinct difference between Homosexuals and Pedophiles, and I am sure there are probably just as many Peds as Homos in the world, and some who are both. Pedophilia is similar to Homosexuality, in that it's a sexual preference that can't be suppressed, people can't help that they have those feelings sexually, they can only chose to act upon them or not. Choosing to act upon a sexual feeling that is illegal, is much less likely than acting upon a sexual feeling that isn't illegal, for obvious reasons. Society has constructed the boundaries and laws, but it doesn't alter human sexuality or desires within individual humans, that still remains. So we see a society that is accepting of 'victimless' deviance, like homosexuality, or general sexual promiscuity, nymphomania, whips & chains, etc... yet, non-accepting of deviant human sexual behaviors which might cause harm or trauma to others.

I know of no one, who thinks gays are pedophiles, except Democrats. I don't see anyone comparing gays to perverts, except Democrats. I am open-minded and honest enough to recognize homosexuality for what it is, and not try to hide behind some false pretense or politically correct testament. I am also open-minded enough to accept societal boundaries on decent human behavior, and have no problem allowing individuals the right to enjoy their indulgent sexual desires, as long as no one is getting hurt by it.

He took two underage Pages on a FRICKING CAMPING TRIP with him....

He was not sending "friendly" emails, he was sending predatory emails to them....AND IF YOU do not KNOW the FRICKING difference, then you are a real DUMB SHIT, to say the least....

So, when we find out that Foley and these Pages on the camping trip engaged in sex....know that the Repubs DID THIS to them and to their families.....

Republicans = Political, CORRUPT WHORES......especially the fricking LIAR Hastert!

care

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

AND IF YOU do not KNOW the FRICKING difference, then you are a real DUMB SHIT, to say the least....

What is the difference between predatory homosexual behavior and friendly homosexual behavior? Can you describe this with a specific? They don't teach these things down here in the South, but I would like to know. What was it, in Mark Foley's emails, that made you believe he was being predatory and not friendly? What is it about taking young boys camping, that is supposed to automatically mean Foley is a pedophile? Are all campers pedophiles, or just Republican gay ones?

[Care4all]

AND IF YOU do not KNOW the FRICKING difference, then you are a real DUMB SHIT, to say the least....

What is the difference between predatory homosexual behavior and friendly homosexual behavior? Can you describe this with a specific? They don't teach these things down here in the South, but I would like to know. What was it, in Mark Foley's emails, that made you believe he was being predatory and not friendly? What is it about taking young boys camping, that is supposed to automatically mean Foley is a pedophile? Are all campers pedophiles, or just Republican gay ones?

What the hell does homosexuality have to do with THIS? If it were a 52 year old congressman that took TWO FEMALE 17 year old pages with him on a camping trip would that be okay?

If it were a 52 year old man that sent emails to your 17 year old daughter asking her what she wanted for her birthday and telling her that this other 16 year old page girl had a HOT BODY would that be okay with you? If this same man over the internet asked your 16 year old daughter to send him a picture of her would that be ok? would that be just "friendly" emails to your daughter in your opinion? This guy was preying on these kids for his own sexual pleasure...he "enjoyed" getting off on minors and developed these relationships with these pages to satisfy himself and this need to be the dominant with the young...he did not have to fuck them to get off.....whether they are girls or boys DOES NOT MATTER.....you got it?

you are being an pompous ass on this and YOU know it....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


...your party sucks, they are nothing but deceitful liars and POND SCUM...and you will go down to the center of the earth with them if you keep this "supporting at any cost shit up"...from a friend.....you are really sucking right now Dixie...

What Foley did was wrong and what Hastert did was worse....

Care

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

What the hell does homosexuality have to do with THIS? If it were a 52 year old congressman that took TWO FEMALE 17 year old pages with him on a camping trip would that be okay?

No, that would be opposite sexes, and totally inappropriate. An all-male camping trip is not inappropriate, just as an all-girl slumber party is not inappropriate. This has to do with homosexuality, because that is the basis on which you think Republicans should have determined Mark Foley was a pervert.

whether they are girls or boys DOES NOT MATTER.....you got it?

Yeah? What about the recent string of blond bombshell school teachers who were fucking their students, and ended up with community service? Yes, apparently it does matter if it's boys or girls, as well as male or female pervs.

This guy was preying on these kids for his own sexual pleasure...he "enjoyed" getting off on minors and developed these relationships with these pages to satisfy himself and this need to be the dominant with the young

You don't know what he enjoyed, or what his motivations were, you are speculating, based on the fact that he was a gay man, engaging in perfectly routine gay behavior with young men. I've read every email, I know everything that was known to Hastert or Republicans, and the only thing I can glean from what I've read, is Foley had a fondness for the physical attributes of young men.... in other words, he was gay.

you are being an pompous ass on this and YOU know it....!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

A pompous ass? Because I won't let you get away with gay bashing? Because I won't let you insinuate that gay people are automatically suspected as pedophiles? Because you can't make your case without making my point, that you Democrats see gay people as sick perverted people capable of anything?


What Foley did was wrong and what Hastert did was worse....

What Foley did was wrong, just as wrong as what Bill Clinton did. What Hastert did was to kick Foley out of Congress and order an investigation. What Democrats did was worse. Save your speeches for how I am going to split hell wide open, you need to worry about your own soul.

[Care4all]

you are the very obvious one that WANTS to turn this in to ''gay bashing'' and I would like to know WHY DIXIE...

Why?

What purpose do YOU think this will do to "protect" your party from this scandal and abomination of trust?

what exactly makes this scandal a ''gay'' issue regarding foley? do you think congress did not know foley AND MANY others within your party were gay....?

of course they knew about him and all of the others,,,,

TELL me who else within your party is gay and who ALSO PREYS on minors....are there more? do all gay congressmen try to pick up or score with minor boys like foley did, therefore this is why this is a ''gay'' thing to you?

i have ONLY viewed repubs on television making ''gay bashing'' statements since this episode began....

no bashing of how it was ''handled'' by your leadership other than the washington times...they are only bashing gays, and bashing dems like the studds affair from 1973, oh...and of course, clintonnnnnnnnnn!

care

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Clinton was gay?

[Jarod]

HAd the same emails been sent to 16 year old girls, would anyone have felt ANY different about the situation?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

you are the very obvious one that WANTS to turn this in to ''gay bashing'' and I would like to know WHY DIXIE...

How have I bashed gays? I merely asked you to define the difference between friendly homosexual behavior and perverted homosexual behavior, and you can't give me an answer. You continue to point to seemingly harmless homosexual gestures in shock that I don't see that it was clearly perverted.... how am I the one bashing gays?

What purpose do YOU think this will do to "protect" your party from this scandal and abomination of trust?

I couldn't "protect" my party if I wanted to! But it seems that it's not my party involved in a scandal or abomination of trust here, it's Democrats who knew this information and sat on it until election time.

what exactly makes this scandal a ''gay'' issue regarding foley? do you think congress did not know foley AND MANY others within your party were gay....?

And is there something wrong with being gay, Care? You act like this was something Republicans were supposed to be outraged by, that there were gays in the party. Yeah, I am sure many people in the party knew Foley was gay, what's the point?

of course they knew about him and all of the others,,,,

They knew he was gay, is that what you mean?

TELL me who else within your party is gay and who ALSO PREYS on minors....are there more? do all gay congressmen try to pick up or score with minor boys like foley did, therefore this is why this is a ''gay'' thing to you?

Why do you automatically assume that gay people prey on minors? What difference does it make if EVERY Republican is gay? I am sure, if there are Congressmen trying to score with minors, they will be dealt with like Foley was, if they are Republicans, and like Studds if they are Democrats.

i have ONLY viewed repubs on television making ''gay bashing'' statements since this episode began....

Yeah? Maybe you could post some of their comments here? I would like to see if I think they were "gay bashing" because I don't think you recognize it. You see, "gay bashing" is when you make inferences that all gay men prey on minors, or that all gay Republicans are perverts, or that merely realizing someone is gay, is a "red flag" that they might be child predators.

[uscitizen]

You tell us Dixie, how does it look under the democrat bus ? We want a first hand report.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You tell us Dixie, how does it look under the democrat bus ? We want a first hand report.


Well, there are plenty of people under there... Gays, Soldiers, Capitalists, Iraqi's, Religious folk...Conservative Democrats... Joe Lieberman.... it's a bloody carnage, for sure. Maybe the American people will see what lousy drivers you are and take your keys away in November?

[Damocles]

Well, there are plenty of people under there... Gays, Soldiers, Capitalists, Iraqi's, Religious folk...Conservative Democrats... Joe Lieberman.... it's a bloody carnage, for sure. Maybe the American people will see what lousy drivers you are and take your keys away in November?
LOL. Awesome.

[uscitizen]

But Dixie, I thought the repubs had the keys and were staying the course ?
You really don't know who has control of our gummit ? No suprise.

[Damocles]

The GOP doesn't drive the Democrat bus, man! They are too afraid of all the Ganja smell eminating from inside!

[uscitizen]

Got that right Damo, And the Hugo T shirts would get them too ;)
don't know how the election in Nov will make any difference though as Dixie alludes.....
I am just glad they have started driving the darned bus again, even though at an idle.

[Blackflag]

Why do you say this has to do with his sexual orientation?

Those emails were creepy and if some old man was emailing my daughter like that I would shoot him in the face.

Those emails were not innocent. It is obvious to anyone with half a brain that he was fishing.

[uscitizen]

BF, those with less than half a brain are the only ones arging the point ;)

[uscitizen]

btw the democratic bus is still moving so slow that only idiots that throw themselves under the wheels will get run over by it.

[Blackflag]

Oh lol true. True... less than 1/3 probably.

[Jarod]

AGAIN, how is this Foley issue a Gay issue...

Dixie you can keep ignoring the difficult questions but its showing!

Do you truely belive anyone would have reacted any differently to this scandal had Foley been sending the same emails to 16 year old girls?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Why do you say this has to do with his sexual orientation?

Those emails were creepy and if some old man was emailing my daughter like that I would shoot him in the face.

Those emails were not innocent. It is obvious to anyone with half a brain that he was fishing.


Well, the first, and most obvious point is, it wasn't girls the representative was writing, it was young men. It might be obvious to democrats or bigots, that a gay man with a fondness for young men was "creepy" or perverted.

[Blackflag]

Well I can't speak for democrats. I can only speak for myself. Those emails were creepy. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to notice that. It may take someone a little smarter than you though.

You seriously didn't think those were creepy?

[Blackflag]

Any Man with a fondness for young men or girls is creepy.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Why do you say this has to do with his sexual orientation?

Because that is the only thing revealed in the emails that Republicans could have been aware of before the instant messages became public. It's on this basis, Democrats think Republicans should have acted sooner.

I have read every single email that has been made public, and not a one of them contains anything other than the suggestion Foley might be gay. He is cordial, he is friendly, he makes comments that lead you to believe he is a homosexual male, but doesn't indicate any sort of sick perversions. Democrats insist that these emails should have been a "red flag" for Republican leaders, and my argument is simple, being gay is not a crime! Being gay is not a "red flag" that someone is a pedophile!

When the more intimate and condemning instant messages emerged, the Republican leadership acted swiftly to secure Foley's resignation and launched a full investigation, complete with a toll-free number for former pages to call and lodge complaints! All Democrats can do, is continue to insist that the emails, which only inferred Foley was gay, should have been enough for the leaders to act sooner. Hello? Being gay is not a reason to be kicked out of Congress, sorry! Being gay is not a "red flag" that someone is a pervert, sorry!

What Foley did was wrong, because he was a U.S. Representative, engaging in personal and intimate relations with a subordinate. It's wrong for the exact same reason Clinton was wrong with Monica! As soon as the information became public knowledge, we didn't have to endure Foley wagging his finger in our faces, insisting that he had done nothing wrong, we didn't have to go through 2 years of special prosecutor investigation to get to the bottom of it, Foley didn't perjure himself before a grand jury instead of telling the truth, and not a soul insisted this was his private sex life and none of our business! No, the first thing that happened is, Foley resigned from his seat, and then the Speaker of the House ordered a full investigation.

Republicans will essentially forfeit a sure Republican seat, where the people in Foley's district will be punished by being misrepresented by a Democrat now, because Democrats withheld this information until it was too late to remove Foley from the ballots. Yet, we don't hear a peep out of those who were so incensed by potentially disenfranchised voters the past two elections, not a fucking peep!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Any Man with a fondness for young men or girls is creepy.

Hello? Virtually every gay man I know, has a fondness for young men! Are ALL gay men creepy to you, Black?

[Blackflag]

I don't know any gay people fond of children. I only know like 2 outted gay people though.

Maybe you only know pedophiles?

[Damocles]

Hence, we call them "Dirty old men"...

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Well I can't speak for democrats. I can only speak for myself. Those emails were creepy. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to notice that. It may take someone a little smarter than you though.

You seriously didn't think those were creepy?


In retrospect, knowing what I now know, yes the emails seem a little creepy and obvious. Had I not known about the IM's, or Foley's personal activities with these young men, I would have to conclude that Foley was possibly a gay man, and that is about all I could conclude from the emails. It certainly doesn't warrant a full investigation or banishment from Congress!

This is the point you seem to be missing, you can't just kick an elected representative out of Congress because you think he's gay, or "creepy." In order to unseat an elected representative, you really do need something tangible, the IM's provided that, and Foley is gone! You seem to want to go back and pretend we knew this all along, and the emails should have been some kind of "red flag" to Republican leaders, and this is ludicrous, the man was gay... that doesn't mean he was a sicko! Can you even imagine the uproar from the Gay Rights community, had Hastert booted Foley for sending overly-friendly emails to young men, and nothing more? Get real!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I don't know any gay people fond of children. I only know like 2 outted gay people though.

