Protect our Children

[TexasTiger 13,053]

http://www.votervoice.net/groups/foley/

[AURaptor 1,128]

A hyperlink isn't a message. Just a link. Hard to comment on something when there's no message.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

A hyperlink isn't a message. Just a link. Hard to comment on something when there's no message.

Here is a message:

http://clerk.house.gov/members/electionInf...16th/index.html

Current Vacancies

Office of the Sixteenth Congressional District of Florida

Formerly the Office of Representative Mark Foley

The Washington, D.C. office and the district offices of the Honorable Mark Foley will continue to serve the people of the Sixteenth Congressional District of Florida under the supervision of the Clerk of the House of Representatives. Representative Foley resigned effective close of business September 29, 2006.

[Tiger in Spain 0]

There will be more members of senate and congress caught up in this before its over.

Hang everyone that preys on children.

[Tiger Al 0]

A hyperlink isn't a message. Just a link. Hard to comment on something when there's no message.

Here's a message from the link:

"I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner for guiding this important legislation through the Judiciary Commitee, and Congressmen Lamar Smith, Mark Foley, and Earl Pomeroy for their leadership on this bill. They have worked tirelessly to protect the health and safety of children.

[otterinbham 0]

I oppose capital punishment. But I would reconsider for child molesters.

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

What this really highlights is the wholesale corruption of our government. The complete subversion of ethics to narrow political gamesmanship.

It's time to clean house on both sides of the aisle. Get them out. Heck, pick the first 454 people out of the phone book to replace our current congress. I bet they would do a better job than what we have now.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

I oppose capital punishment. But I would reconsider for child molesters.

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

What this really highlights is the wholesale corruption of our government. The complete subversion of ethics to narrow political gamesmanship.

It's time to clean house on both sides of the aisle. Get them out. Heck, pick the first 454 people out of the phone book to replace our current congress. I bet they would do a better job than what we have now.

Here, Here. But can it be done?

[DKW 86 7,451]

I oppose capital punishment. But I would reconsider for child molesters.

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

What this really highlights is the wholesale corruption of our government. The complete subversion of ethics to narrow political gamesmanship.

It's time to clean house on both sides of the aisle. Get them out. Heck, pick the first 454 people out of the phone book to replace our current congress. I bet they would do a better job than what we have now.

Here, Here. But can it be done?

I am a supporter of the Third Choice Party now. The two we have are just silly copies of themselves.

[Tiger Al 0]

I oppose capital punishment. But I would reconsider for child molesters.

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

What this really highlights is the wholesale corruption of our government. The complete subversion of ethics to narrow political gamesmanship.

It's time to clean house on both sides of the aisle. Get them out. Heck, pick the first 454 people out of the phone book to replace our current congress. I bet they would do a better job than what we have now.

Here, Here. But can it be done?

I am a supporter of the Third Choice Party now. The two we have are just silly copies of themselves.

Then why do you consistently, aggressively defend the GOP at every turn?

[DKW 86 7,451]

I oppose capital punishment. But I would reconsider for child molesters.

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

What this really highlights is the wholesale corruption of our government. The complete subversion of ethics to narrow political gamesmanship.

It's time to clean house on both sides of the aisle. Get them out. Heck, pick the first 454 people out of the phone book to replace our current congress. I bet they would do a better job than what we have now.

Here, Here. But can it be done?

I am a supporter of the Third Choice Party now. The two we have are just silly copies of themselves.

Then why do you consistently, aggressively defend the GOP at every turn?

Where have you been Al? I dont defend the Republicans at every turn. I dont criticize EVERY SINGLE THING they do so I guess in your closed minded little world I am a total homer.

We have done this ad nauseum. We Conservatives can and do criticize Republicans. Please show the one time you or Tex have EVER, and I mean EVER, criticized the Democrats.

The Republicans may force Hastert out of the Speaker's job. If he was a Democrat, he would be getting a medal for this stuff. Just look at Wright. He had 69 separate ethics charges filed on him and they defended him like a battalion of Spartan soldiers.

Did Hastert do it right? Probably not. They are correcting it now though. If this was th Dems, all we would hear is that it was a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, a Kabal" or some other BS.

