Republican Gay Pedophile Foley Gets Off Scott Free
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
- - - - - - - - - -
Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for sending
sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved Foley,
52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce, solicit,
lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
Florida law.
[more]
<http://www.tcpalm.com/news/2007/aug/24/foley-wont-be/>
--
There are only two kinds of Republicans: Millionaires and fools.
The Cunning Linguist
"GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:L1Lzi.74236$Fc.47924@attbi_s21...
> Cheers and toasts at each Republican household this evening.
> - - - - - - - - - -
>
> Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for
> sending
> sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
> investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
>
> That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved
> Foley,
> 52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce,
> solicit,
> lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
> Florida law.
So what's the problem? Democrat Gary Studds took a Congressional page on a
taxpayers expense junket to Europe and corn holed the poor kid. Congress
did nothing. A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing but a a
republican sends email and you want to hang him. I think Studds told the
boy he was going to show the boy how to get ahead in Washington. You can't
have it both ways. Well, not really, according to democrats.
Black Elk
"The Cunning Linguist" <thin...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:9ULzi.4358$Oo....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>
> "GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:L1Lzi.74236$Fc.47924@attbi_s21...
>> Cheers and toasts at each Republican household this evening.
>> - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for
>> sending
>> sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
>> investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
>>
>> That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved
>> Foley,
>> 52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce,
>> solicit,
>> lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
>> Florida law.
>
> So what's the problem? Democrat Gary Studds took a Congressional page on
> a taxpayers expense junket to Europe and corn holed the poor kid.
> Congress did nothing. A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing but
> a a republican sends email and you want to hang him. I think Studds told
> the boy he was going to show the boy how to get ahead in Washington. You
> can't have it both ways. Well, not really, according to democrats.
Two wrongs don't make a right. A pedophile is a pedophile is a pedophile.
--
There is another reaction the evil frequently engender in us: confusion.
[...] The evil are "the people of the lie," deceiving others as they build
layer upon layer of self-deception.
People of the Lie, M. Scott Peck
Black Elk
"The Cunning Linguist" <thin...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
news:9ULzi.4358$Oo....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>
> news:L1Lzi.74236$Fc.47924@attbi_s21...
>> Cheers and toasts at each Republican household this evening.
>> - - - - - - - - - -
>>
>> Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for
>> sending
>> sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
>> investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
>>
>> That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved
>> Foley,
>> 52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce,
>> solicit,
>> lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
>> Florida law.
>
> So what's the problem? Democrat Gary Studds took a Congressional page on
> a taxpayers expense junket to Europe and corn holed the poor kid.
> Congress did nothing. A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing but
> a a republican sends email and you want to hang him. I think Studds told
> the boy he was going to show the boy how to get ahead in Washington. You
> can't have it both ways. Well, not really, according to democrats.
Foley suddenly decided to resign from Congress and end his re-election
campaign in 2006, after the disclosure of questionable emails from himself
to teenagers, see Florida U.S. House election, 2006. Foley had been the
chair of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children.
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Mark_Foley
Fuji
> "The Cunning Linguist" <thinh...@pacbell.net> wrote in messagenews:9ULzi.4358$Oo....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
There is a huge difference between writing sexually
explicit messages to a kid and corn holing a kid.
Moreover, the man was never charged nor indicted.
You do support the Constitution? Perhaps not since
you are obviously a Bush bashing, brain dead
liberal moron.
Baldin Lee Pramer
> There is a huge difference between writing sexually
> explicit messages to a kid and corn holing a kid.
> Moreover, the man was never charged nor indicted.
Because what he did was not illegal, any more than what Foley did.
BLP
Mike Flannigan
"Black Elk" <windri...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:8f023$46cf8c6c$438896fa$38...@DIALUPUSA.NET...
>
> "The Cunning Linguist" <thin...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:9ULzi.4358$Oo....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:L1Lzi.74236$Fc.47924@attbi_s21...
>>> Cheers and toasts at each Republican household this evening.
>>> - - - - - - - - - -
>>>
>>> Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for
>>> sending
>>> sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
>>> investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
>>>
>>> That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved
>>> Foley,
>>> 52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce,
>>> solicit,
>>> lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
>>> Florida law.
>>
>> So what's the problem? Democrat Gary Studds took a Congressional page
>> on a taxpayers expense junket to Europe and corn holed the poor kid.