Maybe you only know pedophiles?


Let's be clear, the pages Foley was involved with, were not 6 year old boys. We aren't talking about typical pedophilia, and you know that, if you have an honest bone in your pathetic body. I know you live a sheltered life, but take it from me, most older gay men like younger gay men, it's fairly common.

[Blackflag]

Well then they are all pedophiles. I don't live in your stupid liberal PC world Dixie. I can say it.

Only thing I know is that if some old man sent my son or daughter emails like that I'd stab his face off.

[Care4all]

once again Dixie, YOu said I was "gay Bashing" when it is YOU THAT IS gay bashing and trying to make it out as though ALL GAY MEN are EXACTLY LIKE FOLEY....with a "longing" for little boys, or minors near 40 years younger...

When THIS IS CLEARLY NOT THE CASE WITH MOST GAY Men....MOST Gay men have relationships with gay MEN, not with MINOR BOYS....

Just like MOST of the congressmen that have affairs with females or pursue females on Capital hill are doing such with ADULTS, not high school kids...

Yes, the emails were very creepy as BF said and they should have been JUST ONE OF THE THINGS that set off the red flag....that something was very amiss with this man and ...that he could be a SEXUAL predator of the young pages in their custody...YOUR LEADERSHIP SHOULD HAVE done something further than a slap on the hand....like... just asking a few questions of the pages to see if they had anything to say about foley.

Before the leadership read the most recent emails, they read some disconcerting emails from foley to pages a few years earlier too, and they also had the situation where Foley showed up at the page boys dorm drunk as a skunk, where capital police stopped him (THANK GOD) and also notified YOUR leadership, and in addition to this there were several IN YOUR PARTY that also were worried about FOLEY'S predatory behavior, and REPORTED SUCH TO THE sPEAKER....and still...with nothing done to protect the kids.

His emails were not normal Dixie, they were not just "friendly" emails as you say....

And him being gay has nothing to do with it.... other than the fact it was minors of the male sex that he was after verses minors of the female sex.....


and NAME SOME NAMES on who from the Democratic Party Leadership held this info back, because you are LYING THROUGH YOUR TEETH ON THIS AND HAVE ABSOLUTELY no proof of such, it is JUST THE TYPICAL rhetoric of the republicans...NEVER TAKING RESPONSIBILITY FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS AND MISTAKES and aways trying to pin it on a liberal CRAP...put up or shut up Dixie

your party leaders are scum.....just plain ole pond scum....face up to it....

care

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Care, I will ask you one more time, and then I am going to lose my patience with you... what exactly did you read in the emails, that indicated Foley was a pervert? Please... just cut and paste it here, so I can see what it was that you are in such a tissy about! The emails I read, indicate perfectly "normal" homosexual sentiments, nothing perverted or indicative of pedophilia, just routine gay appreciation for young male physical attributes!

For the life of me, I don't see anything other than the man's gayness, as grounds for anyone in the Republican party to question anything or investigate further! If you could just please indicate what it was, that you think should have been a warning or red flag, maybe I can understand where you are coming from, as it stands, it sounds to me like, you think Republicans should have known he was a pervert because he was gay.

For Blackflag, or any of the rest of you idiot pinheads, please tell me, what did you read in the emails that would have caused you to launch a full investigation into this guy, if you were Speaker? Again, just cut and paste it here, so I can see for myself, what juicy little tid-bit you would have used to oust a six-term, legitimately elected representative. Unless I've missed something or overlooked some detail, all I see is stuff that would have caused the Democrats to go ballistic, had Hastert booted Foley. They would have immediately claimed that Hastert just wanted to get rid of the queer before the elections, or some such shit, and they would have had a point, if all Hastert had to go on was the harmless emails!

[Blackflag]

I can't find the email transcripts anymore. Everything links to the IMs where he is talking about his 71/2 inch cock.

Link me them if u have them and I'll post the parts where any normal thinking human, especially a good parent, would find creepy, sick, and twisted.

[Cancel7]

Let's be clear, the pages Foley was involved with, were not 6 year old boys. We aren't talking about typical pedophilia, and you know that, if you have an honest bone in your pathetic body. I know you live a sheltered life, but take it from me, most older gay men like younger gay men, it's fairly common.

Yes. Unlike older hetero men.

Who are well-known for chasing older women.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I can't find the email transcripts anymore. Everything links to the IMs where he is talking about his 71/2 inch cock.

Link me them if u have them and I'll post the parts where any normal thinking human, especially a good parent, would find creepy, sick, and twisted.

Blackflag, you can't throw someone out of Congress because they are gay and you think what they said was "creepy, sick, and twisted" as a parent. If Foley did something or said something unethical or inappropriate, that is one thing, if he just said stuff that make you uncomfortable now that you know the whole story, that's another thing. You simply can't throw someone out of Congress based on what you think sounds creepy! You can't use the fact that he is gay, and acting like a typical gay man would act, as a basis on which to over-ride the will of the people who elected him! If this were the case, Barney Frank would have been gone a long time ago! Is it not "creepy" that his live-in boyfriend was running a gay brothel out of his home?

Okay, let's say that Hastert knew the emails were overly-friendly toward the pages, but nothing of a sexual nature was discussed, no propositions made, etc... they are just very curiously friendly or "creepy" emails... Let's say, for the sake of argument, that he reacted to this by launching a full-scale investigation, and requesting Foley resign his seat... the action that Pinheads say he should have taken, given the emails in question...

Monday 12:00PM- Hastert calls a press conference to announce this, and disclose the emails to the media and public.

Monday 1:00PM- Democrat leader Harry Reid holds a press conference... Does his typical spin job, and accuses Hastert of targeting gays within the party, being the homophobes Republicans are... blah blah blah

Tuesday 7:00AM- Every major news outlet leads the news with "Hastert Outs Gay Congressman!" And the spin machine rails all day long, about how Hastert and the Republicans feared reprisal from the Bible Belt, and thus... had to "get rid" of the problem...

Wednesday 2:00PM- Oprah interviews Foley, the poor innocent victim of the mean old bigoted Republican Hastert, who is launching this investigation into his personal life and destroying him because he is a gay man.

Thursday 3:00PM- Chris Matthews interviews the usual host of pinhead liberals, who take turns bashing prejudice and bigoted homophobic Republicans. Matthews makes certain to point out, the emails contain no salacious or unethical language.

Friday 10:00 AM- Nancy Pelosi calls for an investigation into why Hastert ousted a six-term Congressman based on his personal discrimination and bigotry toward gay people.

Sunday 10:00 AM- Tim Russert interviews Bill Clinton, who tells him this is just the typical Republican paranoia playing out, that he knew Foley for years, there was nothing unethical going on, and other than Foley being gay, there was nothing for Hastert to have based this on.

Do you get the picture, moron?

[maineman]

Regarding Dixie's signature quote, I kind of wish that Dixie would explain where, in international law, the US is given rights as a sovereign nation that are reserved solely to us and not shared by every other sovereign nation.

That sort of smacks of Orwellian "Animal Farm" nonsense. "All animals (sovereignties) are created equal, but pigs (United States) are created MORE equal"????

Is that really his position and can he justify it with anything other than we are the biggest baddest guys on the block with the biggest military and we say so?

Of course he cannot.

[uscitizen]

Originally Posted by Dixie
Let's be clear, the pages Foley was involved with, were not 6 year old boys. We aren't talking about typical pedophilia, and you know that, if you have an honest bone in your pathetic body. I know you live a sheltered life, but take it from me, most older gay men like younger gay men, it's fairly common.
//

But take it from me ??? Is Dixie getting ready to come out of the closet ?

[uscitizen]

Now they are investigating rep. Kolbe (r) from AZ, re. a camping trip with two male pages. This is getting good.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Originally Posted by Dixie
Let's be clear, the pages Foley was involved with, were not 6 year old boys. We aren't talking about typical pedophilia, and you know that, if you have an honest bone in your pathetic body. I know you live a sheltered life, but take it from me, most older gay men like younger gay men, it's fairly common.
//

But take it from me ??? Is Dixie getting ready to come out of the closet ?

You know, it amazes me how you people think you conceal your bigotry. I bet you have all kinds of great words to say about gays, how you have gay friends, and you don't see anything wrong with homosexuals, and how completely tolerant and accepting you are to gays... but it is comments like this, which reveal your true heart.

It takes a truly prejudiced bigot to assume that someone will be offended if you insinuate they are gay. The fact that you dislike me and want to say something insulting to me, is accomplished in your mind, by inferring that I am gay... the worst possible label you can think of to apply to me. In fact, it even ranked higher than "pedophile" in your thoughts of how to attack me personally. This speaks volumes about what your true feelings are toward gay people, regardless of what words you hide behind. You may not realize it, but others do.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Now they are investigating rep. Kolbe (r) from AZ, re. a camping trip with two male pages. This is getting good.


So, a man going camping with two young men... that is now considered pedophilia? Homsexual? What? ...Is this because of that Brokeback Mountain scene?

=======================================

Dixie: Finally, there is the recent revelation of "The List" that Democrat operatives have prepared, to "out" homosexual republicans, just before the election. It seems the "intolerant" republicans have a few homosexuals in their midst, and this is seen as unacceptable by the "more tolerant" Democrats.

Darla: First of all, let me say that I call BS on this "list". Everything I have read, and I've read a lot, put Republican fingerprints all over this Dixie

uscitizen: Now they are investigating rep. Kolbe (r) from AZ, re. a camping trip with two male pages. This is getting good.

Dixie: Toldya!

Who else is on "The List?" Who else is going to be disenfranchised by the Democrats in their lust for power? How much longer are the gay people in America going to tolerate your using them and homosexuality, for political advantage?

[maineman]

it will be quite funny to watch the data to see just what percentage of the republican party's religious right base stays home on election day in disgust. The party that hates gays and loves Jesus sure seems to turn a blind eye when their own elected members are jacking off in the house cloak room having cyber sex with young boys while important roll calls are being held open until they spurt their splooge all over their laptop screens, clean up, and get back in the chamber. Reynolds KNEW what a perverted predator Foley was and STILL worked to get him reelected!!!!

How will THAT play in the religious heartland?

[Care4all]

So, a man going camping with two young men... that is now considered pedophilia? Homsexual? What? ...Is this because of that Brokeback Mountain scene?

=======================================

Dixie: Finally, there is the recent revelation of "The List" that Democrat operatives have prepared, to "out" homosexual republicans, just before the election. It seems the "intolerant" republicans have a few homosexuals in their midst, and this is seen as unacceptable by the "more tolerant" Democrats.

Darla: First of all, let me say that I call BS on this "list". Everything I have read, and I've read a lot, put Republican fingerprints all over this Dixie

uscitizen: Now they are investigating rep. Kolbe (r) from AZ, re. a camping trip with two male pages. This is getting good.

Dixie: Toldya!

Who else is on "The List?" Who else is going to be disenfranchised by the Democrats in their lust for power? How much longer are the gay people in America going to tolerate your using them and homosexuality, for political advantage?

This list is a list of both Democratic and Republicans in Congress that are HYPOCRITES....the list includes both....

It is not and was not gathered by Democratic operatives....it was gathered by gay and lesbian men and women who are sick and tired of these congressmen voting in a manner that contradicts their own, in the closet lifestyles....

I can understand the anger this group feels towards those gay and lesbian leaders in power that are HYPOCRITES...but I still do not agree that they should "out" them....because I think that one's own sex life is his or her own business.

This is not the Democratic party that is doing this or Democratic operatives, but a group of gay and lesbian citizens fet up with the hypocrisy amongst our government leaders....

And this did not just begin with this election....this group was in full force back in 2003/2004.....

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You are full of shit and delusional, that's all I can say. You've still not shown me anything from the Foley emails that denotes certain perversion, and outing gays is not pointing out anything perverted, unless you want to try and claim that being gay is perverted. I certainly understand how you think this will keep the religious right at home, but that is a sad and pathetic tactic to use, to win an election. It's too bad your party can't win on issues and ideas, and has to resort to smearing people and disenfranchising voters by outing homosexuals. You might win this election, you might even manage to win a couple, but your ideology is in deep trouble, if this is what it takes for you to gain power.

[OrnotBitwise]

You are full of shit and delusional, that's all I can say. You've still not shown me anything from the Foley emails that denotes certain perversion, and outing gays is not pointing out anything perverted, unless you want to try and claim that being gay is perverted. I certainly understand how you think this will keep the religious right at home, but that is a sad and pathetic tactic to use, to win an election. It's too bad your party can't win on issues and ideas, and has to resort to smearing people and disenfranchising voters by outing homosexuals. You might win this election, you might even manage to win a couple, but your ideology is in deep trouble, if this is what it takes for you to gain power.
HEY BRAVO! Take note.

Your man, Dixie here, says that a 52 year old man pursuing a 17 year old for sex is not "certain perversion." There you go. Studds is in the clear. Not only with the voters -- already proven -- but with the cons as well.

Case closed.

[Mott the Hoople]

Isn't the Folley incident hilarious? :-) I mean how can Repubs like Dixie even begin to criticize the Dems attacks on the Repub leadership on this?

Gosh remember when the Republicans immorally tried to shut down the American Government and precipitate a constitutional crisis over a blow job? And for no other motive than purely partisan gain?

