What is Digg?Sponsored by Dragon Age: Origins
Can't get enough Dragon Age: Origins? Check out new footage. view!
DragonAge.BioWare.com - EA presents BioWare's new dark fantasy epic Dragon Age: Origins. '9/10' from Game Informer.
137 Comments
- CGorman68, on 10/12/2007, -33/+135What's the big deal?
He already said he was gay and the man said that he was 21.
So he had gay sex. Big whoop. - Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -17/+74He led the House caucus on MISSING AND EXPLOITED CHILDREN and wrote some SEXUAL PREDATOR LAWS enacted in July. This could also be why it is a big deal.
*****. - scotticus, on 10/12/2007, -11/+66Gay sex: not an issue.
A republican from the party trying to ban gay marriage having gay sex: big issue. - Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -28/+83Clinton didn't even have sex with anyone, much less a man - and it was a bigger deal. I know he was president instead of a senator, but he had sex with a page and hit on people who to my knowledge weren't legal yet. That's why it's a big deal.
So now, which is it? The party of cut and run, or greed and pedo fun? - Paktu, on 10/12/2007, -5/+47Time to bring in Sexual Harassment Panda
- forumgirl, on 10/12/2007, -10/+37@ CGorman68
"He already said he was gay and the man said that he was 21.
So he had gay sex. Big whoop."
Hmm...yeah, well, where to start on this one:
- he used his position of authority to elicit sexual favors
- he admitted to sizing up pages while they were juveniles, then going after them later
- he's from the party that advocates limited rights for homosexuals
- he's sponsored legislation specifically targetting sexual predators
It's more than a little creepy that you're defending the guy. - aaronnohalo, on 10/12/2007, -20/+44our tax dollars at work
- enki25, on 10/12/2007, -9/+31It's ok, his lawyer wants everyone to know that Mark Foley is a gay man. As you can see, this is not a Republican problem, it's a gay problem.
/end wingnuttery - enki25, on 10/12/2007, -6/+30But it shows Foley's intent to have sex with the pages he was IMing. Many of those pages were underage.
- martalli, on 10/12/2007, -4/+23Honestly, this accusation, true or not, deals with sex with a 21 year old. At least that part is legal. One wonders what will turn up as time goes by, although this will bring all sorts of camera-hogs out, too.
- totorototoro, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20 a politician who isn't all talk and no action?
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -2/+20@Wavey: "Mark Foley needed to go down."
Apparently so... - sullyj, on 10/12/2007, -7/+24"The latest headline to grip Capitol Hill comes from the Los Angeles Times: A former House page tells the paper anonymously that former Rep. Mark Foley's online flirtation led to sex in the lawmaker's Washington townhouse when the young man was 21.
And a Florida congresswoman says she's learned Foley was turned away from the page dorm late one night in 2002 or 2003. "
Creepy - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -18/+34GJ hyping your article by leaving out the "HE WAS 21" part.
- Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -20/+35"Clinton didn't even have sex with anyone"
You bought Clinton's line that oral sex is not a form of sex -- even though the term itself has the word "sex" right in it? So it wasn't sexual intercourse, so what, it was still a sex act, it still qualifies as sex.
But whatever. Clinton/Lewinsky is all old news. - Herald42, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16Yes, he had gay sex, which is not the issue -- in fact, he has been on the spot about his sexuality since 2003, in the least. However, he had sex with a former page who he had previously had some authority over, in both the role of a mentor and as an employer. And this isn't even touching on his inappropriate conversations with boys who were pages at the time.
He is a man who has run on a platform of upholding family values and protecting children. His campaigns have mentioned ethics, and how they are important. He has both led discussion regarding exploited children, and introduced legislation meant to punish sexual predators in a more harsh manner. By running on this platform, he made a promise to his constituents that his career would follow in an ethical and virtuous manner -- not in a sleazy and corrupt manner. If he had run on the pledge that he would leave congressional sessions in order to drink and have cybersex with a sixteen year old boy that had been entrusted to his teaching, and they had voted him in, perhaps the "Foley did nothing wrong" argument could be made.
But even then, even having a relationship with a consenting adult who you are an authority over or are responsible for teaching is considered entirely unethical -- to the point that nearly any employer would fire you on the spot, or ensure that you were not "re-hired." The APA and ACA, both professional licensure organizations, will actually revoke your license as a counselor if you even have a relationship with someone you previously worked with -- provided you have not ceased all contact for at least five years. Even after five years, it is very much frowned upon and considered unethical, and your license can still be called into question.