>> Congress did nothing. A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing
>> but a a republican sends email and you want to hang him. I think Studds
>> told the boy he was going to show the boy how to get ahead in Washington.
>> You can't have it both ways. Well, not really, according to democrats.
>
> Two wrongs don't make a right. A pedophile is a pedophile is a pedophile.
A pedophile is someone who lusts after pre-pubescent children. The kid in
question in the Foley case was under 18, not 13, dipshit.
Damn, you democrats are morons!
Bawhahahahah!
Mike Flannigan
>
> "The Cunning Linguist" <thin...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:9ULzi.4358$Oo....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:L1Lzi.74236$Fc.47924@attbi_s21...
>>> Cheers and toasts at each Republican household this evening.
>>> - - - - - - - - - -
>>>
>>> Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for
>>> sending
>>> sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
>>> investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
>>>
>>> That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved
>>> Foley,
>>> 52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce,
>>> solicit,
>>> lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
>>> Florida law.
>>
>> So what's the problem? Democrat Gary Studds took a Congressional page
>> on a taxpayers expense junket to Europe and corn holed the poor kid.
>> Congress did nothing. A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing
>> but a a republican sends email and you want to hang him. I think Studds
>> told the boy he was going to show the boy how to get ahead in Washington.
>> You can't have it both ways. Well, not really, according to democrats.
>
> Foley suddenly decided to resign from Congress and end his re-election
> campaign in 2006
While Studds, who actually had sex with an under age kid, had no such
decency. Nor did the democratic party which failed to have the decency to
even try and force him out.
Thanks for demonstrating the difference in the parties, dumbass.
Bawhahahahah!
Mike Flannigan
"Fuji" <fujika...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1188007690....@m37g2000prh.googlegroups.com...
Yep.
High five..
<smack>
Black Elk
"Mike Flannigan" <mflan...@belsouth.net> wrote in message
news:anMzi.43967$Lu.1...@bignews8.bellsouth.net...
You seem to know your pedos or do you just fixate on pre-pubescent children?
---
The term pedophile is also used colloquially to denote an adult who is
sexually attracted to adolescents or youths below the local age of
consent,[2] as well as those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse or
child pornography related offences.
Mike Flannigan
"Baldin Lee Pramer" <baldin...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1188008231....@r23g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Yawn... The old age of consent is 16 in DC defense..
Never mind that what they did was immoral and depraved and yet Studds stayed
on while Foley was forced out. Even while what Studds did was WORSE!
Excuses excuses excuses excuses......
Black Elk
It's interesting that you have to drag out a Democrat pedophile to justify
your pedo while I justified neither one. And then there is your interesting
attempt to hide behind the Constitution when you think it convenient. You're
as big of a shyster as your hero Bush. How Republican of you.
---
Foley had been the chair of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited
Children.
---
Once known as a crusader against child abuse and exploitation, Foley
resigned from Congress on September 29, 2006 after allegations surfaced that
he had sent suggestive emails and sexually explicit instant messages[1] to
teenaged boys who had formerly served as Congressional pages.[2][3] As a
result of the disclosures, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) and the
Florida Department of Law Enforcement opened investigations of the messages
to find possible criminal charges.[4] The House Ethics Committee has also
opened an investigation into the response of the House Republican leadership
and their staff to earlier warnings of Foley's conduct.[5]
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mark_Foley
>
Black Elk
Here, I think you cut some of my post.
---
Foley had been the chair of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited
Children.
---
Sort of like putting the pedo in charge of the henhouse.
Jeff
> "GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> news:L1Lzi.74236$Fc.47924@attbi_s21...
>
>>Cheers and toasts at each Republican household this evening.
>>- - - - - - - - - -
>>
>>Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for
>>sending
>>sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
>>investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
>>
>>That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved
>>Foley,
>>52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce,
>>solicit,
>>lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
>>Florida law.
>
>
> So what's the problem? Democrat Gary Studds took a Congressional page on a
> taxpayers expense junket to Europe and corn holed the poor kid. Congress
> did nothing.
<URL: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds />
Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal,
when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of
Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors — in
Studds' case, a 1973 sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male
congressional page who was of the age of legal consent. The relationship
was consensual (which made it legal, in accordance with state law) but
presented ethical concerns relating to working relationships with
subordinates.
...
The House voted to censure Studds, on July 20, 1983, by a vote of 420-3.