They didn't try to impeach Clinton in the best interest of our nation....hell they don't give one flying F about the best interest of our country and have proved it time and time again.

Naw Dixie' pay backs are a bitch, so quit your whining....hypocrit!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Your man, Dixie here, says that a 52 year old man pursuing a 17 year old for sex is not "certain perversion."

Ornut, since we can apparently take liberty with what was actually said, you are saying that a gay man sending friendly gay emails to young men, is synonymous with perversion.

Let us be perfectly clear about what Dixie said... Foley acted inappropriately with subordinate pages. Period! That was Foley's fault, and he will pay a price for it. The emails only indicate the man is gay, and contain not one instance of Foley propositioning someone for sex, merely expressing interest in young male physical attributes... in other words, he was gay. You and your bigoted Democrats want to argue that because Republicans should have known he was gay by these emails, this should have also let them know he was a pervert. I refute this argument based on the fact that you have not presented evidence that Foley was perverted in these emails, only that Foley is gay. Before you react to what I just said, remember, we are talking about the emails, not the instant messages which JUST became known.

So, when you can show me the specific parts of the emails that let you know Foley was a pervert and not just a gay man, then you can make a point, until then, you haven't made a point and my point stands. Democrats want to infer that being gay is also being perverted, because that is all you have in the emails, normal homosexual behavior, nothing more.

Gosh remember when the Republicans immorally tried to shut down the American Government and precipitate a constitutional crisis over a blow job?

No, I don't recall that. I recall Constitutionally mandated impeachment hearings over a president who lied to a grand jury in a sexual harassment case. Can you present some evidence that Republicans were ever concerned with a blow job?

[Care4all]

HEY BRAVO! Take note.

Your man, Dixie here, says that a 52 year old man pursuing a 17 year old for sex is not "certain perversion." There you go. Studds is in the clear. Not only with the voters -- already proven -- but with the cons as well.

Case closed.


fyi
Foley was pursuing 16 yr olds ....they changed the page program after the page scandal of the early 1980's from 17 yr olds to 16 year olds thinking it would solve the "problem"... ha! what a joke! it instead made it even worse, congressmen and predators of minors like Foley NOW have 16 year olds for their pickin'! :(

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

fyi
Foley was pursuing 16 yr olds ....

The emails don't indicate Foley was "pursuing" anything, just being overly friendly. We've covered this already, and you continue to tell a lie here. If I compliment you and tell you how much I dig your smile, that isn't "pursing" you for sex, is it? So, how can Foley's compliments and cordial words to pages be construed as anything other than normal, routine, homosexual behavior? It is only after the fact, when the IM's are revealed, that you can make the connection between the casual conversation in the emails and nefarious intent on the part of a predator.

I have consistently requested you and the rest of your bigoted friends to post something from the emails that would indicate Foley was a predator, pervert, pedophile, or anything other than a gay man acting like any typical gay man acts. You have consistently failed to do this, and continued to insist that Republicans "should have known about Foley." Without giving me the reason why Republicans should have known, you continue to infer that being gay is the same thing as being a pervert, predator, or pedophile. I refuse to accept that argument.

[maineman]

republicans did know that Foley was sniffing after teenaged pages...

and they chose to ignore it.

oops.

[maineman]

and to say that the constitution MANDATED the republican impeachment of Clinton is, of course, a lie...but Dixie really seems incapable of opening his yapper without spewing lies.

[Care4all]

fyi
Foley was pursuing 16 yr olds ....

The emails don't indicate Foley was "pursuing" anything, just being overly friendly. We've covered this already, and you continue to tell a lie here. If I compliment you and tell you how much I dig your smile, that isn't "pursing" you for sex, is it? So, how can Foley's compliments and cordial words to pages be construed as anything other than normal, routine, homosexual behavior? It is only after the fact, when the IM's are revealed, that you can make the connection between the casual conversation in the emails and nefarious intent on the part of a predator.

I have consistently requested you and the rest of your bigoted friends to post something from the emails that would indicate Foley was a predator, pervert, pedophile, or anything other than a gay man acting like any typical gay man acts. You have consistently failed to do this, and continued to insist that Republicans "should have known about Foley." Without giving me the reason why Republicans should have known, you continue to infer that being gay is the same thing as being a pervert, predator, or pedophile. I refuse to accept that argument.

We haven't covered crap on this issue with the emails Dixie...you have failed to post them so that WE CAN SHOW YOU that they WERE NOT JUST friendly emails as you call themmm...

you are so full of crap on this it is pathetic...

make your case...show the emails they had of him and please show how they were NORMAL FRIENDLY EMAILS between a 52 year old congressman and 16 year old pages...

Then you add to the emails he got in trouble for a few years back that YOUR FRICKING LEADERSHIP KNEW ABOUT, and then you add in the incident where FOLEY was making a scene at the male page's dorms when he was drunk as a skunk that was deemed inappropriate and involved the DC police....and also YOUR REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP was also notified about, and you add these recent emails THAT WERE INAPPROPRIATE and brought to the REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP's attention because the PARENTS of a 16 year old page boy COMPLAINED....you got yourself a sex scandal with underage pages....and the FRICKIN' MORAL (hahaha) Republicans IGNORING IT ALL, JUST TO GET REPUBLICANS REELECTED....

they are one bunch or IMMORAL CHARACHTERS...THOSE Republican leaders that you give your undivided support to....

guess that makes you immoral too, huh?

be proud!

;)

care

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I keep asking you to show your evidence, and you keep insisting it is obvious. I don't know how to get this through to you, but unless you have some evidence for me to look at, that indicates Foley was preying on these young men, and not just being homosexually friendly with them, then you haven't made your case. I have no need to post the emails, I can't prove a negative anyway, I can't show you that Foley was not a pedophile, and that is not my argument. I have maintained that Foley's emails were not actionable, that they did not rise to level of launching investigations and ruining his political career, because they simply infer the man is gay, and nothing more. You obviously can't refute this point, or you would.

[maineman]

the neat thing, that Dixie, of course will not address, is the fact that Foley's homosexuality and the apparent acceptance of that lifestyle by the GOP inside the beltway has disgusted the religious right base of the republican party and they will stay away from the polls in November.

That must suck to be a republican koolaid drinker about now.

[Care4all]

the neat thing, that Dixie, of course will not address, is the fact that Foley's homosexuality and the apparent acceptance of that lifestyle by the GOP inside the beltway has disgusted the religious right base of the republican party and they will stay away from the polls in November.

That must suck to be a republican koolaid drinker about now.

ohhhhh, but they have already convinced the leaders of the RR and those that these leaders preach to, that no matter what the republicans have done, "The Democrat Leftist Liberals, are worse"....a form of brainwashing that "this group" of moonies just can't seem to knock imho....

greed has taken over these churches, the promise of government money has corrupted "The Church" in my opinion and lured them in to getting involved in this corrupt, dishonest, disceiving administration and their, "evil works"...greed and hatred, not love has driven them....and this IS EXACTLY what I warned would happen, some three years ago, when I saw the full fledge support this group has given this "Master of Deceit" and saw how they were salavating at the "Faith based initiative plan" of president Bush.....money, money, money, m o n e y....

As a Christian, I can only pray that the truth will be revealed to them...
-----------------------------------

btw, it is just beautiful up here...the color is much, much better than back home, we were really flat in color this year...across the lake from where we are staying is a state reserve, and filled with Maple and Birch trees in very bright orange and in very bright yellow...and they reflect off the clear lake so it is like double the whammy...just awesome maineman....

We still have not found a house....well we found one in a lake community on a hill with a clear wide view of the 9 mile active lake through to it on three sides... of windows on the house...it is so cute and built in 1999, much smaller than our house now, about 1350 square ft, with another 400 sq ft in the basement that we could finish.........BUT, the lot is only slightly over a quarter of an acre...what a bummer....:(....but the plus side is that the lot on one side is 3 acres so there are lots of woods on that side, the other side and back is all forrest and owned by somebody that owns all 3000 acres surrounding it...so as it stands right now it seems like the acreage is much bigger than it really is, but who knows how long that will last?

And about 100 -200 yards down the street is the Public beach and soon to be marina...right now people drop their boats in their and in the winter we heard they drive on the lake and ice fish and snow mobile....

They are asking 147, it was 159 in the summah...even though it is way cheap compared to anywhere on a lake, this is across the street, with access and it just seems like too much money...we were thinking of offering $137 and see what they say...but we are really so unsure maineman...?

Our realtor seems to think it is a GREAT buy and thinks that come summah :) we can rent the home for boocoo bucks with the Landing and beach, and the views, if we want to find another, bigger home to live in...

Another plus to it is that it is on a public paved road so it gets plowed right to 1A, right in the middle between Bangor and Ellsworth, about 12 miles from ellsworth, the same to bangor....perfect for us, because we don't know where matt will end up getting a job, which could be either town...

we are thinking we might be rushing in to this and maybe should rent the winter and take our time to find a home....

Do you know if they end up taking their homes off the market in the winter and put them back up in the spring so we may not have the same selection as we do right now? How does that work up here?

HELP!

Care

[maineman]

Care...Augusta is nowhere near as "seasonal" as your area....Homes here typically stay on the market until they get sold, but clearly, in the Bar Harbor region, the market has got to be better come springtime. Going against that trend is the ever softening trend in the housing market which leads me to believe that things will not rise as much in the spring - if at all - as they have done in the past.

I would think that you should look until you find the home that tells you it's the one when you see it.... and then buy it and not worry about any marginal differences in the price one way or the other.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I keep asking you to show your evidence, and you keep insisting it is obvious. I don't know how to get this through to you, but unless you have some evidence for me to look at, that indicates Foley was preying on these young men, and not just being homosexually friendly with them, then you haven't made your case. I have no need to post the emails, I can't prove a negative anyway, I can't show you that Foley was not a pedophile, and that is not my argument. I have maintained that Foley's emails were not actionable, that they did not rise to level of launching investigations and ruining his political career, because they simply infer the man is gay, and nothing more. You obviously can't refute this point, or you would.


BUMP!

[uscitizen]

Why I wonder did Foley resign so quickly if he is innocent and white as new snow as Dixie believes ?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Why I wonder did Foley resign so quickly if he is innocent and white as new snow as Dixie believes ?

Maybe you have reading comprehension problems, where did I ever say that Foley was innocent and white as new snow? We most certainly know about Foley now, since the IM's became public knowledge. We simply didn't know about Foley from the emails, all they indicate is that he is a gay man. You seem to think Republican leaders should have outted him because he is gay, and that everyone knows gay men are perverted pedophiles. I just think it's bigoted, hypocritical, prejudiced, and homophobic, to make such assertions.

[Blackflag]

I keep asking you to show your evidence, and you keep insisting it is obvious. I don't know how to get this through to you, but unless you have some evidence for me to look at, that indicates Foley was preying on these young men, and not just being homosexually friendly with them, then you haven't made your case. I have no need to post the emails, I can't prove a negative anyway, I can't show you that Foley was not a pedophile, and that is not my argument. I have maintained that Foley's emails were not actionable, that they did not rise to level of launching investigations and ruining his political career, because they simply infer the man is gay, and nothing more. You obviously can't refute this point, or you would.

I've never said that Republicans should have done more. They can do what they want. I only stated that I recognized the emails as creepy and that if my daughter or son received an email like that from some old man, I'd shoot him in the face. It was obvious trolling on this guys part. Now if (R) say they are too stupid to notice what this guy was doing from these emails....then whatever.....he should have stayed in power. I could care less about whacko repubs and how they handle their scandals.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I've never said that Republicans should have done more. They can do what they want. I only stated that I recognized the emails as creepy and that if my daughter or son received an email like that from some old man, I'd shoot him in the face. It was obvious trolling on this guys part. Now if (R) say they are too stupid to notice what this guy was doing from these emails....then whatever.....he should have stayed in power. I could care less about whacko repubs and how they handle their scandals.

I'll present this to you once again... Just tell me, exactly HOW were republicans supposed to unseat a popular six-term elected representative, based on the emails alone? I don't see it! There is no crime or unethical behavior in sending overtly-friendly emails to people, dufuss! You simply can't overturn the "will of the people" based on your paranoid homophobia, which is exactly how it would have been played by the media and Dems, had Hastert acted on the emails alone.

[uscitizen]

Dixie, I will ask you once again, why did Foley bail out so quickly ?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dixie, I will ask you once again, why did Foley bail out so quickly ?

Because he was wrong to have been engaging in the kind of behavior revealed in the IM's, which the Dems held until it was too late to put another name on the ballot.

[uscitizen]

Yep all the dems fault ;)
Always is with you isn't it Dix ?
but then I suppose thoae repubs that have known about Hastert for years were holding on to their knowledge till just before the election as well...

[Blackflag]

I'll present this to you once again... Just tell me, exactly HOW were republicans supposed to unseat a popular six-term elected representative, based on the emails alone? I don't see it! There is no crime or unethical behavior in sending overtly-friendly emails to people, dufuss! You simply can't overturn the "will of the people" based on your paranoid homophobia, which is exactly how it would have been played by the media and Dems, had Hastert acted on the emails alone.


And i'll tell you again retard that I never said they should have unseated him. I don't care what you idiots do. The only thing I said was that it is obvious to me that the emails were creepy and the product of someone trolling for kids.

I know that our elected reps are retarded though so I can't have expected them to see this.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I know that our elected reps are retarded though so I can't have expected them to see this.

My point is, it doesn't matter if they "saw this" or not. Unless you have some sort of tangible evidence of actionable unethical behavior (as in the IM's) you really can't just unseat an elected representative. All these calls for republican leadership to resign because they failed to act, are bogus, because there was nothing to act upon, unless being gay is now a crime.

