Foley: Wasn't his rights violated?

[5thGenTexan]

So, if the IMs end up being a prank to mess with a gay man by another legal adult, wouldn't this be sexual-orientation modivated harrasment? Hasn't Mr. Foley's civil rights been violated?

Will the ACLU step up in defense on Mr. Foley? This targeted arrasement has caused him the loss of his career and public humiliation and riducule.

Will the Rebpublications act this time?

[woofie]

Too many questions


The ACLU will be contacting you

[TChris]

Well, if they is been violating, than thee peoples who done the violated bitter bee throwing inn jail! ;-)

[MaineVoter2002]

The questions still remain...


WHEN DID THE IMs GET INTO THE HANDS OF THE OPPOSITION?
HOW DID THE IMs GET INTO THE HANDS OF THE OPPOSITION?

Were the democrats snooping? Spying? Stealing? Could THIS be the REAL next Watergate?

[bruin66]

Foley: Wasn't his rights violated?

Try using a grammar checker.

[TruthShallSetYouFree]

Sounds like one of those hate crimes the dems are so fond of speaking out against. Of course, democrats experience cognitive dissonance when a gay republican is harrassed.

[VRWCmember]

Hasn't Mr. Foley's civil rights been violated?

Yes, they has.

[jennyjenny]

meanie. ;-)

[TommyDale]

Someone is guilty of releasing or distributing private communications without the consent of the other party. It falls under the category of illegal wiretapping. There is a crime here, and it should be investigated and prosecuted!

[trisham]

You're joking, right?

[acw011]

I seen on another thread that they was.

[SoldierDad]

Of course, democrats experience cognitive dissonance when a gay republican is harrassed.

... or a conservative Black, a conservative woman, a conservative Hispanic, or a conservative ________.

[loreldan]

To be truthful, I don't think any of us should be defending Foley. Even if he was set up he was still prowling around for underage boys. Even if the Democrats used a witch hunt to find this out, I hope every child molester is found out. (I don't really care how.) I don't care if "his rights" were violated. IMO child moesters shouldn't have rights. Forget Foley. Good riddance. Now let's start a real hunt to find all the other perverts in Congress. Republicans and Democrats.

[BradD11]

So, if the IMs end up being a prank to mess with a gay man by another legal adult, wouldn't this be sexual-orientation modivated harrasment? Hasn't Mr. Foley's civil rights been violated? (yes)

Will the ACLU step up in defense on Mr. Foley? This targeted arrasement has caused him the loss of his career and public humiliation and riducule. (They should)

Will the Rebpublications act this time? (probably not)

Through all of this, and we have seen this time and time again, both parties will react aggressively defending one and attacking the other.

The problem: Both parties will use this to their advantage, and will make it their focus concerning the elections in november.

The real problem: A couple days before the house passed a bill basically taking away the 4th ammendment. The liberal press refuses to cover it, the dems are a bunch of wusses, and the republicans have completely forgotten about what limited government is all about.

[5thGenTexan]

Joking? How so? This is a character exposing moment for the Democrats:

• Do they defend a person who was targeted based on his sexual orientation or not? Do they publicly wring their hands over his public humiliation and the loss of his career?
  
  
• Do they speak out on the privacy violation by publishing private conversations between two legal adults without the consent of all parties in the conversation?
  

Do they stand by their stated principles on these issues, regardless of the real victim's (Foley) political party?

Or, do they show themselves for what they are: a party that simply pandering to these groups and only seek to keep them on the plantation.

Will the Republicans respond, or just give them another pass?

[trisham]

Do they defend a person who was targeted based on his sexual orientation or not? Do they publicly wring their hands over his public humiliation and the loss of his career?

Do they speak out on the privacy violation by publishing private conversations between two legal adults without the consent of all parties in the conversation?

Do they stand by their stated principles on these issues, regardless of the real victim's (Foley) political party?

Or, do they show themselves for what they are: a party that simply pandering to these groups and only seek to keep them on the plantation.

Will the Republicans respond, or just give them another pass?

****************

It's clear they've already chosen to condemn Foley simply because he's a Republican. In fact, they are like jackals to a kill. The Democrats have demonstrated that they are not a party of principles, but of political expediency and partisan politics.

I sincerely hope that Hastert does not resign.