To the TAIL end!
Posted on 11/16/2011 11:01:13 AM PST by Jacvin
Like most Americans, I'm infuriated at the child abuse scandal unfolding at Penn State. But unlike many other Americans, I'm not shocked, because as a Republican operative in Palm Beach County, I had an uncomfortable seat on the front lines of the Mark Foley page scandal.
In both scandals, power trumped truth. Foley was always rumored to like young men. But there was also ample evidence, which is in everyone's best interests to deny now, that people from both sides of the aisle knew about Foley's predatory behavior well before his messages to pages became public. And the same is true about Penn State’s Jerry Sandusky. The two cases of men in power taking a prurient interest in young boys have obvious parallels, but there are important differences, too – differences that appear to have eluded the idiots dominating the mainstream media.
Sandusky, the disgraced former defensive football coach for Penn State, stands accused of being a practicing pedophile under the word’s accurate definition. Mark Foley, through his text messages to adolescent congressional pages, displayed tendencies for ephebophilia.
snip
But that’s where the differences end, for me anyway. Because as I watch Penn State fans put blinders on as they stubbornly stand by those who enabled Sandusky’s alleged abuses through years of silence, I am painfully reminded of the “circle the wagons” mentality that dominated local GOP circles as Foley’s scandal unfolded.
(Excerpt) Read more at bizpacreview.com ...
And it’s such a good thing that no democrat like Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy or Bawney Fwank ever did anything like that.
hardly the point now is it.
Foley was a creep. but was there ever ANY evidence of him committing an illegal act (even explicit texting) with a minor? I didn’t think so, because it would have been front page news forever. Maybe I missed it.
From my recollection of the era, I believe you’re correct.
This is crap. Mark Foley joked with adults who weren’t even the same room. Jerry Sandusky raped a 10-year-old. Equivalent? Really?
sorry but you’re both wrong there were very sexually explicit messages sent.
you didn’t even read the article did you
you should read the whole article. you’re proof of the problem.
politics
January 2007
E-Mail
Washington
Don’t Ask … Don’t E-mail
Continued (page 5 of 6)
“What do you mean ‘sexually explicit’?” asked Fordham.
Kello glanced at his notes and began reading passages that dealt with hand jobs and lotion. But there was more.
Messages, in which Foley used the screen name Maf54, were posted on the ABC Web site. In one, he presses for details about the boy’s genitalia and his sexual habits:
Maf54 (7:46:33 PM): did any girl give you a haand job this weekend
[Teenager] (7:46:38 PM): lol no
[Teenager] (7:46:40 PM): im single right now
[Teenager] (7:46:57 PM): my last gf and i broke up a few weeks agi …
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny
[Teenager] (7:47:29 PM): lol … a bit
Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself
[Teenager] (7:48:04 PM): no
[Teenager] (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy
Maf54 (7:48:33 PM): wow …
Maf54 (7:48:34 PM): i am never to busy haha …
Maf54 (7:58:59 PM): but it must feel great spirting on the towel
[Teenager] (7:59:06 PM): ya
Maf54 (7:59:29 PM): wow
Maf54 (7:59:48 PM): is your little guy limp … or growing
[Teenager] (7:59:54 PM): eh growing
Maf54 (8:00:00 PM): hmm
Maf54 (8:00:12 PM): so you got a stiff one now …
Maf54 (8:01:21 PM): i am hard as a rock … so tell me when your reaches rock …
Maf54 (8:03:47 PM): what you wearing
Hated this article.....the problem is this “twisting” of labels (Marxism).....He spends a lot of time explaining the “correct” labels and he never uses the correct label for the coach=”Pederast”. It is why these things keep happening.....the Catholic church refused to label the pedophilia of priests as “pederasty” and conducted by”homosexuals”. It is to separate the two dysfunctional “lifestyles” which are connected, because of childhood abuse which is “acted out” again, when adults have control over young boys.
Anyone who argues for “homosexual” rights are advocating child abuse. These people need to be treated....they are intrinsically disordered and corrupted in worldview when children by a perverted adult.
I may have missed something but I don’t think anyone here is arguing for homosexual rights
If you’ll read the article, you’ll find this point is discussed.
I thought it was a good article. He wasn’t trying to excuse anybody or apologize for them, but points out that power was the “ultimate aphrodisiac,” and resulted not only in their ability to seduce these boys but also that the desire to be around or close to power was what kept witnesses from speaking out and protected both these men from the consequences of acts that had been known for years.
He also points out that power goes to the head of people who have it and makes them feel that they are beyond normal morality and also should rightfully be immune from any negative consequences - laws are for the little people. The odious DSK (who is now being linked to a prostitution ring that supplied high-priced prostitutes to luxury hotels) is another example of this.
Thank you. Nothing like a fellow old time freeper who actually reads the article before commenting.
Well, I’m glad I serve a purpose, then. thanks.
OK thanks.
Not even close. Pages must be 16 or older, the age of consent in D.C. is 16 and no investigation of Foley found sexual contact with anyone who was a present page, only two ex-pages who were 18 and 21 at the time.
No charges were ever filed either by Foley's state of FL or by the FBI.
Foley was creepy, but his behavior was in no sense comparable to the Sandusky scandal.
another one who didn’t read the artilce, the age of consent in Florida is 18 and the house refused to release Foley’s emails.
I have a 16 year old boy, and tend to think that “unofficially” the age of consent refers to when the raging hormones come out and he wants to fool around with someone who was born in the same decade as him. Someone extremely powerful with influence over him , who is . . . what . . . fifty or sixty something?? That is consent? Legally maybe, but in what actual universe is that okay?
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.