[Tiger Al 0]

I oppose capital punishment. But I would reconsider for child molesters.

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

What this really highlights is the wholesale corruption of our government. The complete subversion of ethics to narrow political gamesmanship.

It's time to clean house on both sides of the aisle. Get them out. Heck, pick the first 454 people out of the phone book to replace our current congress. I bet they would do a better job than what we have now.

Here, Here. But can it be done?

I am a supporter of the Third Choice Party now. The two we have are just silly copies of themselves.

Then why do you consistently, aggressively defend the GOP at every turn?

Where have you been Al? I dont defend the Republicans at every turn. I dont criticize EVERY SINGLE THING they do so I guess in your closed minded little world I am a total homer.

We have done this ad nauseum. We Conservatives can and do criticize Republicans. Please show the one time you or Tex have EVER, and I mean EVER, criticized the Democrats.

The Republicans may force Hastert out of the Speaker's job. If he was a Democrat, he would be getting a medal for this stuff. Just look at Wright. He had 69 separate ethics charges filed on him and they defended him like a battalion of Spartan soldiers.

Did Hastert do it right? Probably not. They are correcting it now though. If this was th Dems, all we would hear is that it was a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, a Kabal" or some other BS.

David, I'm not the one claiming to support a third party, you are.

[DKW 86 7,451]

I oppose capital punishment. But I would reconsider for child molesters.

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

What this really highlights is the wholesale corruption of our government. The complete subversion of ethics to narrow political gamesmanship.

It's time to clean house on both sides of the aisle. Get them out. Heck, pick the first 454 people out of the phone book to replace our current congress. I bet they would do a better job than what we have now.

Here, Here. But can it be done?

I am a supporter of the Third Choice Party now. The two we have are just silly copies of themselves.

Then why do you consistently, aggressively defend the GOP at every turn?

Where have you been Al? I dont defend the Republicans at every turn. I dont criticize EVERY SINGLE THING they do so I guess in your closed minded little world I am a total homer.

We have done this ad nauseum. We Conservatives can and do criticize Republicans. Please show the one time you or Tex have EVER, and I mean EVER, criticized the Democrats.

The Republicans may force Hastert out of the Speaker's job. If he was a Democrat, he would be getting a medal for this stuff. Just look at Wright. He had 69 separate ethics charges filed on him and they defended him like a battalion of Spartan soldiers.

Did Hastert do it right? Probably not. They are correcting it now though. If this was th Dems, all we would hear is that it was a "Vast Right Wing Conspiracy, a Kabal" or some other BS.

David, I'm not the one claiming to support a third party, you are.

And????? I claim to support a Third Party AND The Republicans????? I will support any party that will get the job done in Washington. If the Dems had a REAL conservative anywhere I would likely support them.

Al, You and Tex need to have a class in logic, or maybe just put down the DEM methods of political debate. You guys never answer one question. If you reply, it is always with another question or some off-handed comment that makes little or no sense.

[AURaptor 1,128]

A hyperlink isn't a message. Just a link. Hard to comment on something when there's no message.

Here's a message from the link:

"I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner for guiding this important legislation through the Judiciary Commitee, and Congressmen Lamar Smith, Mark Foley, and Earl Pomeroy for their leadership on this bill. They have worked tirelessly to protect the health and safety of children.

Is it even worth the time to designate between 'pedophiles' , those who take advantage of 'underaged' individuals and those who 'just take advantage of subordinates because of their position. ' ? To make myself clear, all are wrong , but legally there are differences between being a pedophile and fooling around w/ an intern, correct ? Depending on each state's laws, girls can have sex legally anywhere from 14- 16. ( ages may vary, up or down ) What of boys ? And we all know of the case where Representitive Gerry Studds (D-Mass) admitted having sex w/ a 17 yr old male page and yet he wasn't considered a pedophile. and he kept his Congressional seat.

So, 20 yrs later, a gay Republican Congressman sends naughty IM's to a 16 yr old male page, gets caught, resigns immediatly, and suddenly the Dem party starts crying about saving the children ????? Last I've heard, he hasn't admitted to actually having any physical relations w/ this 16 yr old, but that may come out later on.