[uscitizen]

unless being gay is now a crime.
//

If many in the right wing had their way it would be, and I believe it is in some states, whose laws have not yet been overturned.

[Damocles]

unless being gay is now a crime.
//

If many in the right wing had their way it would be, and I believe it is in some states, whose laws have not yet been overturned.
I'd like to see a link. Plus the SCOTUS ruled such laws to be unconstitutional....

[uscitizen]

yep, but suck laws are still on the books, Not about being gay per sie, but against the sex acts that gays indulge in. In reality the same thing.

I did mispell such, but decided to leave it that way ;)

[Blackflag]

I know that our elected reps are retarded though so I can't have expected them to see this.

My point is, it doesn't matter if they "saw this" or not. Unless you have some sort of tangible evidence of actionable unethical behavior (as in the IM's) you really can't just unseat an elected representative. All these calls for republican leadership to resign because they failed to act, are bogus, because there was nothing to act upon, unless being gay is now a crime.


I haven't called for them to resign. I think unethical, scandal plagued Republicans should stay in office.

[uscitizen]

I haven't called for them to resign. I think unethical, scandal plagued Republicans should stay in office.

Yep, I sure wish Rove's assistant had not resigned because of that Abramhoff hoopla ;)
Ney is hanging in there after pleading guilty to corruption charges though :) Way to go Ney :clink:

[Jarod]

AGAIN DIxIe, what does this have to do with being Gay, everyone would have had the same reaction had Foley been sending the same emails to 16 year old GIRLS!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Look moron, I've already explained it to you several times in this thread alone, why are you continuing to argue the point? It doesn't matter whether the page was a male or female, the emails sent by Foley were not indicative of pedophilia, and wouldn't have been, regardless of the gender of the page. Do you really want to establish this criteria for throwing people out of Congress? What is going to happen when Republicans point to some totally innocuous and harmless friendly email sent by a Democrat to a page, and insist that the Democrat relinquish his/her seat? Are you going to be "okay" with that when it happens? Something tells me you won't, particularly since your party doesn't seem to have a problem with Congressmen having actual sex with pages!

Can't you understand? We don't get to throw people out of their duly-elected seats in Congress, based on an over-friendly email! If Foley were emailing them, propositioning for sex or something, then you have a viable ethics violation and something actionable, as it stood, they didn't have this, they had Foley sending gay emails to young men, being "gay friendly" with them, and nothing more. Had republicans acted on what they had, the very FIRST charge made by Democrats, would have been that the Republicans are homophobes, and just wanted to get rid of the gay guy. You know this is true, you know I have a valid point, yet you continue to try and paint an argument that shouldn't even be dreamed up.

[uscitizen]

Careful Dixie you are running off right wing Christians with that kind of talk. After all the guy is gay ;)

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Careful Dixie you are running off right wing Christians with that kind of talk. After all the guy is gay ;)

Yes, and we know that ALL Christians HATE Gays! Which is precisely why Democrats think Republicans should have booted a six-term Congressman, because they discovered he was gay. Fortunately Republicans have the Democrats to remind them how intolerant and bigoted they are.

I'm really glad we've established this new guideline for booting people out of Congress... Now, when we disclose the cordial and friendly emails from Nancy Pelosi to a former female page, we can immediately boot her ass out of Congress on the presumption that she is guilty of being a pedophile. It's a relief to know, we don't really need any actionable evidence, just suspicion alone is enough. Ahh ha!... there's a "red flag" she said she liked her pretty smile! Buh-Bye, Nancy!

Seriously, you need to really think about the parameters and criteria you are trying to establish here, I don't think you really want to go down this road, because it can get real ugly fast.

[uscitizen]

Seriously, you need to really think about the parameters and criteria you are trying to establish here, I don't think you really want to go down this road, because it can get real ugly fast.
//

It already has, You are posting on it ;)

[Blackflag]

Wait, I thought Dixie was gay.

[OrnotBitwise]

Wait, I thought Dixie was gay.Queer. "Gay" is deprecated.

[uscitizen]

Dixie is Gay, that is why he is so upset about the Foley issue.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Seriously, you need to really think about the parameters and criteria you are trying to establish here, I don't think you really want to go down this road, because it can get real ugly fast.
//

It already has, You are posting on it ;)


Yeah, I know, it is ugly watching me hand your ass to you. My advice would be to not look. If you just have to put your ass out there for me to take off, the best thing you can do is look the other way and save yourself the ugliness. Of course, the smartest thing to do, would be to just shut the fuck up and move on, but then, you're not all that smart.

[Blackflag]

Wait..is he? I'm not trying to make a joke I thought he really was a gay hairdresser.

[uscitizen]

Yeah, I know, it is ugly watching me
//

Got that right! Just glad I only have to read your typing. Gay guys are always after my ass Dix, why would you be any different ?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dixie is Gay, that is why he is so upset about the Foley issue.

It's amusing to me, how you guys seem to think it's an insult to insinuate someone is gay. I've seen several comments with that motive, and it's indicative of bigots who believe homosexuality is something to be shunned.

It doesn't really bother me, I've been mistaken for gay before, as my line of work is dominated by gay people. If I were gay, I would be offended, as it would seem awfully bigoted and intolerant of those who continually use it as an insult or slam.

[uscitizen]

Being Gay is ok, Dixie, I am proud of you that you are able to come out of the closet that way. Just don't talk about my ass all the time ;)

[Blackflag]

It is insulting to say "oh I thought you were gay"?

How so?

[Care4all]

Look moron, I've already explained it to you several times in this thread alone, why are you continuing to argue the point? It doesn't matter whether the page was a male or female, the emails sent by Foley were not indicative of pedophilia, and wouldn't have been, regardless of the gender of the page. Do you really want to establish this criteria for throwing people out of Congress? What is going to happen when Republicans point to some totally innocuous and harmless friendly email sent by a Democrat to a page, and insist that the Democrat relinquish his/her seat? Are you going to be "okay" with that when it happens? Something tells me you won't, particularly since your party doesn't seem to have a problem with Congressmen having actual sex with pages!

Can't you understand? We don't get to throw people out of their duly-elected seats in Congress, based on an over-friendly email! If Foley were emailing them, propositioning for sex or something, then you have a viable ethics violation and something actionable, as it stood, they didn't have this, they had Foley sending gay emails to young men, being "gay friendly" with them, and nothing more. Had republicans acted on what they had, the very FIRST charge made by Democrats, would have been that the Republicans are homophobes, and just wanted to get rid of the gay guy. You know this is true, you know I have a valid point, yet you continue to try and paint an argument that shouldn't even be dreamed up.

Can't you understand?

Those predatory emails to 16 year olds from Foley, in which some parents even complained about, DESERVED FURTHER INQUIRY, by the leadership of your party. If they WERE just friendly emails AS YOU SAY, then a further inqury would have NETTED NOTHING....

But your leadership CHOSE NOT TO PROTECT these teens by IGNORING these emails that were clearly emails of a 52 year old with an attraction to minor boys.....let alone his inappropriate behavior of going to the dorms of these boys when he was drunk...which your leadership was already aware of before the most recent emails in august of last year...

just give it up dixie.

[Damocles]

I believe he has stated that the e-mails were not predatory, but the IMs were. That Hastert saw the e-mails, (not predatory per his opinion), and didn't have actionable evidence to ask him to leave. That it was the publishing of the IMs that he had not seen that caused Foley to resign...

I think he is asking you to post the portions of the e-mails that were "predatory" so that he can examine them and change his opinion as necessary....

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You're correct Damo. Care can't apparently find anything in the emails which would indicate certain predatory behavior, and what I read, only indicates that Foley might be gay. You can't unseat an elected representative based on the fact he's gay, even IF he's a republican!

[uscitizen]

Who cares if there is legal grounds to unseat him Dix, the rightwingers sure don't need legal grounds to be homophobes ;) He already resigned anyway, and the republican backlash on Hastert and the others that his Foley, is a backlash of betrayal.
This is pretty funny to watch happen.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Who cares if there is legal grounds to unseat him Dix...


Well, I thought that was what all the hooplah was about! After all, he resigned his seat, and is gone from Congress. The Democrats continue to call for Hastert to go, based solely on the fact that he might have known Foley was gay. It's almost as if the Democrats are angry that Republicans didn't react in a typical homophobic way months ago, and throw Foley out for just being disgustingly gay!

The whole purpose of this thread, was to ask Rob how it looked beneath the Democrat Bus, where homosexuals have apparently been thrown, in the liberal lust to regain power. It's just sad that your party has to use dirty tricks, and sex scandals, to get elected... it says something for your ideology, when you can't win a race in the arena of ideas.

[Care4all]

I believe he has stated that the e-mails were not predatory, but the IMs were. That Hastert saw the e-mails, (not predatory per his opinion), and didn't have actionable evidence to ask him to leave. That it was the publishing of the IMs that he had not seen that caused Foley to resign...

I think he is asking you to post the portions of the e-mails that were "predatory" so that he can examine them and change his opinion as necessary....

look damo, i am on fricking dial up, ready to shoot myself to remove the misery, connecting at 24.3k, i asked dixie to post these emails and i would point out the problems and inappropriate content of them...how about you...can you find them and post them so i could prperly point out what was said by this 52 yr old congressman to a 16 year old that many, many republicans in office felt were INAPPROPRIATE....? PRETTY PLEASE....:)

I did find a link, that took 4ever to load of a cnn article that has another link to go in to to get the actual verbage of these emails that sent red flags up to several congressmen...

it said...

In his e-mails, Foley purportedly asked the page to send a picture of himself to the congressman, asked the teen what he wanted for his birthday and made comments about another former page in which Foley allegedly said he acted "much older than his age" and was "in really great shape."

now, just from that ALONE, MAJOR RED FLAGS SHOULD HAVE GONE OFF IN ANY ADULT OR PARENT responsible for the welfare of a minor...it should have been looked in to further, questions should have been asked....in my, and many others, mind!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/30/foley.quits/index.html?section=cnn_allpolitics

[maineman]

hardcore republicans like Dixie can spin and twist all they like. The fact of the matter is that their base is pissed and they will stay home.

Ah yes..... and it seems like only yesterday Dixie was stomping around like a bull elephant proclaiming the permanent minority status of the democratic party and how we would go the way of the whigs soon.

And all that bravado will only cost him $100...... if he has the ethics to actually honor his wagers. which I strongly doubt.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

In his e-mails, Foley purportedly asked the page to send a picture of himself to the congressman, asked the teen what he wanted for his birthday and made comments about another former page in which Foley allegedly said he acted "much older than his age" and was "in really great shape."

now, just from that ALONE, MAJOR RED FLAGS SHOULD HAVE GONE OFF IN ANY ADULT OR PARENT responsible for the welfare of a minor...

Whoa... hang on just a sec... nothing in that is indicative of pedophilia, or unethically inappropriate. You simply can't unseat an elected official without something tangible, and that is not tangible. It might make you uncomfortable, it might seem creepy, it might even send off red flags to some, but unless you can show Foley soliciting these boys for sex, or making some lewd remarks, you can't kick him out of the Congress for what you've presented, nor can you launch a full-scale investigation into his conduct. You apparently live in some dream world where this is the case, but the reality is, regardless of whether Foley was Democrat or Republican, trying to boot him out of office on no more than "friendly" emails, is impossible.

[Damocles]

look damo, i am on fricking dial up, ready to shoot myself to remove the misery, connecting at 24.3k, i asked dixie to post these emails and i would point out the problems and inappropriate content of them...how about you...can you find them and post them so i could prperly point out what was said by this 52 yr old congressman to a 16 year old that many, many republicans in office felt were INAPPROPRIATE....? PRETTY PLEASE....:)

I did find a link, that took 4ever to load of a cnn article that has another link to go in to to get the actual verbage of these emails that sent red flags up to several congressmen...

it said...

In his e-mails, Foley purportedly asked the page to send a picture of himself to the congressman, asked the teen what he wanted for his birthday and made comments about another former page in which Foley allegedly said he acted "much older than his age" and was "in really great shape."

now, just from that ALONE, MAJOR RED FLAGS SHOULD HAVE GONE OFF IN ANY ADULT OR PARENT responsible for the welfare of a minor...it should have been looked in to further, questions should have been asked....in my, and many others, mind!

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/09/30/foley.quits/index.html?section=cnn_allpolitics
aHHH... Well, I am sure somebody else can find something to post. I'm annoyed enough at this particular scandal. I can't believe that somebody wasn't more proactive...

[Blackflag]

In his e-mails, Foley purportedly asked the page to send a picture of himself to the congressman, asked the teen what he wanted for his birthday and made comments about another former page in which Foley allegedly said he acted "much older than his age" and was "in really great shape."

now, just from that ALONE, MAJOR RED FLAGS SHOULD HAVE GONE OFF IN ANY ADULT OR PARENT responsible for the welfare of a minor...

Whoa... hang on just a sec... nothing in that is indicative of pedophilia, or unethically inappropriate. You simply can't unseat an elected official without something tangible, and that is not tangible. It might make you uncomfortable, it might seem creepy, it might even send off red flags to some, but unless you can show Foley soliciting these boys for sex, or making some lewd remarks, you can't kick him out of the Congress for what you've presented, nor can you launch a full-scale investigation into his conduct. You apparently live in some dream world where this is the case, but the reality is, regardless of whether Foley was Democrat or Republican, trying to boot him out of office on no more than "friendly" emails, is impossible.

