What is Digg?21 Comments
- sharpfork, on 10/12/2007, -3/+18Here is an analogy of the situation.
Say a male teacher writes some nasty sexual emails to one or more 16 year old male students at a boarding school. Upon preofessional review, it is determined that these letters are in line with what a pedophile would right. The Principle of the school does nothing substantial or officail when he finds out abot the emails. A few years later the same male teacher is caught going way over the line with explicit IMs to students. If your kid went to this school, you would want not only the teacher's ass fired and investigated for legal charges, you would want the Principle fired and investigated for legal charges.
Since the House is charged with the care of theses kids who are pages, Foley is the teacher and Hastert is the principle. Since Hastert has admitted he knew about the emails for a long while, It is clear that Hastert needs to resign. He let some ones kid work within reach of someone super sketchy as far as pedophilia is concerned to try to retain a grasp on power for his party. The GOP is more concerned about it keeping power than taking responsibility for this breach of trust. - geronimo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+12*chomps on popcorn*
This will be entertaining. Let's hope in the middle of all this we do what's best for the kids. - scottc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8It's good to see conservatives challenging the Republican leadership. They have masqueraded as conservatives for far too long and have just about destroyed the Republican party.
- FlaG8r, on 10/12/2007, -0/+7There are a lot of conservatives separating themselves from the Republican Party on this one. Tomorrow's Washington Times (known as a strong conservative paper) is going to call for Hastert's resignation.
- danielwsmithee, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6It seems more and more that our two party system is on the verge of collapse. Here is hoping that we can get a strong third or fourth party.
- mv10, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7This is a forgiving country and I believe everyone deserves a second chance, HOWEVERRRRRRR This world has no room for sexual predators. Lock Him Up and Throw away the Key.
- DFrag, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Holy *****! It seems that Bay Buchanan has actually said something that makes some sense!
- Roger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6What a sick *****.
- headzoo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Would Foley's fellow congressman have exposed him sooner, if it wouldn't cause any damage to their party? Probably. So what does that say about this silly (two) party system we have in place? I dunno, you decide. But it seems to me that no one is going to do the right thing so long as it puts a spotlight on their political party, and that's just ***** up. Damn politicians. All of them.
- ZenMojo, on 10/12/2007, -1/+5Zell is an old-school Democrat, a conservative. As Barry Goldwater put it, one day people would view the conservative of that era as a liberal.
Let's put it this way. When an old Democrat sides with the Republicans, it doesn't make the Republican party sane, it just shows that the Democratic party's gotten better. If Woodrow Wilson were alive today, he'd be a Republican.
If Lincoln were alive today, he'd be a Democrat. - tsinder, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4At the very least, this is textbook sexual harassment, given the employer/employee relationship. Moreover, the use of the internet to arrange sexual contact (which some of the messages did) with those under 18 does violate specific internet predator laws.
http://www.fbi.gov/publications/pguide/pguidee.htm - DeadDragon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Maybe one day we'll get a strong 3rd party, probably not anytime soon.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3Foley's actions are indefensible. He made his bed and now must lie in it. Foley's perverted behavior is not a Democratic or Republican thing. There are plenty of politicians we can point fingers at throughout the years from both sides of the aisle. I'm a Conservative first and would vote for a Democrat like Zell Miller in a heartbeat! I don't see the need to defend Foley. I do see the need to defend moral behavior. I would hope Conservatives take the high road even if Republicans choose otherwise.
- macfanboi, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2Alcoholism made him do it. Geez!
- internutdpl, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2You should see this video. It has the Reps. blocking the kicking out of Foley!
http://www.dlundberg.com/the-news/latest/boehner-blocks-investigation-of-foley.html - gcnaddict, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6Tried and convicted of sexual harrasment and, more importantly, *obstruction of justice*? Not if Bush pardons them (which he might)
- boogienights, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3But there are special circumstances when the adult is in a position of leadership or authority over the child (such as a teacher), aren't there? Or does it depend upon the laws of the particular state? Does D.C. have anything like that? What is the jurisdiction (i.e. maybe not all of the behaviour occurred in D.C., or maybe the use of telecommunications makes it federal or something)?
- ichbinladen, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5This would sure be a good year for a strong 3rd party. Too bad Ross Perot pussied out. (Sure he was crazy... but he was option c.)
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0DISCLOSURE: THIS STORY IS SPAM POSTED BY THE FOLLOWING CENTER FOR AMERICAN PROGRESS POLITICAL OPERATIVE TO DRIVE TRAFFIC TO THEIR THINKPROGRESS.ORG SITE & SHAPE PUBLIC OPINION:
Digg.com ID: jlegum, a.k.a. Netscape.com ID: buco, a.k.a. Reddit.com ID: jlegum, a.k.a Judd Legum, Research Director at the Center for American Progress and the editor of ThinkProgress.org.
http://rikki-tikki-tavis-garden.blogspot.com/ - Barbara123, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0When someone is caught in depraved, predator behavior, the hypocrisy of their protectors becomes ever more apparent. Everyone in Congress who knew about Mark Foley and did nothing should resign immediately.