Can the Dems be so void of intellectual honesty that they now cry about saving the children when just a few yrs ago, they re-elected a gay man for doing FAR WORSE ??

[Tigermike 3,066]

Can the Dems be so void of intellectual honesty that they now cry about saving the children when just a few yrs ago, they re-elected a gay man for doing FAR WORSE ??

In a word, yes.

[Tiger Al 0]

And????? I claim to support a Third Party AND The Republicans????? I will support any party that will get the job done in Washington. If the Dems had a REAL conservative anywhere I would likely support them.

Al, You and Tex need to have a class in logic, or maybe just put down the DEM methods of political debate. You guys never answer one question. If you reply, it is always with another question or some off-handed comment that makes little or no sense.

I have no problem with logic other than trying to follow yours. You claim to be a supporter of some third choice party now, yet, constantly defend a party that's nothing more than, in your words, a 'silly copy' of the Democratic party?

I am a supporter of the Third Choice Party now. The two we have are just silly copies of themselves.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

Yet, Texas Tiger, I wouldn't be so quick to rejoice here. If you can actually get past your political myopia for a second, you'd realize that more allegatons will come to light, and most of them will probably have some basis for them. And Republicans and Democrats are going to be involved.

Not sure where your pissy little comment comes from, but since it obviously isn't based on anything I've said on this thread, I'm left to conclude that your assumptions come from your own political biases. My position is to let the truth come to light and let the chips fall where they may. Dem, Repub, I don't care. Any one preying on kids needs to be found out and dealt with.

In the mean while, this is the big current issue and the circus is what it is. All the effort to deflect and make this about both parties based on what is currently known, is just more political gamesmanship and your as guilty as the next guy.

Maybe the next perv discovered is a Dem. At the present, however, we know that the current Republican leadership protected and enabled this guy, even encouraging to run this time after knowing about the emails. The lying and finger pointing is absurd.

[otterinbham 0]

"Not sure where your pissy little comment comes from, but since it obviously isn't based on anything I've said on this thread..."

Oh, don't be disingenuous, TT. I don't see you waxing indignant over any Democratic sex scandals (Which have been manifold over the past two decades). And lookng at your recent posts, you're pretty much a pure Democratic homer if there ever was one. So it's pretty obvious that you're licking your chops at how this will effect the mid-terms.

However, if you read my previous posts, you'll realize that I'm not letting either party off the hook on any issue. I think Hastert should resign for his covering up on this, and have argued that point over the past couple of days on two different threads. However, on the other side of the coin, I'm fairly sure you would have been in Barney Frank's corner when the prostitution ring was running out of his basement, counselling him to wait out the storm.

And, TT, if you actually bothered to read my post before going off on another one of your hairtrigger rants, you might have actually gotten my point that Congress is corrupt down to its toenails, and a full-blown housecleaning is in order on both sides of the aisle.

Unfortunately, you're too obtuse to get that.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

"Not sure where your pissy little comment comes from, but since it obviously isn't based on anything I've said on this thread..."

Oh, don't be disingenuous, TT. I don't see you waxing indignant over any Democratic sex scandals (Which have been manifold over the past two decades). And lookng at your recent posts, you're pretty much a pure Democratic homer if there ever was one. So it's pretty obvious that you're licking your chops at how this will effect the mid-terms.

However, if you read my previous posts, you'll realize that I'm not letting either party off the hook on any issue. I think Hastert should resign for his covering up on this, and have argued that point over the past couple of days on two different threads. However, on the other side of the coin, I'm fairly sure you would have been in Barney Frank's corner when the prostitution ring was running out of his basement, counselling him to wait out the storm.

And, TT, if you actually bothered to read my post before going off on another one of your hairtrigger rants, you might have actually gotten my point that Congress is corrupt down to its toenails, and a full-blown housecleaning is in order on both sides of the aisle.

Unfortunately, you're too obtuse to get that.