Why should he be kicked out of Congress? I hope he stays. It'll be more fun in the long run.

Saying though that the stuff in that email doesn't indicate he was trolling for children is either a lie or you are very naive and retarded.

[Care4all]

In his e-mails, Foley purportedly asked the page to send a picture of himself to the congressman, asked the teen what he wanted for his birthday and made comments about another former page in which Foley allegedly said he acted "much older than his age" and was "in really great shape."

now, just from that ALONE, MAJOR RED FLAGS SHOULD HAVE GONE OFF IN ANY ADULT OR PARENT responsible for the welfare of a minor...

Whoa... hang on just a sec... nothing in that is indicative of pedophilia, or unethically inappropriate. You simply can't unseat an elected official without something tangible, and that is not tangible. It might make you uncomfortable, it might seem creepy, it might even send off red flags to some, but unless you can show Foley soliciting these boys for sex, or making some lewd remarks, you can't kick him out of the Congress for what you've presented, nor can you launch a full-scale investigation into his conduct. You apparently live in some dream world where this is the case, but the reality is, regardless of whether Foley was Democrat or Republican, trying to boot him out of office on no more than "friendly" emails, is impossible.

an attraction to adolescents=hebephilia...

predators are KNOWN BY ALL to befriend their prey in this ''down to the teen's, childish manner'' ......

the teen himself recognized this for christmas sake, he said they were freaking him out, and that they were ''sic, sic, sic, sic, sic, sic, sic, sic....''

those email's and the child's own concerns SHOULD HAVE SET OFF A RED FLAG! PERIOD!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Why should he be kicked out of Congress? I hope he stays.

HE'S GONE! IDIOT! HE HAS BEEN GONE!



Saying though that the stuff in that email doesn't indicate he was trolling for children is either a lie or you are very naive and retarded.

It doesn't indicate actionable inappropriate behavior, and you've not demostrated that it did! You can sit here and cast uninformed judgements all day long, and claim this and that, but without some tangible and legitimate reason to boot an elected official out of office, you simply can't do it!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

predators are KNOWN BY ALL to befriend their prey

And so do politicians, befriend young people interested in government! And so do gay men, who just want to be friendly with other gay men! What the fuck is your point? That everytime we notice someone being friendly, we should assume they are a sicko?

[Blackflag]

Lol I never said or asked for him to be fired lol. I never said anything he did was actionable. LOL

The only thing I said is that anyone who is not a retard can tell from those emails that he was trolling for the boy. Only total retards would not see that.

I realize Foley is gone I was talking about Hastert.

[Blackflag]

predators are KNOWN BY ALL to befriend their prey
That everytime we notice someone being friendly, we should assume they are a sicko?

That's what I do lol unless it is a woman.

[Jarod]

Look moron, I've already explained it to you several times in this thread alone, why are you continuing to argue the point? It doesn't matter whether the page was a male or female, the emails sent by Foley were not indicative of pedophilia, and wouldn't have been, regardless of the gender of the page. Do you really want to establish this criteria for throwing people out of Congress? What is going to happen when Republicans point to some totally innocuous and harmless friendly email sent by a Democrat to a page, and insist that the Democrat relinquish his/her seat? Are you going to be "okay" with that when it happens? Something tells me you won't, particularly since your party doesn't seem to have a problem with Congressmen having actual sex with pages!

Can't you understand? We don't get to throw people out of their duly-elected seats in Congress, based on an over-friendly email! If Foley were emailing them, propositioning for sex or something, then you have a viable ethics violation and something actionable, as it stood, they didn't have this, they had Foley sending gay emails to young men, being "gay friendly" with them, and nothing more. Had republicans acted on what they had, the very FIRST charge made by Democrats, would have been that the Republicans are homophobes, and just wanted to get rid of the gay guy. You know this is true, you know I have a valid point, yet you continue to try and paint an argument that shouldn't even be dreamed up.


No, all I wish was that the emails were shared with the voting public and let them decide if they were creapy enough to prevent his reelection or not! Instead, Republicans hid covered up these creapy emails. Had an adult emailed my sister, when she was 16, a message like the one Foley emailed those boys, I would have been discusted by it. My parents would likely have doen something about it. It was CREAPY and waranted further investigation! To say otherwise is pinheaded!

[Care4all]

DIXIE DARLIN....GIVE IT UP!

what they should have done is inquired FURTHER...talked to others within the party that delt with him daily, review the OTHER INCIDENTS, that he HAD with the pages previously like when he went to the male pages dorms lookin' for some ''action'' in the middle of the night and capital police had to haul him away...., or review the OTHER emails that were in question about his behaviors with minors a few years earlier...

so what the HELL ARE YOU TALKING ABOUT.....ALL OF THIS WAS KNOWN BY REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP, ALL OF IT....GOT IT?

not just this ONE SIC, SIC, SIC, SIC, SIC, SIC....as the young 16 yr old said...

YOUR LEADERSHIP DID NOT LOOK FURTHER FOR POLITICAL GAIN ONLY....FOR FEAR OF WHAT ELSE THEY WOULD FIND, if they investigated, with scrutiny, his previous actions....

it was wrong...nuff said.

[maineman]

I never demanded that he be booted from COngress..... I do think that a more vigorous investigation of the numerous reports about his inappropriate behavior would have led ETHICAL politicians to do something about it other than ignore the warning signs and push for the guy's reelection anyway.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

what they should have done is inquired FURTHER...

Based on WHAT?

You can't "inquire further" these days, without appearing to be a homohobe! The lame-ass argument that republicans should have taken action on nothing but the overly-friendly email correspondence, is just ludicrous! You are essentially saying, we should automatically suspect any homosexual of being a perverted pedophile! ....Tell you what, Care... let's have a look into Barney Frank's emails? Let's see if Barney has ever made any "friendly gay" comments to anyone, and if so, let's demand a full investigation into his personal life as a gay man! You wanna fucking do that? I didn't think so!

What you want is a double standard, as always! You want to have your gay Congressmen, or womanizing adulterer president, and we dare not mention anything about their private personal sex lives... but let a fucking Republican write a friendly email, and we are supposed to launch full-scale ethics investigations and ruin his political career!

This is about the most deceitful, disingenuous, bigoted, prejudiced, hypocritical bunch of partisan bullshit you've EVER come up with!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

And while we are noticing "red flags" let's have a complete look at Harry Reid's financial dealings! Since we can apparently launch investigations and ruin people's political careers on suspicion alone, let's not be selective in our moral outrage!

[Damocles]

I believe the "sic, sic, sic" thing was about the IMs, Care. To be fair to Dix he is talking about a different group of missives.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I believe the "sic, sic, sic" thing was about the IMs, Care. To be fair to Dix he is talking about a different group of missives.

She knows this, they all know it. Like usciti said, it's not whether or not an investigation could be legitimately justified, as long as they can make the Bible Belt folks stay at home in disgust. This is about trying to rub Republicans noses in something they had no knowledge of, purely for political gain, and it's going to bite Democrats in the ass when it's all said and done.

The Democrats would have done well to turn over the goods on Foley in time for Florida to put another candidate on the ballot, and then shut up about it. When Foley resigned, it took their thunder away, and they couldn't help but to go after Hastert, and make complete jackasses out of themselves. It's what they do! The fine upstanding conservative Bible Belt folks they were trying to steer, have watched this unfold, and although they were disgusted with Foley, they are more disgusted with the way Democrats have behaved since his departure.

Oh.... but The Polls! The Polls! :shock:

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Another thing they failed to consider, is how their utter hypocrisy and willingness to use Foley's homosexuality, to infer this was supposed to be a warning he was a perverted pedophile, has back-lashed in the gay community. Several people who I have spoken to, who are gay, have indicated they do not plan to support Democrats now. This cinched it for them. They may not vote Republican, but they certainly don't support the Democrats after this.

[maineman]

adult men who have the hots for 17 year olds are not pedophiles.

When congressional staffers send up warning signals and the speakers office does nothing about it.... that is negligence.

[Care4all]

Huh? What are you guys talking about?

IT WAS THE KID FROM :lOUISIANNA Who'd parents were involved in reporting the emails foley sent to their son THAT SAID FOLEY WAS sick,sick,sick,sick, sick......not the pages involved in the more explicit IM's with him?

Who has spread this propaganda to you that it was a page involved in the IM's? huh?

it was the kid from LouisianA that reported this email regarding foley asking him what he wanted for his birthday and that making comments about a another page's "body" that FREAKED HIM OUT....? THIS HAS BEEN REPORTED OVER AND OVER AGAIN...?

"The improper communications between Congressman Mark Foley and former House congressional pages is unacceptable and abhorrent. It is an obscene breach of trust," read the statement issued by Majority Leader John Boehner of Ohio, House Speaker J. Dennis Hastert of Illinois and Majority Whip Roy Blunt of Missouri.

Earlier, the chairman of the House Page Board said Foley "was not honest about his conduct," referring to e-mail exchanges that a former page has called "sick, sick, sick."

The House leaders said in their statement that they had asked the House Page Board to review the incident and to propose measures to ensure the program is safe. They also have set up a toll-free number for pages and their relatives to confidentially report incidents, the statement said.

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

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

regarding foley asking him what he wanted for his birthday and that making comments about a another page's "body" that FREAKED HIM OUT

Okay, very slowly, once again.... you can not investigate, question, interrogate, lodge ethics complaints, censure, impeach, or otherwise boot out of elected office, any official who has made a comment about another person's body or asked about a birthday.

I fully understand that a straight guy was grossed out by Foley's gay gestures, but again, these are common among gay men and women, and unless we are going to pass laws against gay people acting gay, I don't see much that can be done here. When I look at this, and try to find a reasonable opportunity the Republicans had to take action on Foley, I just don't see it, there was no crime, other than being gay. This is why I've continued to ask you for some evidence they could have used. Certainly the IM's were enough, and action was swiftly taken, but before the IM's were known about, what did Foley do or say, that was actionable?

Are you just too dumb to imagine what would have happened, had Hastert launched investigations into Foley, based on the mere fact that he asked a page about his birthday and made a gay comment about someones body? Care, I don't think anyone is that ignorant, I don't know why you want to pretend you are. The "All Pubs Are Homophobes" crowd, would have ate Hasterts and the Republicans lunch, and you know it.

Even though, in retrospect, you can act like Blackflag and pretend the behavior creeps you out, there is a vast difference between what makes us uncomfortable as individuals and what society has established as legally actionable or ethically questionable. In the Foley case, you liberals are the victim of your own PC policy. We simply can't call Foley into question for behaving like a gay man, and that is precisely what you claim we should have done.

[Cancel7]

Another thing they failed to consider, is how their utter hypocrisy and willingness to use Foley's homosexuality, to infer this was supposed to be a warning he was a perverted pedophile, has back-lashed in the gay community. Several people who I have spoken to, who are gay, have indicated they do not plan to support Democrats now. This cinched it for them. They may not vote Republican, but they certainly don't support the Democrats after this.

Dixie, your collection of Ken dolls really doesn't count as a scientific poll of the gay community.

I'm sure the dolls were all up in arms though.

[AnyOldIron]

I merely asked you to define the difference between friendly homosexual behavior and perverted homosexual behavior,

Well, first you have to define 'perverted'.

What you might deem perverted, others might not...

[uscitizen]

Then too Any, Dix's definition of perversion depends on which party the person in question is in ;)

[Jarod]

what they should have done is inquired FURTHER...

Based on WHAT?

You can't "inquire further" these days, without appearing to be a homohobe! The lame-ass argument that republicans should have taken action on nothing but the overly-friendly email correspondence, is just ludicrous! You are essentially saying, we should automatically suspect any homosexual of being a perverted pedophile! ....Tell you what, Care... let's have a look into Barney Frank's emails? Let's see if Barney has ever made any "friendly gay" comments to anyone, and if so, let's demand a full investigation into his personal life as a gay man! You wanna fucking do that? I didn't think so!

What you want is a double standard, as always! You want to have your gay Congressmen, or womanizing adulterer president, and we dare not mention anything about their private personal sex lives... but let a fucking Republican write a friendly email, and we are supposed to launch full-scale ethics investigations and ruin his political career!

This is about the most deceitful, disingenuous, bigoted, prejudiced, hypocritical bunch of partisan bullshit you've EVER come up with!

You are all tangled in with this gay thing. EVEN if Foley had been sending the same email to 16 year old girls, they should have been looking further into it.

When a CONGRESS man sends creapy flirtatious emails to 16 year old pages, the Ethics Committee should look into it!

[uscitizen]

When a CONGRESS man sends creapy flirtatious emails to 16 year old pages, the Ethics Committee should look into it!
//

I think the FBI should look into it as a probable link to sexual predator behaviour.
Heck with an "ethics" comittee.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

I merely asked you to define the difference between friendly homosexual behavior and perverted homosexual behavior,

Well, first you have to define 'perverted'.

What you might deem perverted, others might not...

Well, that is the reason I asked Care to define it. Some people obviously find typical, routine, normal and friendly homosexual behavior to be "perverted".

[uscitizen]

Well, that is the reason I asked Care to define it. Some people obviously find typical, routine, normal and friendly homosexual behavior to be "perverted".

LOL yep, most right wingers .

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

LOL yep, most right wingers .

Well, no, actually and ironically, it seems to be me, who is standing up and defending gay people for merely being gay, and it seems to be you, Care, Black and others, who want to define a gay man's routine behavior as perverted, or at least indicative of a "red flag."

[uscitizen]

well , Yes actually dixie.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

well , Yes actually dixie.