Thankfully, there have been people from all over the political spectrum who have said this. I have been especially impressed with comments from Randi Rhoads, Al Franken, Richard Viguerie (on Lou Dobbs Tonight), Bay Buchanan (on The Situation Room), and of course the inimitable savior of sanity, Jon Stewart.
I also heard the pain in John Walsh's voice on Larry King, when he said he thought he had a good sense of people after 23 years of activism and was in shock. It is stunning how Mark Foley could have sat across a table from John Walsh and been the very type of criminal they both were crafting a law to fight against.
Both of Nancy Grace's shows on the Foley scandal have been magnificent.
Here are some of the points she made:
Exiling yourself into rehab will not allow you to avoid responsibility for predatory sexual behavior because voluntary intoxication is not a defense under the law.
Foley's claim that he was molested by clergy in his youth will not stand. Being a crime victim is not a defense for commiting crimes against children. Indeed, Foley will not name his abuser. No one at Cardinal Newman High School in West Palm Beach, Fla. has any clue who it might have been. Nancy suspects he's lying.
Nancy played Minnesota Democrat Patty Wetterling's campaign ad, which demands a criminal investigation into this scandal. She mentioned that Patty's son Jacob disappeared one afternoon while riding his bike, transforming Patty into a huge proponent of victim's rights.
In her interview with former page Tyson Vivian, she established that Foley selected pages to target by observing them in the cloak room, sought out their personal information without their consent, and contacted them a few months after they left the page program with sexual solicitations over AIM, without revealing his identity for 3 to 4 weeks.
Nancy also interviewed Melanie Sloan of Citizens for Ethics and Responsibility in Washington, who is also a frequent guest on Al Franken's radio show. Melanine said she had given the first set of emails to the FBI in July 2006. These are the emails the Republican leadership said were innocuous. They were not innocuous, Melanie said, "They had, like Bay Buchanan said, predator written all over them."
When someone thought he saw Foley on AIM again and wanted to ask him about the larger political context of his actions, Nancy said, "Larger political context? I want to know why this guy is not in jail. Political Shmolitical. If you tried to clean out Congress, you'd have to get rid of practically everybody. Give me a sinner over a hypocrite any day of the week!"
(As I was watching I had to take a break and blow a kiss at the screen :-)
Then a caller asked what the difference was between Foley and the people they catch on Dateline. And Nancy said on Dateline, people showed up for the meeting. They committed an "overt act." When you plan something, talk about something, it's not prosecutable. The criminal has to commit an overt act.
It was a superb show, but I have something personally to say about this last point. I believe the log IS THE CRIME. The online environment creates a new crime scene. A manipulative conversation targeting an underage child, who is not developed enough to understand how insidiously he/she is being used, who is at the bottom end of a huge power imbalance, is the felony equivalent of taking a pornographic picture of that child in real life. This is especially true when pictures are exchanged or a web cam is used.
The log is the crime, and American law has not reached that point of understanding yet. I have always feared that the child of a powerful man would have to die before Congress would change the law. But with the Foley scandal, God gave us a gift. No Child Died.
The co-Chair of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children was revealed to be a sexual predator 5 weeks before an election where his party was fighting to keep control of Congress.
And maybe, as people with principles like Nancy keep tearing this hypocrisy apart, the public will demand a change in the law to make the "covert act" of these solicitations the crimes they really should be.
Barbara
http://www.ilovenancygrace.com
comments@ilovenancygrace.com - donkeyking, on 10/12/2007, -5/+1You do realize that what he did was not against the law right? The legal age of consent is 16. Now I don't deny he is a sick SOB but he didn't do anything against the law and I also took an unbiased view and it sure seems to me that the kid was sure into it himself and seemed to go along with everything pretty well.
(3) "Child" means a person who has not yet attained the age of 16 years.
§ 22-4108. First degree child sexual abuse.
Whoever, being at least 4 years older than a child, engages in a sexual act with that child or causes that child to engage in a sexual act shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life and, in addition, may be fined an amount not to exceed $250,000. (May 23, 1995, D.C. Law 10-257, § 207, 42 DCR 53.)
§ 22-4109. Second degree child sexual abuse.
Whoever, being at least 4 years older than a child, engages in sexual contact with that child or causes that child to engage in sexual contact shall be imprisoned for not more than 10 years and, in addition, may be fined in an amount not to exceed
$100,000. (May 23, 1995, D.C. Law 10-257, § 208, 42 DCR 53.)
Check out the new & improved 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is