I read your post, (watch the namecalling). I got your point. But you failed to get mine before ripping off on another pissy little rant. You are just another Republican "Homer" who dresses up a bit better than the rest. The biggest current issue in DC right now is how the congressional leadership has handled this mess. This congressional leadership happens to be Republican. If you want to start a thread on the history of sex scandals in DC, be my guest. Lotsa losers from both parties in that one. Neither side has a corner on morality or stupidity, but it is the Repugs who tend to wax on moralistically about such matters, which you would readily admit if you were half as honest and objective as you attempt to paint yourself.

This is a political forum, dealing primarily with current events. If you guys want to talk about that creepy b*****d Gerry Studds, be my guest. No one here has ever defended him to my knowledge. He had an inappropriate affair with a 17 year-old back in 1973 and when it was discovered 10 years later, he was censured by the Democratically controlled House. The voters in his district re-elected the b*****d. That sleazebag supposedly took the kid to Morrocco so he wouldn't be violating any US laws. Still disgusting, though. I haven't heard anyone defend that like some of your fellow Republican Homers have with Foley since 16 is the age of consent in DC. You let those comments slide, though, so I guess you agree with them.

Studds was hardly defended by the Dems since he was formally censured, but that lie has been told a few times on this forum to try and somehow diminish the fact that the leader of the NRCC in 2006 took $100,000 from Foley and encouraged him to run again even after knowing about the emails. Your post attempted to take a specific current issue that has relevance about the current leadership of the current Congress and diminish that issue by blaming everyone for it. You think that makes you "objective." I called you on your bull$hit. I got your point. You're just AURaptor in a nicer suit.

[otterinbham 0]

"I read your post, *******."

Ah. When you can't rebut me, you stoop to petty insults, right? You must hail from the school of thought that believes that the shriller you get, the stronger your position gets. Grow up, you contemptible halfwit, and join a civilized debate of the issues.

"You are just another Republican "Homer" who dresses up a bit better than the rest."

Actually, I do vote Republican most of the time. But I also quite often vote for Democratic candidates. That makes me an independent voter. Unfortunately, you're so ideologically blind that anybody who disagrees with you on any aspect of your position automatically falls into the enemy camp. That makes you as bad as the most fanatic Bushbot on this board, but just a different stripe. I'm just calling you on it.

"The biggest current issue in DC right now is how the congressional leadership has handled this mess."

That's quite a statement. Sure, this scandal is a big deal. But the War in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea, Immigration, the Economy, and half a dozen others loom much larger. And, I'm fairly certain that a huge portion of the electorate agrees with me. However, once again, I made the point that this is a perfect example of the corruption that runs rampant in Congress on both sides of the aisle--A point you cannot seem to fathom. Instead of acknowledging this universal truth, you act like a small child who's had a sucker taken away. The sucker, in your eyes, is a nice little scandal prior to the mid-term that allows you to pick up a half-dozen seats in the house.

To me, it's a simple matter: Hastert should resign for an intolerable failure to put a stop to this guy's behavior. Foley should be prosecuted. How on earth that makes me a Republican homer in your eyes is beyond me.

[TexasTiger 13,053]

"I read your post, *******."

Ah. When you can't rebut me, you stoop to petty insults, right? You must hail from the school of thought that believes that the shriller you get, the stronger your position gets. Grow up, you contemptible halfwit, and join a civilized debate of the issues.

"You are just another Republican "Homer" who dresses up a bit better than the rest."

Actually, I do vote Republican most of the time. But I also quite often vote for Democratic candidates. That makes me an independent voter. Unfortunately, you're so ideologically blind that anybody who disagrees with you on any aspect of your position automatically falls into the enemy camp. That makes you as bad as the most fanatic Bushbot on this board, but just a different stripe. I'm just calling you on it.

"The biggest current issue in DC right now is how the congressional leadership has handled this mess."

That's quite a statement. Sure, this scandal is a big deal. But the War in Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea, Immigration, the Economy, and half a dozen others loom much larger. And, I'm fairly certain that a huge portion of the electorate agrees with me. However, once again, I made the point that this is a perfect example of the corruption that runs rampant in Congress on both sides of the aisle--A point you cannot seem to fathom. Instead of acknowledging this universal truth, you act like a small child who's had a sucker taken away. The sucker, in your eyes, is a nice little scandal prior to the mid-term that allows you to pick up a half-dozen seats in the house.