While Studds has often been reported as having "turned his back on the
House" as the House read its censure motion aloud,[3] contemporary
reports made it clear that in contrast to Crane, who faced the House as
the motion for his censure was read, Studds faced the Speaker who was
actually reading the motion, with his back to the other members.[4] Also
in contrast to Crane, who left the chamber after his censure, Studds
rejoined the other members of the House after his censure was read.[4]
In addition to the censure, the Democratic leadership stripped Studds of
his chairmanship of the House Merchant Marine Subcommittee.
Of course that is ancient history for anyone but a republican
apologist. But I'm sure you don't want to go back a mere two weeks and
talk about yet another closeted republican having dick in mouth disease.
And just like Mark Foley whose duties were over seeing the Page
Program, this one was in charge of the Young Republicans.
<URL:
http://watchingthewatchers.org/news/1284/rising-republican-accused-deviate-sexual/>
Glenn Murphy Jr., who has been credited with reviving the Republican
Party in in his Indiana county, and was recently elected president of
the Young Republican National Federation (YRNF), has been accused by a
22-year old male of performing an unwanted sex act on him while he slept.
This apparently is the second such charge against Murphy. The first was
made in 1998 but resulted in no criminal charges. Murphy's current
lawyer has publicly responded, claiming that posting the police report
online was unlawful, and that the sex act alleged by the complainant was
consensual.
If the complaint is true, Murphy is a criminal. Even if not true, Murphy
appears to be yet another of the many GOP hypocrites who are and act gay
while serving the anti-gay forces that prevail in the Republican party.
Murphy, whose consulting firm has worked for many Republican candidates,
has been accused of being "fond of using divisive wedge issues, such as
gay marriage, to promote his candidates."
And you find no hypocrisy that the party that claims to be the party
of "family values" has so many closeted encounters. Funny how the same
guys that are moralising on family values have none themselves.
There's something really queer about republicans and high offices.
From Mark Foley's leadership position to Glenn Murphy (director of
Young Republicans) to Dick Cheneys gay daughter and to Karl Roves
homosexual father.
There is an obsession about homosexuals with republicans, yet another
example right here:
> A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing but a a
> republican sends email and you want to hang him.
And it's the same obsession over Clinton's unit.
You repugs are a queer lot.
Jeff
The Cunning Linguist
>
> "The Cunning Linguist" <thin...@pacbell.net> wrote in message
> news:9ULzi.4358$Oo....@newssvr17.news.prodigy.net...
>>
>> "GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in
>> message news:L1Lzi.74236$Fc.47924@attbi_s21...
>>> Cheers and toasts at each Republican household this evening.
>>> - - - - - - - - - -
>>>
>>> Former Congressman Mark Foley is unlikely to face criminal charges for
>>> sending
>>> sexually explicit e-mails to teenage boys, sources close to the yearlong
>>> investigation have told Scripps Howard News Service.
>>>
>>> That could change if new evidence surfaces in the next week that proved
>>> Foley,
>>> 52, sent online messages to male teenagers with the intent to "seduce,
>>> solicit,
>>> lure, entice, or attempt to seduce a child," a third-degree felony under
>>> Florida law.
>>
>> So what's the problem? Democrat Gary Studds took a Congressional page
>> on a taxpayers expense junket to Europe and corn holed the poor kid.
>> Congress did nothing. A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing
>> but a a republican sends email and you want to hang him. I think Studds
>> told the boy he was going to show the boy how to get ahead in Washington.
>> You can't have it both ways. Well, not really, according to democrats.
>
> Two wrongs don't make a right. A pedophile is a pedophile is a pedophile.
Agreed. I hope the dems hear you loud and strong.
The Cunning Linguist
Yes, he had the decency to resign unlike Studds who gave the finger to
Congress.
Mike Flannigan
Ohhhh... So it was okay for Studds to stay on while republicans forced Foley
out. Even though Studds accually cornholed the kid.
And here you claimed you condemed both.
Nice try..
The Cunning Linguist
"Baldin Lee Pramer" <baldin...@msn.com> wrote in message
news:1188008231....@r23g2000prd.googlegroups.com...
Taking a boy toy to Europe on the governments tab is legal?
>
The Cunning Linguist
The point is you are disregarding a dems wrong conduct and condemning a
Republicans wrong conduct. You are also overlooking the fact that Foley had
a sense of shame while Studds told Congress to shove it.