Yes what? Am I a "right winger"? Are you and Care?

There are two positions you can take on Foley....

A. He was a gay man, exhibiting perfectly normal and routine gay behavior when he sent emails to former pages.

B. He was a sick perverted pedophile preying on children when he sent emails to former pages.

Now... which one describes YOUR view, and which one describes MY view?

[uscitizen]

You need option 3. My stand.
3. It is questionable that Foley is a pedofile, but he is sick and perverted to message teenage pages in this manner. At the very least it is on the job sexual harrasment.

[Connecticut Stud]

dixie your confusing (once again) pedophiles with homosexuality... not the same thing....

all people i know who are gay would find the actions of foley disgusting...

[uscitizen]

Rob has it figured out Dixie, Why are you unable to figure it out ? Does it have something to do with blind partisanship ?

[Connecticut Stud]

Why do you say this has to do with his sexual orientation?

I have read every single email that has been made public, and not a one of them contains anything other than the suggestion Foley might be gay.


THAT in itself is kind of creepy too...

[uscitizen]

Every email perhaps, you forget the instant messages Dixie . Or perhaps you don't and are just intentionally attempting to mislead.

[Damocles]

Every email perhaps, you forget the instant messages Dixie . Or perhaps you don't and are just intentionally attempting to mislead.
No, his whole point is that the e-mails were not as huge as the IMs and that Hastert only had access to the e-mails. That because he only had the e-mails then he only had evidence of his homosexuality...

correct me if I'm wrong, Dix. I'm pretty sure this was your whole point here.

[uscitizen]

Perhaps Damo, and that was my point . That Dixie was cherrypicking the evidence to support his argument.

[AnyOldIron]

Some people obviously find typical, routine, normal and friendly homosexual behavior to be "perverted".

Very true. You are learning the relative nature of such terms as perverted, sin, evil, good etc etc.

[uscitizen]

Uhh oh Any, that will probably get us about a 1/2 page response....

[AnyOldIron]

Uhh oh Any, that will probably get us about a 1/2 page response....

Hopefully. Be good to see Dixie challenging his sacred cows...

[uscitizen]

That won't happen Any. We will get back some kind of convoluted reasponse that dances around the real issue.

[Jarod]

The point is that the creapy flirtatious nature of the emails waranted more investigation which would have led to the IM's. The sex of the 16 year old victim is illrelevant. The sexual orientation of Mr. Foley is illrelevant!

[Jarod]

Some people obviously find typical, routine, normal and friendly homosexual behavior to be "perverted".

Very true. You are learning the relative nature of such terms as perverted, sin, evil, good etc etc.




Great point, but social conservatives usually dont understand the grey areas... they see only black and white!

[uscitizen]

Ahh but according to the polls it is not irrevelant to many right wing republican voters ;) I will take a win or two based on the other sides prejudice and biggotry causing them to shoot their own feet ;)

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Ahh but according to the polls it is not irrevelant to many right wing republican voters ;) I will take a win or two based on the other sides prejudice and biggotry causing them to shoot their own feet ;)

You don't realize it, but you are making my point brilliantly. In order for Democrats to feign outrage over Foley's emails, they have to contradict their own principles regarding sexuality, because they feel that they can appeal to the homophobic republicans this way. That's the problem with their argument, they assume republicans are homophobic bigots, so they convey a message of homophobic bigotry, in hopes of swaying republicans. When called on it, they can't seem to do anything except bluster and spew more hypocritical rhetoric.

The emails indicated Foley was a gay man, nothing more. Had there been anything more, Republican leadership would have reacted the same way they did when the IM's became public. To pretend that something should, could, or would have been done differently, on nothing more than the emails, takes a profound and bigoted homophobic view, because nothing in the emails is abnormal for a gay man.

[uscitizen]

Still avoiding the IM's Dixie ?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

dixie your confusing (once again) pedophiles with homosexuality... not the same thing....

all people i know who are gay would find the actions of foley disgusting...

Rob, I am not confusing anything, I know the difference. Foley sent emails to 16-18 y.o. former pages, in them he asked, what they planned to do for their birthday, could he have a picture, and so-and-so has a nice body. Are any of those things considered taboo in the gay community? Do gay people consider gays who ask these things to be perverts? What part of the emails disgusted you, Rob? Democrats seem to want to claim this, Rob, not me. I am not gay, and I have to defer to your opinion here, but I really didn't think cordial and typical homosexual conversation was considered perverted.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Still avoiding the IM's Dixie ?

US, I have never argued anything regarding the IM's, in fact, I have openly said on numerous instances, the IM's revealed the inappropriate behavior, and as soon as they became public, Foley was gone, and well he should be. You are now trying to manipulate my argument into an argument supporting Foley, or his actions in the IM's, and that has never been part of my argument.

[maineman]

it is only a red flag when it is aimed at teenage boys under the care and supervision of congress.

and the republican leadership's failure to adaquately supervise and protect those teens, and to worry more about getting Foley reelected is what will keep the base home on election day.

[uscitizen]

US, I have never argued anything regarding the IM's, in fact, I have openly said on numerous instances, the IM's revealed the inappropriate behavior, and as soon as they became public, Foley was gone, and well he should be. You are now trying to manipulate my argument into an argument supporting Foley, or his actions in the IM's, and that has never been part of my argument.
LOL, don't accuse me of what you are already doing Dix.
the point is that the IM's are known by the Dems and just perhaps they have based their decisions on them as well. hmmm ?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

LOL, don't accuse me of what you are already doing Dix.
the point is that the IM's are known by the Dems and just perhaps they have based their decisions on them as well. hmmm ?

Again, let me make this point vividly clear, I am not supporting Foley, I am not condoning what he did in any way, and I feel the appropriate action was taken in asking for his resignation. That is NOT my issue here, as much as you want to make it my issue, and if you just want to continue being ignorant of that and insisting otherwise, that's up to you, I have stated it several times in several different ways now, and I really don't fucking know what else to do to make that point any clearer.

We are talking about Hastert, the Republican leadership, and the emails they knew about before the IM's became public. Those emails do not indicate that Foley was anything other than a garden variety gay man! So, you can either take the position that the leadership could have reacted with homophobia and ruined his career over inoccuous emails, or they could have not reacted to his personal sex life and conduct related to his homosexuality. There is no other option here.

[uscitizen]

Ok, even on that score the emails constituted inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, quite possibly sexual harrasment. I know congress made themselves exempt from the sexual harrasment laws, and now we know why :)

Dixie it is all about perception with voters, reality has little provididence in their minds, it is all about perception. And some right winger gay biggots feel betrayed that Foley is gay.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Ok, even on that score the emails constituted inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, quite possibly sexual harrasment. I know congress made themselves exempt from the sexual harrasment laws, and now we know why :)

Dixie it is all about perception with voters, reality has little provididence in their minds, it is all about perception. And some right winger gay biggots feel betrayed that Foley is gay.

Right-winger gay bigots? Is there such a thing?

You are correct, it's all about perception. But I am thinking the perception may be that Democrats are homophobes, since they think "red flags" should have been acted upon, based on typical and normal homosexual behavior. You see, to establish this perception, they had to take a completely homophobic position on Foley's emails, and argue that typical homosexual conversation is reason enough to launch investigations and ruin Congressional political careers. The flawed and hypocritical position also assumes that, in doing this, they will appeal to republican homophobic bigots, who are probably satisfied that Foley resigned.

[uscitizen]

dix, I think your mistaken perception is that the Dems are stirring this all up. I think it is the republicans themselves. Or are you just doing a Rush and spinning for all you are worth ?

[Damocles]

Every time I see the title I just want to say, "It looks like the underside of the Bus, what would you think it would look like?!"

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Ok, even on that score the emails constituted inappropriate behaviour in the workplace, quite possibly sexual harrasment.

Not really. There was nothing sexual ever discussed in the emails that I read. Perhaps you have some portion you'd like to post, to illustrate your point? There is nothing inappropriate about a Congressman writing an email to a former page, they do this all the time. There is nothing inappropriate about asking for a picture or inquiring about birthday plans, people do this everyday and are never cited for sexual harassment.

Without the subsequent IM's, the emails appear perfectly innocent and harmless. Foley does seem to have a clear "gay" curiosity in them, but his sexuality shouldn't be used as a criteria for determining his intentions, or to make him into a pedophile. Unless we are supposed to judge typical gay behavior as being perverted, which seems to be the Democrat view these days.

[uscitizen]

But the demoncratic bus is moving so slow a quadrapelegic could crawl out of the way. One has to intentionally put himself in the path to get run over by the demoncratic bus right now.

[uscitizen]

You have proof that the demoncratic view is perversion just on the emails alone dixie ? put out or shut up.
and I am not just talking about a few demoncrats on here either.

[Care4all]

regarding foley asking him what he wanted for his birthday and that making comments about a another page's "body" that FREAKED HIM OUT

Okay, very slowly, once again.... you can not investigate, question, interrogate, lodge ethics complaints, censure, impeach, or otherwise boot out of elected office, any official who has made a comment about another person's body or asked about a birthday.

I fully understand that a straight guy was grossed out by Foley's gay gestures, but again, these are common among gay men and women, and unless we are going to pass laws against gay people acting gay, I don't see much that can be done here. When I look at this, and try to find a reasonable opportunity the Republicans had to take action on Foley, I just don't see it, there was no crime, other than being gay. This is why I've continued to ask you for some evidence they could have used. Certainly the IM's were enough, and action was swiftly taken, but before the IM's were known about, what did Foley do or say, that was actionable?

Are you just too dumb to imagine what would have happened, had Hastert launched investigations into Foley, based on the mere fact that he asked a page about his birthday and made a gay comment about someones body? Care, I don't think anyone is that ignorant, I don't know why you want to pretend you are. The "All Pubs Are Homophobes" crowd, would have ate Hasterts and the Republicans lunch, and you know it.

Even though, in retrospect, you can act like Blackflag and pretend the behavior creeps you out, there is a vast difference between what makes us uncomfortable as individuals and what society has established as legally actionable or ethically questionable. In the Foley case, you liberals are the victim of your own PC policy. We simply can't call Foley into question for behaving like a gay man, and that is precisely what you claim we should have done.

The minute I read the emails and ONLY THE EMAILS, I saw that there could be a real serious problem with this Congressman's conduct and immediately felt that he was PREYING on this young, under age boy.

I had not seen the instant messages and did not need to see the instant messages to KNOW that this behavior of a 52 year old congressman with a 16 year old was inappropriate and it sent off red flags that should have made Those in power look in to the matter further....whether it was a girl or a boy that he made these comments to....

In addition to this, YOUR LEADERSHIP HAD MORE THAN JUST AN EMAIL FROM FOLEY....Your leadership, Dennis Hastert, had complaints from Congressman Alexander, From Congressman Reynolds, and from Congressman Shimkus (sp?) along with a formal complaint from the capital police when Foley was trying to enter the Dorms of the Boy pages, in the middle of the night, while drunk as a skunk.

All of this was in the hands of the Speaker's office LONG BEFORE this set of emails to the Louisianna boy that was freaked out.

All of these complaints and concerns regarding Foley's inappropriate behavior HAPPENED BEFORE LAST AUGUST....when the Louisianna Boy's parents complained to Congress....

Now, your spin is just disgusting...on this...

you act as though there was only one email, you act as though this conversation that he had with this boy is nothing but normal gay talk...you act as though nothing could have or should have been done to see if there was reason to be concerned about Foley after the 5th complaint to the speaker's office....

you are being a real asshole and NO ONE ON THIS BOARD agrees with your distorting and lying account of what happened.

YOUR PARTY CHOSE to ignore some very well evident problems with Foley so that they could win this republican seat again in Florida...

That was and is wrong...most Human beings know this....

Give it up....you are wrong....there was PLENTY OF REASON to further an investigation of foley's behavior with the pages LONG BEFORE this one email in August.....the email last august should have been the straw that broke the camel's back...



care

[maineman]

I know of no democrat who has called Foley perverted. He is a gay man trolling for teenage boys..... and the inappropriateness lies in the page board and the speakers office for knowing about that trolling, and having been warned about it repeatedly and not only not doing anything positive to stop it, rather doing things to ignore it and to insure that Foley got reelected.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Care, all I can say is, bigoted people like yourself, shouldn't be serving in Congress.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

you act as though this conversation that he had with this boy is nothing but normal gay talk.

Everything I read was, maybe you can show me something to change my mind? Asking what he was planning to do on his birthday, asking for a picture, commenting on another guy's physique... sounds like typical gay talk to me, and it doesn't sound like a "red flag" the guy was perverted or preying on children, I am sorry.

[uscitizen]

So it would be ok for Rob to use normal gay talk to any other co worker in his office Dix ?
forgive me Rob , but unlike dixie , I really don't know what normal gay talk is.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So it would be ok for Rob to use normal gay talk to any other co worker in his office Dix ?
forgive me Rob , but unlike dixie , I really don't know what normal gay talk is.

Isn't that what the whole "gay rights" thing is about?

Do you want to make a law against gay people acting gay?

Should we make a law that gay people can't serve in Congress?

Can we assume that any gay behavior is a "red flag" of perversion and pedophilia?

It seems this is the way you think we should go. I disagree.

[uscitizen]

Sexual talk among employees is inappropriate and illegal. No matter what the sexual orientation of the person initiating the sex related talk. It is especially bad when initiated by a boss to a subordinate.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Sexual talk among employees is inappropriate and illegal. No matter what the sexual orientation of the person initiating the sex related talk. It is especially bad when performen by a boss to a subordinate.