To me, it's a simple matter: Hastert should resign for an intolerable failure to put a stop to this guy's behavior. Foley should be prosecuted. How on earth that makes me a Republican homer in your eyes is beyond me.

You flatter yourself. You're just the typical Republican with a better vocabulary. You have the key hallmark sign of a Republican, which was the point of the thread-- hypocrisy. (the website I linked to illustrated that key characteristic). You were the first to hurl the petty insult in this exchange and now you try to act above it all.

Such a shame. I had wanted to think you were as truly independent as you strive to appear.

Actually I'm an independed who cast his first vote for Bush's daddy in the 1980 primary, and the Republican, John Anderson, running as an independent, in the general election. In 2000, I voted for McCain. Granted, I have been particulary disgusted with the Republicans lately, but they are the ones running things. There's a communist party in America that I vigorously disagree with, but they don't control the levers that impact my life, so I don't waste much time scrutinizing them. I guess that is hard for you to understand. Or maybe you do, but you don't want it to get in the way of your own petty insults. I'll readily admit that I lean toward the Democrats mostly by default. I'm not thrilled with them, the Republicans have become sooo bad, they are the ones who concern me the most.

[otterinbham 0]

You flatter yourself. You're just the typical Republican with a better vocabulary. You have the key hallmark sign of a Republican, which was the point of the thread-- hypocrisy. (the website I linked to illustrated that key characteristic). You were the first to hurl the petty insult in this exchange and now you try to act above it all.

Such a shame. I had wanted to think you were as truly independent as you strive to appear.

Actually I'm an independed who cast his first vote for Bush's daddy in the 1980 primary, and the Republican, John Anderson, running as an independent, in the general election. In 2000, I voted for McCain. Granted, I have been particulary disgusted with the Republicans lately, but they are the ones running things. There's a communist party in America that I vigorously disagree with, but they don't control the levers that impact my life, so I don't waste much time scrutinizing them. I guess that is hard for you to understand. Or maybe you do, but you don't want it to get in the way of your own petty insults. I'll readily admit that I lean toward the Democrats mostly by default. I'm not thrilled with them, the Republicans have become sooo bad, they are the ones who concern me the most.

Again, here's where you're wrong. I cannot find an insult cast your way in this thread before you referred to my "pissy" thoughts on your original post. I don't know. Maybe you took "myopic" that way, even though that's an apt description of your short-sighted partisan approach on what is really an institituional problem in the halls of Congress. "Disingenuous" basically is an excellent description of your response to my post, given how you obviously relish the idea of having a powerful wedge issue in the hands of the Democrats a scant five weeks before the election. However, there's a big difference between a vigorous debate of the issues and simple name calling. You're the one who chose to descend into this territory, not me.

As far as a being a hypocrite, I defy you to find an instance of hypocrisy on my part. At no point in this entire thread, or in the history of my postings on this forum have I taken a position that isn't consistent around a single thought: Namely, that both parties are deeply flawed and too blind to their narrow self-interests to effectively govern this country. In fact, you have lauded me in the past when I took your side on an issue. Your problem is that once I disagree with you, you automatically lump me in with the Bushbots. That is uninformed on your part, and actually is good demonstration of the central problem in this country--The lack of a middle ground in any political debate. In fact, I'm certain several other strident Republicans on this forum would state exactly the opposite of my political beliefs, having crossed swords with me on an entire spectrum of issues. Again, when you cannot defend your position, you seem to think that a shrill denunciation will do the job nicely.

Actually, our voting is fairly similar. I voted for Bush in 1980 and worked for the Anderson Campaign in Birmingham for three months (Remember the Shelby Finance office on 2nd and 21st that acted as its headquarters?). I also voted for McCain. And, quite frankly, I am disturbed by the present regime's profligate spending, reckless adventures (I was against the incursion into Iraq WAAAAAYYY long before it became unpopular), and flirtation with the religious right.

Further, I am amazed that you cannot ackowledge a basic point that I keep making: Hastert should resign for this shocking ethical lapse. Period. Instead, you blunder on like some lunatic, as if you were the sole guardian of the true and righteous flame. Put away the sackcloth, stop eating the locusts, come in from the wilderness, and stop acting as if people who disagree with you are hopeless nitwits or morally suspect.