Foley misrepresented himself to his constituents, took advantage of his position, betrayed his district's trust, betrayed the trust and purpose of the entire Congressional Page program, and tarnished the image of the Congress. Any members of either party, especially those in leadership positions, who covered for him are equally as guilty. I honestly expected that he be called before the Committee on Standards of Official Conduct (the House Ethics Committee) immediately, and that he be impeached – especially given that the party in the majority of both House and Senate runs on a platform of restoring traditional values and ethics to America. Instead, I see people making excuses for the man, and denouncing any criticism of him, which honestly shocks me. - dacheetah, on 10/12/2007, -8/+22@Rhine23:
"Sex is defined by an act that can transmit an STI through bodily fluids"
I've never seen such a stupid definition. Are you saying that if you have been the victim of a needlestick incident, where a used needle pierces your skin, mixing your bolidly fluids with a very small amount of someone elses, you have just had sex with that person? Or if you are playing some sport, and someone gets a bloody nose, or something else that makes them bleed, and this blood were to splat one you, and get in your eyes, mouth, or a cut of your own, you have just had sex with that person?
I would say that it's far more probable that STI is defined based loosely on sex, not the other way around... - augmentation, on 10/12/2007, -5/+18"So now, which is it? The party of cut and run, or greed and pedo fun?"
Dugg for the rhyme. - Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+15His lawyer is a joke. "Now, I'm not using this as an excuse, but I want everybody to know that Mark Foley is a gay man [as if that is really relevant] and that he was molested by an [unnamed, probably non-existent] priest when he was a youth. Not that that's an excuse, mind you!! But Mark Foley has had to grow up with the shame of that event hanging over him, and this is the first time he has spoken of it, and he wants everyone to know of it. Not that it excuses his behavior in any way, because it doesn't!! But he wants you to know that....etc. etc."
Rinse, Repeat until the message is said a sufficient number of times to plant the seed in people's minds that maybe it SHOULD excuse his behavior. I hate lawyers. - TheWestExit, on 10/12/2007, -3/+13True but if all it was that Foley had sex with a page then it'd be almost the same reaction. But what everyone upset was that the republican party know about it and tried to cover it for years. And then people latch onto the irony that they're the moral, christian, gay basher party and to have a immoral, gay-for-underage-pages senator that the party tries to protect, That's why this is a big deal.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -5/+15This is a non-starter. There are a lot of 21 year olds of both sexes that will polish an old geezers knob a few times to get ahead in Washington.
WTF do you think Monica was doing with Billy boy?
What goes on behind closed doors in Washington would probably make a billy goat puke.
Maybe the North Koreans will do us a favor and nuke it so we can start from scratch. - soll, on 10/12/2007, -6/+14Wow when you try to soften the blow by immediately calling this poor kid an opportunist... those are some balls right there buddy.
- Herald42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+8If the Democrat who had sex with a page 20 years ago is still in congress, by all means, please point him out. It is unethical behavior, regardless of party, and said Democrat should not continue to be in any position of authority. If he is no longer still in office, however, it's a rather poor comparison, as there is nothing we can do about it now. In the same regard, it does not justify Foley's actions.
This isn't about party as a whole -- this is simply about one man's unethical behavior, and others who have run on a platform of ethics covering up said wrongdoings. The only people who I blame for Foley's abuses of his position in regards to pages (either above or below the age of consent, but who have worked with him within a certain timeframe) are Foley himself and anyone who knew but actively covered it up. - devindotcom, on 10/12/2007, -11/+19I'm all for seeing the guy go down in flames, or more precisely the people who hid this ***** from their constituency, but we should withhold judgment until we know exactly what happened and when - don't need opportunists taking advantage of the system and screwing things up more than they have to be... remember that ugly chick who said she hooked up with Clinton when the Lewinsky scandal was in progress?
- Wamzlee, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11"don't punish people who didn't do anything."
That's the problem, some individuals in the Republican party didn't do a thing. - dtfinch, on 10/12/2007, -3/+1021 isn't exactly underage. But that didn't stop the Clinton impeachment.
- bek99, on 10/12/2007, -4/+11"A former House page tells the paper anonymously that former Rep. Mark Foley's online flirtation led to sex in the lawmaker's Washington townhouse when the young man was 21."
From Senate website:
"Page eligibility is limited to juniors in high school who will be 16 or 17 on or before the date of appointment."
Age 21 = Former Page. - soll, on 10/12/2007, -7/+14You're wrong here. The article states Foley had sex with a page BECAUSE HE DID.
- forumgirl, on 10/12/2007, -2/+8"So Foley had sex with a former page, when the former page was 21. That's just not interesting."
Yeah, it's actually very interesting. Here's a guy in a position of authority, using the page program to size up potential recruits for when they get older, and you think there's no story?
It's a flagrant abuse of power. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+10Just because they are consenting adults doesn't mean it's not a problem.
If a straight teacher has sex with an 18 year old student (consenting adults), it is indeed a problem. But because this guy is a homosexual suddenly nothing can be a problem for him out of political correctness? Give me a break.
If you all want equality then dish out barriers, consequences, and taboos equally as well. It is definitely a problem that someone in Congress is having sex with Congressional Pages, no matter girl or boy. - Joe_rigby, on 10/12/2007, -26/+31Fellatio is not sexual intercourse, it's foreplay.
