Posted on 10/02/2006 6:17:26 AM PDT by libstripper
If there were an Academy Award for Hypocrisy, the surefire favorite for 2006 would be the Democratic Party. Just two recent items make the decision a virtual certainty:
The Representative Foley "scandal" is really worthy of a whole book on hypocrisy. On the one hand, we have a poor misguided Republican man who had a romantic thing for young boys. He sent them suggestive e-mail. I agree, that's not great. On the other hand, we have a Democratic party that worships ( not likes, WORSHIPS ) a man named Bill Clinton who did not send suggestive e-mails as far as we know, but who had a barely legal intern give him oral sex kneeling under his desk in the Oval Office while he talked on the phone to a Congressional Committee Chairman, took great pleasure in putting a cigar in her orifice and then smelling it and tasting it, and having her fellate him when in the sacred seat of power of the world's leading Republic.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectator.org ...
Dear Condor51,
In one of the IM conversations that has been published, the page reminded Mr. Foley that he was not yet of age, yet Mr. Foley's side of the conversation may have crossed the line in terms of how explicit he was.
sitetest
It's not just about Lewinsky, it's about the workplace and everyone else there.
yer right, as usual
Aw man! How'm I gonna finish my breakfast now??
Yech!!!!
I know its about the workplace and everyone else there. But, if there is no threat to the job...if the person who was "harassed" says there was no threat or advancement, and she/he had the affair and no regrets - has harassment taken place? No it hasn't... can the supervisor then be charged with harassment? You are saying its a blanket law. Supervisor/subordinate no matter what...harassment!
I must not have made myself clear. Nothing Foley did is defensible. HIs relationship with the pages ought have been based upon Foley acting in loco parentis. Personally, I suspect the emails and the IM'ing were not isolated instances. I sure hope that is all they represent though
The problem, Ben, is that the Republican Party sells itself as the party of morality, of Christianity, of decent behavior. It does not ally itself with sexual immorality or perversity of any sort. So for the Republican leadership to sweep this under the rug for so long and try to run this guy for reelection is hypocrisy.
And before anyone says that Denny Hastert didn't know about it until just the other day: Ben, the gay community in Foley's district in Palm Beach knew Foley to be queer and a predator. A lot of people on the Hill knew about this and had to warn young pages about Foley. It was not much of a secret, apparently.
What they had to warn the kids about was not that Foley had a "romantic" thing for young boys, but that he was a predator. To call what he was doing "a romantic thing" trivializes and glamorizes a filthy perversion.
Yes, what Gerry Studds and Teddy Kennedy and Bill Clinton and Barney Franks did was profoundly wrong. All of them ought to have been horsewhipped and driven from office, then put in jail. But if we are indeed the party of decent people, the party of normalcy, the party of Christianity, then we cannot make excuses for what Foley did.
The Republican Party is now going to lose big-time in November. That means we are all going to be punished for what this one evil man did.
I hadn't heard of them still being under age. So if that's the case Foley should be doing hard time. He'll be Tyrone's b*tch by day two in the Graybar Hotel.
It's because of people like Bill Clinton and Barney Frank that the Republicans are able to take the moral high ground in topics such as gay marriage and the like.
To keep this goober as the freaking chairman of the committee for exploited children all the while it was well known that he was gay and had a scent of scandal on him is beyond prepostorous.
I am more outraged at the way the MSM and Washington Post has made Woodward's book the top story of the week. It's disgraceful...and a good thing I'm not president.
Beckel bristled mightily and said he didn't appreciate being intro'd that way.!
In the place of a parent? His relationship with the pages should be based upon Foley acting place of a parent? Well, we put parents in prison who do what Foley was hoping to do.
No, I don't think we are going down big in November. Most races our local issues. So, my local congresswoman is not going to be driven from office because of what Tom Foley or Dennis Hastert did or did not do.
"it really is no different than the Lewinsky fiasco"
Except that, based on information disclosed thus far, Foley did not suborn perjury or lie under oath to a grand jury.
Dear Condor51,
"I hadn't heard of them still being under age."
I'm only aware of one IM conversation where that seemed to be the case. Mr. Foley's correspondent said something like, "Hey, remember, I'm still under age."
As well, my impression was that this conversation was a bit milder than some of what else I read.
Nonetheless, if we are to say that the law states that one may not have a sexually-graphic electronic conversation for the purposes of prurient interest with someone aged 16 or under, then it seems appropriate to investigate Mr. Foley to determine whether, and to what degree, he broke the law.
sitetest
The homosexualisation of America has been so complete and so successful that few (outside of FR) understand just how predatory and promiscious homosexuals are. And adult homosexuals (chickenhawks) have a long history of chasing petty young "hot" men. Most Americans think gays are towards other men like normal men are towards women. All one has to do is remember the homosexual crimes of the clergy had to do with adolescent males, not children.
Gays lust after young guys.
No kidding. Thatt is just what I have been advocating
Many organizations try to prevent romantic/sexual relationships between individuals where one is in a chain of command directly subordinate to the other. It can become difficult to tell if and when the relationship is truly consensual, or conversely, when it ceases to be truly consensual.The organization may, but that doesn't make it illegal.
Where the disparity between the two partners is as great as in the case of Mr. Clinton and Ms. Lewinsky, it wouldn't be unfair to say that the relationship may be viewed as inherently abusive.It might be abusive, but, again, that doesn't make it illegal.
The reason I ask is that my understanding of sexual harassment is that it involves unwanted or unwelcome sexual advances. My recollection of the whole Monicagate affair was that she pursued him, not the other way around.
Thanks
This is one of the worst cases of sexual harassment I've ever heard of. First the gap in power is immense. Second, a hostile work environment was created.
How would you like it if you were one of the interns, and one of your co-workers,let's call her Monica, was during working hours, messing around with the boss, at work?
Other co-workers had to cover for her, handling some of her responsibilities, because she was 'busy'.
Once it became a news story. being a 'whitehouse intern' became a joke. and didn't look nearly as impressive ont he resume.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.