I agree completely! Now... what part of the emails do you find "sexual" in nature? Asking for a picture or about birthday plans, is not sexual harrasment by any definition. Commenting on another person's appearance, is not sexual harrasment... so what exactly do you read in the emails, that could have been considered "sexual harassment?"

[uscitizen]

You are the one who said they were normal Gay talk Dixie, how could you tell that if they did not have sexual inuendo at least.
Squirm dixie Squirm ;)

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You are the one who said they were normal Gay talk Dixie, how could you tell that if they did not have sexual inuendo at least.
Squirm dixie Squirm ;)

Because they showed a level of curiosity indicative of a homosexual man. Listen, this is really easy for you, just go find the emails, I am sure they are posted all over the Inernet, and find the parts that you feel were "sexual harassment" or "perverted," and maybe I will change my opinion! This shouldn't be too much to ask, should it? I mean, if you have an argument here, present the facts to back your argument, or admit that I am correct in my assessment. I'm not squirming, I have no reason to squirm, I am right on this, and you haven't presented anything to refute what I have stated.

[uscitizen]

Naah dix, you started the thread the burden of proof is on your back, not mine ;)

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Naah dix, you started the thread the burden of proof is on your back, not mine ;)


Yeah, I don't blame you for running away, after all, this was all about perception anyway, not the truth, right?

[uscitizen]

Yeah, I don't blame you for running away, after all, this was all about perception anyway, not the truth, right?
running away from proving your point dixie ?
:tongout: I reply to childish behaviour with childish behaviour ;)

[Jarod]

They dont show a curiosity indicative of a gay man, they show a curiosity indicative of a sick man, two very different things.

[maineman]

and it is all about perception at this point.... the truth of the matter is, only 25% of the public considers the foley matter to be as major issue in the upcoming election.

The big problem for the republicans is that the 25% all happen to be religious conservatives! HA!

[uscitizen]

The big problem for the republicans is that the 25% all happen to be religious conservatives! HA!
//
right on, and this is what Dix is trying to spin over to the left ;)

[Jarod]

All adults who hit on 16 year olds are sick.
Some gay men hit on 16 year olds...

In Dixieland above means all gay men are sick!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

running away from proving your point dixie ?
:tongout: I reply to childish behaviour with childish behaviour ;)

Whatever. I didn't accuse a man of being perverted based on his normal gay behavior, you did. I've repeatedly asked for some evidence to back the argument that Foley was a "known pervert", or something actionable in the emails, and you have consistently avoided providing any. I hardly see where I am the one who has failed to make a point.

When you blatantly accuse a gay man of being obviously perverted, the burden of proof does not lie with me, I didn't make that charge. I am not the one who is being unreasonable and refusing to follow common principles of debate, that would be yourself. Either provide evidence to support your argument, or run along! I've already presented my case!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

They dont show a curiosity indicative of a gay man, they show a curiosity indicative of a sick man, two very different things.

Then, explain the difference, Jarhead?

That's all I am asking any of you to do. Tell me, what was in the email that show Foley was a pervert? Point it out! Let's take a look! From what I've read, nothing in the emails was indicative of pedophilia or sexual perversion, just generally "gay curious" comments from a gay man.

Look... try this experiment... Pretend that, instead of the IM's, we had some sort of definitive empirical evidence that Foley was not gay, he was straight. Now, read those emails, and tell me what was inappropriate about them, if you assume Foley is not gay? Is there anything? If not, you must admit that any indication of improper behavior, is predicated on the fact he is gay.

[uscitizen]

did I say he was perverted dix, I said Inapproiate behaviour based on the emails, You are just plain lying. another sign of your juvenile brain at work, well attempting to work.
.

[Jarod]

They dont show a curiosity indicative of a gay man, they show a curiosity indicative of a sick man, two very different things.

Then, explain the difference, Jarhead?

That's all I am asking any of you to do. Tell me, what was in the email that show Foley was a pervert? Point it out! Let's take a look! From what I've read, nothing in the emails was indicative of pedophilia or sexual perversion, just generally "gay curious" comments from a gay man.

Look... try this experiment... Pretend that, instead of the IM's, we had some sort of definitive empirical evidence that Foley was not gay, he was straight. Now, read those emails, and tell me what was inappropriate about them, if you assume Foley is not gay? Is there anything? If not, you must admit that any indication of improper behavior, is predicated on the fact he is gay.



EASY, he was flirting with a 16 year old! Its not that he is gay, its that he is flirting with a 16 year old....

If we knew he was not gay, and he was sending the same email to a 16 year old girl... it would warrant investigation to see if he were using the Congressional page program to troll for chicks....

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

EASY, he was flirting with a 16 year old! Its not that he is gay, its that he is flirting with a 16 year old....

If we knew he was not gay, and he was sending the same email to a 16 year old girl... it would warrant investigation to see if he were using the Congressional page program to troll for chicks....

What do you mean by "flirting?" How can something be seen as "flirting" if you are not assuming he is homosexual? He asked the page for a photo.... that's not flirting. He asked about his birthday plans.... that's not flirting! He commented on a mutual friend's physical appearance... that is not flirting! It wouldn't matter if the page was male or female, the language in the emails was not sexual or predatory in nature, it was "gay curious", it was indicative of Foley being homosexual, but it was nothing actionable, and nothing worthy of launching an investigation over. When you take the man's sexuality out of the equation, and then consider what was said, there is nothing unethical or inappropriate in the emails. It is only AFTER you know he is a gay man, and you know what was said in the IM's, that you can make the determination that the emails were "uncomfortable" or "creepy" or whatever label you want to tag on.

This Democrat stance makes me very uncomfortable, because it's as if you are saying we should presume homosexuals are perverted pedophiles, if they show casual personal interest in another male.

[uscitizen]

This Democrat stance makes me very uncomfortable, because it's as if you are saying we should presume homosexuals are perverted pedophiles, if they show casual personal interest in another male.

ROTFLMAO, And all the right wing nut job homophobes worry you none ? this is a great projection attempt Dix.

[Jarod]

EASY, he was flirting with a 16 year old! Its not that he is gay, its that he is flirting with a 16 year old....

If we knew he was not gay, and he was sending the same email to a 16 year old girl... it would warrant investigation to see if he were using the Congressional page program to troll for chicks....

What do you mean by "flirting?" How can something be seen as "flirting" if you are not assuming he is homosexual? He asked the page for a photo.... that's not flirting. He asked about his birthday plans.... that's not flirting! He commented on a mutual friend's physical appearance... that is not flirting! It wouldn't matter if the page was male or female, the language in the emails was not sexual or predatory in nature, it was "gay curious", it was indicative of Foley being homosexual, but it was nothing actionable, and nothing worthy of launching an investigation over. When you take the man's sexuality out of the equation, and then consider what was said, there is nothing unethical or inappropriate in the emails. It is only AFTER you know he is a gay man, and you know what was said in the IM's, that you can make the determination that the emails were "uncomfortable" or "creepy" or whatever label you want to tag on.

This Democrat stance makes me very uncomfortable, because it's as if you are saying we should presume homosexuals are perverted pedophiles, if they show casual personal interest in another male.


If you cant see that the emails were creepy and flirtatous, regardless if the victim was a girl or boy... you are blind by partinsinship!

A grown person does not ask a 16 year old for a photo, does not give them birthday presents (unless they are related) and does not carry on email conversations unless they are interested in that person sexually... its creepy and should be investigated further.

If my teacher had asked for a photo or what I wanted for my birthday when I was 16 I would have been wearded out, just as this victim was!

[uscitizen]

But didn't Dixie claim That foley was just having normal gay talk with the boy ?

[Jarod]

But didn't Dixie claim That foley was just having normal gay talk with the boy ?



When its between a man in his 40's and a 16 year old its clearly not "normal gay talk".

[maineman]

dixie is sweating bullets because he knows that this thing is not playing well to the republican base.....he is desperately looking for some way to spin it, but his efforts will have zero effect....the mom and pop republican baptists in Peoria are gonna stay home in disgust..... too damned bad, really.

$100 Dixie..... are you gonna renege on your wager or will you honor your debts?

[uscitizen]

Agreed Jarod, but I was just emphasizing Dixie changing his logic in midstream.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

This Democrat stance makes me very uncomfortable, because it's as if you are saying we should presume homosexuals are perverted pedophiles, if they show casual personal interest in another male.

ROTFLMAO, And all the right wing nut job homophobes worry you none ? this is a great projection attempt Dix.

I don't see anyone being homophobic about Foley, except Democrats.

My position is, what Foley did was wrong, based on the IM's, which weren't brought to light until the day he resigned. The emails that Democrats keep insisting Hastert should resign because he knew about, indicate that Foley might be gay, and nothing more. I am the one standing up for the gay man, making the point that you can't label him a pervert because he behaved like a typical gay man behaves, which is all that can be derived from the emails. How is that position homophobic?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

If you cant see that the emails were creepy and flirtatous, regardless if the victim was a girl or boy... you are blind by partinsinship!

As I have repeatedly said, post the part that you think is "creepy" or "flirtatious" and let's have a look! I am open-minded, maybe you can show me something I missed? From what I read, it looked to me like normal conversation that could ONLY be deemed "creepy" or "flirtatious" after knowing Foley was gay and reading the IM's. If you are basing your judgement of the emails, in any way, on Foley being a gay man, that is homophobic, it is as simple as that.

[Care4all]

When its between a man in his 40's and a 16 year old its clearly not "normal gay talk".

40's? try 50's....

[Jarod]

If you cant see that the emails were creepy and flirtatous, regardless if the victim was a girl or boy... you are blind by partinsinship!

As I have repeatedly said, post the part that you think is "creepy" or "flirtatious" and let's have a look! I am open-minded, maybe you can show me something I missed? From what I read, it looked to me like normal conversation that could ONLY be deemed "creepy" or "flirtatious" after knowing Foley was gay and reading the IM's. If you are basing your judgement of the emails, in any way, on Foley being a gay man, that is homophobic, it is as simple as that.



Its creapy for a man in his 40's to ask a 16 year old for a picturea and what he/she wants for his/her birthday!

You would not be susposous if a man in his 40's was asking those things of your 16 year old kid?

[Care4all]

Its creapy for a man in his 40's to ask a 16 year old for a picturea and what he/she wants for his/her birthday!

You would not be susposous if a man in his 40's was asking those things of your 16 year old kid?

Foley is in his 50's not 40's

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Its creapy for a man in his 40's to ask a 16 year old for a picturea and what he/she wants for his/her birthday!

You would not be susposous if a man in his 40's was asking those things of your 16 year old kid?

Not if it was a U.S. Congressman my kid had worked for. Asking for a photo, doesn't mean anything sexual unless you make it sexual in your mind. Nothing in the emails is the least bit creepy, until you know Foley is a gay man who talked dirty to boys on the IM. That is when the emails become creepy to you. The reason none of you will post anything from the emails, is because you know I am right, there was nothing sexual about them, unless typical friendly gay behavior is sexual. Foley was nice, Foley was sweet, but that doesn't make him a pedophile or pervert, it makes him a gay man!

The challenge still stands, show me something from the emails that denotes certain perversion or pedophilia, or is even inappropriate sexual innuendo, because I have yet to see that. When you take Foley's sexuality out of the equation, the emails could be interpreted as nothing more than cordial and friendly emails from a mentor to a subordinate, which is done all the time in the real world. It's when you know that Foley is gay, and that he cybered with guys on the IM, that you form your opinion here, and being his homosexuality is the determining factor for you, it makes your viewpoint purely homophobic.

[uscitizen]

what dix meant to say ....Not if it was a Republican U.S. Congressman .......

[Jarod]

Its creapy for a man in his 40's to ask a 16 year old for a picturea and what he/she wants for his/her birthday!

You would not be susposous if a man in his 40's was asking those things of your 16 year old kid?

Not if it was a U.S. Congressman my kid had worked for. Asking for a photo, doesn't mean anything sexual unless you make it sexual in your mind. Nothing in the emails is the least bit creepy, until you know Foley is a gay man who talked dirty to boys on the IM. That is when the emails become creepy to you. The reason none of you will post anything from the emails, is because you know I am right, there was nothing sexual about them, unless typical friendly gay behavior is sexual. Foley was nice, Foley was sweet, but that doesn't make him a pedophile or pervert, it makes him a gay man!

The challenge still stands, show me something from the emails that denotes certain perversion or pedophilia, or is even inappropriate sexual innuendo, because I have yet to see that. When you take Foley's sexuality out of the equation, the emails could be interpreted as nothing more than cordial and friendly emails from a mentor to a subordinate, which is done all the time in the real world. It's when you know that Foley is gay, and that he cybered with guys on the IM, that you form your opinion here, and being his homosexuality is the determining factor for you, it makes your viewpoint purely homophobic.



Come on, of corse you would be conserned, you are being silly now.

[maineman]

Dixie: knowing of the content of the IM's.... are the emails now creepy to YOU too?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

what dix meant to say ....Not if it was a Republican U.S. Congressman .......

I am trying to imagine a scenario where my kid would be working for a Democrat................. maybe as a Spy? Nevertheless, it wouldn't matter, unless I knew the Congressman was gay and had talked dirty on the IM. There is nothing in the emails that "creeps me out" or "sets off red flags" on their face, it's only after knowing about the IM's and Foley's sexuality, that the emails become questionable. As I said, take the test... read the emails as you pretend that you know for certain Foley is straight... does it have the same conotation? Not in the least!

[uscitizen]

So Republicanism is inherited Dix ?

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

So Republicanism is inherited Dix ?