The Cunning Linguist
And you're saying that Foley emailed an exploited child?
>
> ---
>
> Sort of like putting the pedo in charge of the henhouse.
I think that's what the dems did with Gary Studds.
The Cunning Linguist
"Jeff" <dont_...@all.uk> wrote in message
news:13cv77j...@corp.supernews.com...
The point, obvious to anyone but a democrat foil, is that dems voted the
child molester back into office. The pervert didn't even have the decency
to resign and dme leadership stayed quiet.
>
> And just like Mark Foley whose duties were over seeing the Page Program,
> this one was in charge of the Young Republicans.
>
> <URL:
> http://watchingthewatchers.org/news/1284/rising-republican-accused-deviate-sexual/>
>
> Glenn Murphy Jr., who has been credited with reviving the Republican Party
> in in his Indiana county, and was recently elected president of the Young
> Republican National Federation (YRNF), has been accused by a 22-year old
> male of performing an unwanted sex act on him while he slept.
>
> This apparently is the second such charge against Murphy. The first was
> made in 1998 but resulted in no criminal charges. Murphy's current lawyer
> has publicly responded, claiming that posting the police report online was
> unlawful, and that the sex act alleged by the complainant was consensual.
>
> If the complaint is true, Murphy is a criminal. Even if not true, Murphy
> appears to be yet another of the many GOP hypocrites who are and act gay
> while serving the anti-gay forces that prevail in the Republican party.
> Murphy, whose consulting firm has worked for many Republican candidates,
> has been accused of being "fond of using divisive wedge issues, such as
> gay marriage, to promote his candidates."
I htought you dems liked that kind of conduct. I'd think you'd be
congratulating the above.
>
>
>
> And you find no hypocrisy that the party that claims to be the party of
> "family values" has so many closeted encounters. Funny how the same guys
> that are moralising on family values have none themselves.
I find no hypocracy when those who are caught doing wrong are removed from
office or their posiiton. I find hypocracy in those who fail to remove
those who are guilty.
>
> There's something really queer about republicans and high offices.
> From Mark Foley's leadership position to Glenn Murphy (director of Young
> Republicans) to Dick Cheneys gay daughter and to Karl Roves homosexual
> father.
>
> There is an obsession about homosexuals with republicans, yet another
> example right here:
>
>> A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing but a a republican sends
>> email and you want to hang him.
>
> And it's the same obsession over Clinton's unit.
I believe it was a republican basher who started this post.
Mike Flannigan
I fixate on the correct use of the English language as derived from the
Latin.
Nice attempt at painting me as a pedophile because of it though. Good one!
Too funny..
Hahahahaha!
> The term pedophile is also used colloquially to denote an adult who is
> sexually attracted to adolescents or youths below the local age of
> consent,[2] as well as those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse or
> child pornography related offences.
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophile
Yeah. I know how it's used, or more accurately, misused by illiterates such
as yourself.
Factoid: I banged 16 and 17 year old girls when I was 18. Does that make me
a "pedophile"? Or just illegal?
Heh heh heh.. I just love being right.. and with you moron democrats, it's
so easy!
Bawhahahahahaha!
Black Elk
It looks like Repubs attacked Studds without a legal basis as opposed to
Foley:
Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal,
when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of
Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors - in Studds'
case, a 1973 sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional
page who was of the age of legal consent. The relationship was consensual
(which made it legal, in accordance with state law) but presented ethical
concerns relating to working relationships with subordinates.
>>
Black Elk
There was no reason for Studds to be forced out legally, but as is most
often the case with the GOP they want everyone to live by standards they
won't. On the other hand Foley was head of the House Caucus on Missing and
Exploited Children while he was try to seduce minors.
----
Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal,
when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of
Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors - in Studds'
case, a 1973 sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male congressional
page who was of the age of legal consent. The relationship was consensual
(which made it legal, in accordance with state law) but presented ethical
concerns relating to working relationships with subordinates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds
>
>
Mike Flannigan
Yup.. Well said..
Black Elk
Yes, he was exploiting the minor he e-mailed.
Black Elk
Prove it!
>
> Nice attempt at painting me as a pedophile because of it though. Good one!
> Too funny..
>
> Hahahahaha!