[CCTAU 3,351]

Put away the sackcloth, stop eating the locusts, come in from the wilderness, and stop acting as if people who disagree with you are hopeless nitwits or morally suspect.

He lives in a 55 gallon drum. Only gets the vibrations from CNN as his only communcation with the outside world.

Nobody defended Foley wiht the age of consent being 16. I said that is was not a legal issue. Hastert should not resign. This is a country where you are innocent until proven guilty. The demoncrats have turned this into a country where everybody has to prove their innocence first. They accuse anybody of anything. Hell, the media leads the way (Rathergate). In order for any leadership to publically address a situation, they have to have proof, not just hearsay. The leadership did adress it. They spoke to him about it. But to go public and accuse the man of something that you have no solid proof of, is irresponsible. Yes they should have tried to do a little more. But what if the accusations would have turned out to be false?

We have come to the conclusion in this country that its OK to ruin a man's life by accusing him of something/anything. What if it were you that was falsely accused?

Now to Foley and the here and now. Now it has come out and there is an accuser that has the proof. Now is the time to make sure this creep will not represent the views of the conservatives any more. Yeah, yeah, You say they had proof before. But what proof is an email without a recipient? Just because the email was typed, does not mean it was him. Now, having a recipient to back all this up is a different story. I am not defending the man. I am just pointing out how legally now ther is a leg to stand on. All of the poeple in DC are lawyers. They know how the system works. It's not pretty, but it seems that its working now.

Given the above legality of the situation, what should Hastert have done? What would your boss do to you if you more morally backrupt but still legal and did your job? Nothing. Because then you could sue.

The blame for this man's sorry life and morals lie solely with him. Noone else can be held responsible for his actions. Certainly not Hastert.

The demons always want somebody (republican) to resign. Yet in the wake of any scandal, they never demand their own to do the same.

[DKW 86 7,451]

Listened to Glenn Beck today, He had a funny bit about Beer. Beck is a recovered alcoholic. He was making fun of Foley's "blame it on the alcohol" defense.

"It is funny, I have never seen a beer marked 'Warning: Drinking this product can cause you to desire after underage male pages in the Congressional offices. "

[otterinbham 0]

Listened to Glenn Beck today, He had a funny buit about Beer. Beck is a recovered alcoholic. he was making fun of Foley's "blame it on the alcohol" defense.

"It is funny, I have never seen a beer marked 'Warning: Drinking this product can cause you to desire after underage male pages in the Congressional offices. "

Boy, that's funny.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

A hyperlink isn't a message. Just a link. Hard to comment on something when there's no message.

Here's a message from the link:

"I want to thank Chairman Sensenbrenner for guiding this important legislation through the Judiciary Commitee, and Congressmen Lamar Smith, Mark Foley, and Earl Pomeroy for their leadership on this bill. They have worked tirelessly to protect the health and safety of children.

Is it even worth the time to designate between 'pedophiles' , those who take advantage of 'underaged' individuals and those who 'just take advantage of subordinates because of their position. ' ? To make myself clear, all are wrong , but legally there are differences between being a pedophile and fooling around w/ an intern, correct ? Depending on each state's laws, girls can have sex legally anywhere from 14- 16. ( ages may vary, up or down ) What of boys ? And we all know of the case where Representitive Gerry Studds (D-Mass) admitted having sex w/ a 17 yr old male page and yet he wasn't considered a pedophile. and he kept his Congressional seat.

So, 20 yrs later, a gay Republican Congressman sends naughty IM's to a 16 yr old male page, gets caught, resigns immediatly, and suddenly the Dem party starts crying about saving the children ????? Last I've heard, he hasn't admitted to actually having any physical relations w/ this 16 yr old, but that may come out later on.

Can the Dems be so void of intellectual honesty that they now cry about saving the children when just a few yrs ago, they re-elected a gay man for doing FAR WORSE ??

Ahh, but the stinch of the failures of the defeated is so sweet in the nostrils of overcomers.

List of GOP Gays and such - WOW!