No, I just have smart kids.

[maineman]

they stayed away from their dumbass daddy for years on end...I would have to agree

[Care4all]

Yes, and we know that ALL Christians HATE Gays! Which is precisely why Democrats think Republicans should have booted a six-term Congressman, because they discovered he was gay. Fortunately Republicans have the Democrats to remind them how intolerant and bigoted they are.

I'm really glad we've established this new guideline for booting people out of Congress... Now, when we disclose the cordial and friendly emails from Nancy Pelosi to a former female page, we can immediately boot her ass out of Congress on the presumption that she is guilty of being a pedophile. It's a relief to know, we don't really need any actionable evidence, just suspicion alone is enough. Ahh ha!... there's a "red flag" she said she liked her pretty smile! Buh-Bye, Nancy!

Seriously, you need to really think about the parameters and criteria you are trying to establish here, I don't think you really want to go down this road, because it can get real ugly fast.

Your idiocy astounds me.... EVERYONE KNEW THAT FOLEY WAS GAY in congress....him being gay NEVER caused an uproar with the Democratic or republicans in Congress....it was WELL KNOWN.....

These inproprieties of his, had to do with PREYING on MINOR AGED Pages, and the republican leadership being told about it OVER AND OVER AGAIN, and the leadership IGNORING IT.....

your song and a dance won't ever change those facts Dixie...

Though I will say it has been QUITE INTERESTING to see how your "twisted" mind works... ;)

care

[klaatu]

Hello? Virtually every gay man I know, has a fondness for young men! Are ALL gay men creepy to you, Black?


Just as young adult women and men who look physically mature have the ability to turn straight women and men on..American Beauty anyone? anyone here who would deny this is full of shit. Foley has problems..yes indeed, but the Democrats and anyone else who have repsonded to this thread by implying that the republicans are the only ones who have politicised this issue.. are not only full of shit... they are bursting at the seams. Dixie is right on in this thread and has kicked ass.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

These inproprieties of his, had to do with PREYING on MINOR AGED Pages, and the republican leadership being told about it OVER AND OVER AGAIN, and the leadership IGNORING IT.....

That is just plain factually incorrect. There was no evidence of Foley "preying" on anyone. There were some cordial and friendly emails, which could be construed as Foley being a homosexual, and nothing more. Last I checked, Foley being a homo is not a reason to launch a full-scale investigation into his personal sex life.... (you guys haven't changed that policy have you?) As soon as it became public that Foley had engaged in inappropriate behavior, he was asked to resign and an investigation was launched. You're trying to score a few extra points by claiming repubs should have been more "homophobic" about Foley, and questioned his behavior a long time ago, but you can't support that argument with anything that could have been legitimately questioned, other than the man's sexuality. In other words, you are all a bunch of bigoted homophobic hypocrites, who think that homosexuality is "creepy" and "disgusting."

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

they stayed away from their dumbass daddy for years on end...I would have to agree


Too bad your son couldn't stay away from you for years.

[Damocles]

Too bad your son couldn't stay away from you for years.
Nobody quoted it...

*sigh*...

It ends.

[uscitizen]

No, I just have smart kids.
Dix, I will not pick on your children, they can't help who their daddy is.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Dix, I will not pick on your children, they can't help who their daddy is.


Well that is wise of you, because, not only could my kids whip your candy ass, they are vastly more intelligent than you as well.

[uscitizen]

Well that is wise of you, because, not only could my kids whip your candy ass, they are vastly more intelligent than you as well.

How typical, I be nice and you act like the redneck asshole that you are ;)
I remember that my dog can whip your dog tune from about 3rd grade.

[maineman]

Too bad your son couldn't stay away from you for years.

of course, my sons would disagree.... we have very normal and supportive relationships.

but you wouldn't know anything about them, and it is clear you wouldn't know a normal supportive relationship if one jumped up and bit you.

Why WAS it that you didn't even know your daughter's whereabouts for more than a decade? Where I come from, that's not the way good fathers operate.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

How typical, I be nice and you act like the redneck asshole that you are ;)
I remember that my dog can whip your dog tune from about 3rd grade.

Hey, just stating the facts. If it makes you feel any better, they can probably whip my ass too! I damn sure wouldn't mess with my oldest, the black belt. Of course, they aren't as smart as I am, they are pretty damn close, but having their mother's genes is a handicap for them. I still think they are vastly smarter than you, or most anyone on this board.

[Damocles]

Just enjoy them, and leave them off the board. Both Maine and Dix need to end this. There are better things to argue about on a poli-board.

[maineman]

and Dixie knows exactly what needs to occur for me to do my part to "end this"

it really is quite simple: just apologize - as I already did to him long ago - for saying terrible things about me and my sons.

I deserve that.

[Damocles]

As I said, somebody needs to be the hero and just end it. Dix, you wanna step up to that?

[uscitizen]

Dix I am not worried about who can whip my ass. That is a redneck worry, not mine.

[uscitizen]

Damo, I am not sure either one will step up to the plate....

[maineman]

As I said, somebody needs to be the hero and just end it. Dix, you wanna step up to that?

let's not forget, damo, that I have already stepped up and made my apologies to Dixie. His reciprocating gesture is well past due.

[maineman]

and damo...as a further good faith gesture on my part, you will notice that I have removed the incriminating Dixie quotation from my signature line.

[uscitizen]

Dump the hatred Maine, it only burdens you.

[maineman]

I pretty much have..... I respond to him now.... he needs to do the right thing and apologize to me and accept my apologies to him and then get back to getting his ass kicked by me in debates regularly.

Thinking of it that way, however...one can see why he might be reluctant to settle the grievance. ;)

[uscitizen]

aww don't worry about him Maine. I believe you expect too much from Dix. I doubt that he will ever admit to being wrong. Unless he wrangles it around so he was right by being wrong :)

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

You want an apology, asshole? Here goes...

I am deeply and profoundly sorry that my example using the rumors that you are a pedophile, to make the point that it's not fair to judge based on rumors, was taken completely out of context by you. I am sorry that you lack the moral character to be honest with yourself as well as the people on this board, about the facts of what I say and mean by my remarks. I am sorry that this egotistic obsession you seem to have with being apologized to, has turned you into the kind of perverted pond scum who would threaten to rape my daughter at gunpoint, then claim it was the booze talking. I am sorry that you feel the need for an apology from me, after saying the things you said about my daughter, and continuing to drag my personal life onto the message board. I'm sorry that I don't live near Maine, where I could make a personal visit to you and settle this matter face to face, and cure your habit of threatening people's kids. I'm sorry that you don't consider yourself fortunate to be alive after threatening my family the way you did, and instead, insist on being apologized to. And I am sorry that you apparently don't realize, your continued protests only lend credibility to the charges of your pedophilia sickness, and you would have been better served to just let this die, as you've been repeatedly advised to do.

But mostly, I am truly sorry that I have devoted this much time and energy posting on this matter, or even acknowledging your pathetic existence.

There's your fucking apology!

[maineman]

aww don't worry about him Maine. I believe you expect too much from Dix. I doubt that he will ever admit to being wrong. Unless he wrangles it around so he was right by being wrong :)


prescient

good call

[uscitizen]

Yep, he is very predictable. Those of narrow minds always are.

[Jarod]

That read like a papal apology!

[Care4all]

These inproprieties of his, had to do with PREYING on MINOR AGED Pages, and the republican leadership being told about it OVER AND OVER AGAIN, and the leadership IGNORING IT.....

That is just plain factually incorrect. There was no evidence of Foley "preying" on anyone. There were some cordial and friendly emails, which could be construed as Foley being a homosexual, and nothing more. Last I checked, Foley being a homo is not a reason to launch a full-scale investigation into his personal sex life.... (you guys haven't changed that policy have you?) As soon as it became public that Foley had engaged in inappropriate behavior, he was asked to resign and an investigation was launched. You're trying to score a few extra points by claiming repubs should have been more "homophobic" about Foley, and questioned his behavior a long time ago, but you can't support that argument with anything that could have been legitimately questioned, other than the man's sexuality. In other words, you are all a bunch of bigoted homophobic hypocrites, who think that homosexuality is "creepy" and "disgusting."

just a tidbit for YOU, mr. lie through your teeth...for the sake of your partisanship...

Sources: House clerk warned GOP about Foley years ago
POSTED: 12:07 a.m. EDT, October 19, 2006

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Former House Clerk Jeff Trandahl repeatedly raised red flags about former Rep. Mark Foley years before GOP leaders said they knew about Foley's inappropriate conduct with pages, sources said.

Trandahl's lawyers said he is scheduled to testify Thursday before the House Ethics Committee, which is investigating the Foley case.

Two sources close to Trandahl told CNN that he had been monitoring Foley's interaction with pages after being told of troubling behavior by the congressman in the House cloakroom and elsewhere. Trandahl took his concerns to Kirk Fordham, Foley's former chief of staff, many times, the sources said.

Fordham testified last week that he warned House Speaker Dennis Hastert's chief of staff, Scott Palmer, at least three years ago about Foley's conduct, according to a source familiar with Fordham's version of events.

[maineman]

ouch! well done care....

I anxiously await Dixie's desperate attempts to spin away from THAT!

[AnyOldIron]

We should lock Dixie and Maine in a windowless room until they've sorted out their differences.....

[maineman]

he'd be dead in a matter of minutes.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Care, I warned you over a year ago about Maineman's obsession with kids, he even posted his sick perverted fantasies on the board for all to see! Have you taken any action yet? I don't see anyone condeming him, or holding him accountable for his actions, in fact, you all think he's one of your greatest voices. Maybe we should hold ethics hearings on you, and find out why you've failed to act, knowing the details of Maines behavior?

[uscitizen]

Care, I warned you over a year ago about.....

Dixie do you actually think anyone takes you seriously ?

[maineman]

and the slander continues....does anyone wonder why his "apologies" are never taken seriously?

[uscitizen]

Dixie's "apologies" are never apologies.

[maineman]

how can you have "warned" anyone over a year ago, when you yourself have stated that you have never suggested that I was a pedophile? Why do you persist in this slander of me? All I ever asked was that you retract that slander and apologize for it, yet here you are continuing to spew your lies!

[Jarod]

Care, I warned you over a year ago about Maineman's obsession with kids, he even posted his sick perverted fantasies on the board for all to see! Have you taken any action yet? I don't see anyone condeming him, or holding him accountable for his actions, in fact, you all think he's one of your greatest voices. Maybe we should hold ethics hearings on you, and find out why you've failed to act, knowing the details of Maines behavior?

1) THIS IS NOT THE Congress of the United States.

2) You are a known Liar, Foley's acusers were not.

3) You have nuthing to back up your baseless allegations about Maineman.

4) If this were the United States Senate, I am sure Maineman would have been investigated and cleared of your baseless slander by now!

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

Care, I warned you over a year ago about.....

Dixie do you actually think anyone takes you seriously ?


Probably what Republican leadership said to whoever was sounding warning alarms and sending up red flags on Foley, years before anyone had any knowledge of his behavior. Which WAS my point. Thanks!

[maineman]

why wouldn't the republican leadership take seriously the warnings of the Clerk of the House and the Chief of Staff of the congressman involved?

if they did say that to those individuals, that alone is proof of negligence!

[uscitizen]

bump

[Jarod]

If noone takes Dennis Hastert seriously.... he should resign!

[Care4all]

Care, I warned you over a year ago about Maineman's obsession with kids, he even posted his sick perverted fantasies on the board for all to see! Have you taken any action yet? I don't see anyone condeming him, or holding him accountable for his actions, in fact, you all think he's one of your greatest voices. Maybe we should hold ethics hearings on you, and find out why you've failed to act, knowing the details of Maines behavior?

were you born with your stupidity or is this some sort of characteristic that you developed and perfected over the decades of practice?

care

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

were you born with your stupidity or is this some sort of chatacteristic that you developed and perfected over the decades of practice?

care


Oh, it's not stupidity, it's your very same logic, applied to a different situation. I'm surprised you didn't recognize it. You see, logic should apply across the board, if something is a good approach in one instance, it should be a good approach in every instance, if it is based on sound logical principles. So, if it is fair to hold Danny Hastert accountable because some people "warned" him about Foley, it's fair to hold you accountable for the child predator you've been "warned" about as well.

[maineman]

and the slander continues.

[uscitizen]

Oh, it's not stupidity, it's your very same logic, applied to a different situation. I'm surprised you didn't recognize it. You see, logic should apply across the board, if something is a good approach in one instance, it should be a good approach in every instance, if it is based on sound logical principles. So, if it is fair to hold Danny Hastert accountable because some people "warned" him about Foley, it's fair to hold you accountable for the child predator you've been "warned" about as well.

Hopeless.....
Mentally deficient and morally bankrupt.

[Dixie - In Memoriam]

and the slander continues.

It's not slander at all. When you get drunk, and post predatory comments about someones kid, it has consequences. Should I repost what SR deleted from his site? The stuff that was so deplorable, even your liberal ass-wipe friends were calling you to task over? The intricate details of how you wanted my daughter to be gang-raped by disease-infested bikers as you ejaculated on her face at gunpoint? Shall we revisit all the sordid details of your posts about this subject? Or should we behave like adults and drop the petty fawning for apologies, move on, and grow the fuck up?

[maineman]

Cypress has already posted your horrid comments about me that you deny ever happened or claim happened as a response to anything I ever said about your daughter when the timeline makes no sense. It is certainly slander to call me a child predator or a pedophile when you know that such is not the case. Now why don't YOU behave like a gentleman and apologize for slandering me for months on end?