>
>> The term pedophile is also used colloquially to denote an adult who is
>> sexually attracted to adolescents or youths below the local age of
>> consent,[2] as well as those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse
>> or child pornography related offences.
>>
>> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophile
>
> Yeah. I know how it's used, or more accurately, misused by illiterates
> such as yourself.
Keep putting your foot in your mouth it seems to be a natural fit.
>
> Factoid: I banged 16 and 17 year old girls when I was 18. Does that make
> me a "pedophile"? Or just illegal?
It does if they were minors and below the age of consent and you were an
adult, you could have been prosecuted. And according to wikipedia you were a
pedophile and could have been legally prosecuted as one. Why don't you ask
the question of your local prosecutor?
---
The term pedophile is also used colloquially to denote an adult who is
sexually attracted to adolescents or youths below the local age of
consent,[2] (^ Ames, A. & Houston, D. A. (1990). "Legal, social, and
biological definitions of pedophilia." Archives of Sexual Behavior. 19 (4),
333-342.) as well as those accused or convicted of child sexual abuse or
child pornography related offences.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pedophile
>
> Heh heh heh.. I just love being right.. and with you moron democrats, it's
> so easy!
>
> Bawhahahahahaha!
Like the braying of a jackass...
Keep slapping yourself on the back dipstick even after you've been proven
wrong and failed to provide any evidence to support your claims.
Black Elk
http://www.dkosopedia.com/wiki/Mark_Foley
---
Studds was a central figure in the 1983 Congressional page sex scandal,
when he and Representative Dan Crane were censured by the House of
Representatives for separate sexual relationships with minors - in
Studds' case, a 1973 sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male
congressional page who was of the age of legal consent. The relationship
was consensual (which made it legal, in accordance with state law) but
presented ethical concerns relating to working relationships with
subordinates.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds
>>
>>
>>>>
Jeff
Well I didn't vote for him and he was censured and his chairmanship
stripped. But apparently his constituency loved him. They even gave him
a standing ovation after he returned from the censure. Rather amazing
considering that this was formerly a strong republican seat.
>
>> And just like Mark Foley whose duties were over seeing the Page Program,
>>this one was in charge of the Young Republicans.
>>
>><URL:
>>http://watchingthewatchers.org/news/1284/rising-republican-accused-deviate-sexual/>
>>
>>Glenn Murphy Jr., who has been credited with reviving the Republican Party
>>in in his Indiana county, and was recently elected president of the Young
>>Republican National Federation (YRNF), has been accused by a 22-year old
>>male of performing an unwanted sex act on him while he slept.
>>
>>This apparently is the second such charge against Murphy. The first was
>>made in 1998 but resulted in no criminal charges. Murphy's current lawyer
>>has publicly responded, claiming that posting the police report online was
>>unlawful, and that the sex act alleged by the complainant was consensual.
>>
>>If the complaint is true, Murphy is a criminal. Even if not true, Murphy
>>appears to be yet another of the many GOP hypocrites who are and act gay
>>while serving the anti-gay forces that prevail in the Republican party.
>>Murphy, whose consulting firm has worked for many Republican candidates,
>>has been accused of being "fond of using divisive wedge issues, such as
>>gay marriage, to promote his candidates."
>
>
> I htought you dems liked that kind of conduct. I'd think you'd be
> congratulating the above.
The wedge issues are of Roves creation. Every Republican and Democrat
before Bush ruled from somewhere around the center. Rove decided that
all he needed/wanted was the hard right base.
I've read Paul O Neal, Richard Clarke and George Tenets books. All of
them had extensive experience in previous (republican) administrations.
All of them say the same thing, that the policy meetings they expected
from previous administrations never happened. Turned out that policy was
subservient to politics, and the politics at hand was to drive a wedge
against the democrats. Now we all know how all those policies have
played out in the fiasco of Katrina, the fisaco of Iraq and the fiasco
of the financial policy.
>
>>
>>
>> And you find no hypocrisy that the party that claims to be the party of
>>"family values" has so many closeted encounters. Funny how the same guys
>>that are moralising on family values have none themselves.
>
>
> I find no hypocracy when those who are caught doing wrong are removed from
> office or their posiiton.
But you, you have to go back 24 years to scrape up your dirt. And you
don't find that strange?
You have a White House that promised a higher ethical standard and
what do we have? Well they are now fleeing like rats from the sinking
ship but why is Gonzales still there? At the very least he is
incompetent, is he not still there because he is obstructing every
investigation into the shady questionable dealings of the White House.