If he had vaginal or anal sex with Lewinsky, then he had sex with her - I've defined sex in this manner independent of Clinton. What he did was his business, but he didn't head anything explicitly condemning sexual relations with interns.
What did Foley have to say about this?
"It's vile. It's more sad than anything else, to see someone with such potential throw it all down the drain because of a sexual addiction." -- Mark Foley, R-West Palm Beach, September 12, 1998
That's eerily similar to what's happening now - ironic, even.
You should accept what he did was worse than Clinton, it is a big deal, and that every politician is an opportunistic bastard. - Herald42, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5I'm a tad confused, regarding the Studds case. From the article, it seems as though the Ethics Committee investigated, and in a full House vote, he was censured and stripped of the committee chair he held. His constituents seemed to be the only ones to truly want him back at the time (given the vote to censure of 420-3), and so he got voted back in.
Unfortunately, it seems that Congress frowns on the idea of using a Vote of No Confidence (or invoking the Fourteenth Amendment) to depose of its own peers (see: Joseph McCarthy, also given the same punishment of censure), and thus the only true way to remove him from office would be to ensure that he was defeated in his election. From what I can tell, Studds got the most severe punishment Congress has given since its vote of no confidence on Sec. of State Dean Achenson for being a defender of a known Soviet spy, and labeled as a Communist himself.
Frankly, I prefer the Parliamentary system's willingness to depose of certain "questionable" peers. - jonjon602, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7hehe cant wait for the GOP talking points on this... lets just label Foley as a Dem...no wait thats been done .see faux news..
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Well, by this standard, I had sex with a Girl Scout -- when I married and my wife was 23 and had left the scouts eight years earlier. You people are nuts.
- lightmywifire, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6Good article, horrendous title. The better part is about the response from the GOP about the situation, not the fact that, yes, Foley is gay. We could kind of assume he had gay sex. Coming out and reporting he did it with a legal partner shouldn't be news.
- Wavey, on 10/12/2007, -4/+9Zing!
Bad choice of words on my part, heh. - knyghtryda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+5Agreed with the comment. Its not the sexual act that mattered, nor the genders involved. Its the fact that it was between people with a definite power difference and a definite professional relationship. That right there is normally either called a) quid pro quo sex or b) sexual harassment. take your pick, both are wrong.
- foamweapons, on 10/12/2007, -5/+10Foley IM: Do I make you a little horny?
...
That makes me a Sad Panda :( - xedd, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"Interesting to see the dems so homophobic."
It's VERY interesting to see Republicans defending GAY banter between an adult and teenagers, and defending GAY SEX between a POLITICIAN and a 21 year-old congressional page!
Hell must be freezing over. - IrishLadd, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8I'd like to ask the diggers here why this is all being put on the republicans? One man made a few (that we know of) mistakes, but why should the party go down in flames because of it?
Punish Foley for what he did, and possibly those who covered it up, but don't punish people who didn't do anything.
@ jamessavik
Thanks for the laugh. I aggree, the North Koreans could do us a favor, but hell, since when do they do anyone a solid? - knyghtryda, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4gotta love the Daily Show for showing that clip :)
- enki25, on 10/12/2007, -10/+14Good point, and one time CNN put a black X on Cheney's face.
- inactive, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7"Maybe the North Koreans will do us a favor and nuke it so we can start from scratch."
Hey now! At least send me an email with a heads up so I can leave in a hurry. :P - sulthernao, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8Yes, and at one point, Lincoln was a Republican.
- forumgirl, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8"The democrats are the party of the homosexuals."
Just wanting that to be true won't magically make it so.
Didn't you get the memo? No one cares what people like you think anymore. - Obvioustroll, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@jamessavik -
That turns out to have been the best part of the Clinton Legacy (and Bush I) - 12 years of Congress and the White House at each other's throats, unable to do any damage to the rest of the country. - knyghtryda, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5Gay, straight, bi, it doesn't matter. He screwed a subordinate. Thats what matters. Don't try using homophobia as a shield on this one.
- Obvioustroll, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5 You mean, Foley committed perjury, too?
- forumgirl, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9"forumgirl who are people like me? People who have opposite viewpoints from you?"
No. People who blame Democrats when Republicans do things wrong.
Foley scandal? Democrats advocate for homosexuals!
9/11? Clinton's fault!
No WMD? The Democrats believed it too!
Every once in a while, try blaming the people who are actually responsible for everything that's broken, instead of the people you've pre-decided not to approve of. It will do wonders for your credibility. - FrankieB078, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4At least the guy was 21...but who knows how many lewd comments were sent to the guy before he was of age? I'm no gay basher, if he wants to ***** guys thats all good, but to start flirting while he was underage would be bad news in my book.
-
Show 51 - 100 of 137 discussions
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is