I find hypocracy in those who fail to remove
> those who are guilty.
He was censored and stripped of his chairmanship and it was the job
of the electorate to remove him. He did nothing legally wrong and his
supposed victim has not complained, certainly not the howling that you
are doing.
>
>> There's something really queer about republicans and high offices.
>>From Mark Foley's leadership position to Glenn Murphy (director of Young
>>Republicans) to Dick Cheneys gay daughter and to Karl Roves homosexual
>>father.
>>
>> There is an obsession about homosexuals with republicans, yet another
>>example right here:
>>
>>
>>>A democrats sucks boy dick and you say nothing but a a republican sends
>>>email and you want to hang him.
>>
>> And it's the same obsession over Clinton's unit.
>
>
> I believe it was a republican basher who started this post.
So, it's a current event. Not 24 year old news.
Jeff
Rich Travsky
The page was of legal age. And nearly the whole House censored him. But you
knew that, right?
RT
Rich Travsky
If the trip was work related.
RT
Rich Travsky
Not really. Studds was censored by nearly the entire House. The page was of legal
age.
The Cunning Linguist
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
news:46D11214...@hotmMOVEail.com...
Yes, I knew that. Did you know he refused a legitimate admonishment by
turning his back when the censure was read? Did you know that he never
reimbursed the government for travel expenses of the page? What else didn't
you know?
>
> RT
The Cunning Linguist
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
Well, I guess that would be determined by what you consider "work".
>
> RT
GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia
I think it's funny to read these wingnuts try to exonerate their GAY PEDOPHILE
REPUBLICAN hero Foley by blaming Studds.
The Cunning Linguist
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
Studds didn't literally give the House the finger but stood with his back to
the members of the House when they read the censure. Now about the legal
age of the page. How do we know if the page was of legal age since the name
of the page was never released? But that question is not being addressed
here. A pertinent question would be why Studds felt it necessary to take a
page on a Congressional trip to Europe.
All Mark Foley's email contactees were of age of consent as were the
partners of Gary Studds. Now, the content of the emails sent by Foley may
have been suggestive but hardly more than that. Foloey folded under
pressure (as he should of) while Studds continued with his activities.
Personally, I believe the Congressional Page program is great but I don't
believe it should be a hunting ground for old perverts. These young people
are there to learn, at close hand, the inner workings of the government not
to be a piece of candy in a candy store. Any lawmaker who attempts to take
advantage of a page should become a page in history and shame on those
voters who willingly send the wolf back into the sheep herd.
Both cases are just as repugnant, and wrong, as a high school teacher
sleeping with a student who is under their influence.
The Cunning Linguist
You got it bass ackwards, I'm trying to understand why lib nutbsacks
condemn someone else when one of their won has done the same thing.
BTW, the record shows what Gary Studds was guilty of.. Care to show what
record there is showing what Foley is guilty of?
Rich Travsky
Yup and yes. But that's you distracting from the legalality of the sexual aspect.
RT
Rich Travsky
> "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
So?
> age of the page. How do we know if the page was of legal age since the name
Odd, in another post you said you knew the page was of legal age...
http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0610/14/cnr.07.html
...
BEGIN VIDEOTAPE)
LIN (voice-over): It was an improvable journey, he said so himself. On October
28, 1995, Gerry Studds announced he would not seek reeelection after more than
two decades in the House of Representatives.
...
That was the year that Studds became the first House member to be censured for
having a sexual relationship with a 17-year-old male page.
...
> of the page was never released? But that question is not being addressed
As you can see, the name isn't needed.
Rich Travsky
> "GW Chimpzilla's Eye-Rack Neocon Utopia" <g...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
> >> "Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
> >>>> >>>
Studds was censured. What don't you understand about that and that republicons
knew about Foley but didn nothing?
MioMyo
"Rich Travsky" <traR...@hotmMOVEail.com> wrote in message
Since when is 17-years old of legal age?
Don't believe, see:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerry_Studds
Lamont Cranston
"MioMyo" <USA_P...@Somewhere.com> wrote in message
news:%XqBi.667$ZA5...@nlpi068.nbdc.sbc.com...
Sorry to burst your con bubble, but in Washington, D.C. the age of consent
is 16.
Rich Travsky
HAHAHHAHAHAHA! Missy bitch slapped again!
RT