Replies

Alas NRA2BFree has more than one issue covered in his response. The problem is that in the Foley case a child is involved. No one is disputing or disagreeing with that.

At the same time NRA2BFree assures us that Barney Frank is NOT INVOLVED with a child.

NO, I did NOT say "Barny Frank is NOT INVOLVED with a child." Show me where I said that!!

That's a totally different issue, and none of us know that for a fact. We could surmise that maybe he's not involved with a child since no one has said anything about it ~ and certainly he's public enough person there are those who keep a close eye on him (the Congress seeming to have a high percentage of homosexuals who do, in fact, engage in cruising for sex with minors). All we can really say about Barney, unlike Mr. Frank, is that Barney hasn't been caught!

You have TOTALLY missed the point!! It's NOT about Barney Frank, so don't go there. Our focus has to be on FOLEY! Right now, I don't care about Barney Frank. I care about what Foley and the Republicans who looked the other way have done to that child. I care that it is probably going to give control back to the RATS. Foley needs to go to prison for what he did to that child. It is AGAINST THE LAW, and so is it AGAINST THE LAW for ANYONE to cover up a CRIME! There will be consequences to pay, and rightfully so. They are NOT ABOVE THE LAW! I like Hastert, but I am NOT going to give him a pass on this one. By his inaction, he allowed Foley to continue his crime against that child, and so did the other Republicans who looked the other way!! It's fine if you want to debate, but stick to the facts!!

You are entirely too soft on Foley ~ weak even ~ I've recommended that he cut his guts out.

Maybe this ought to be done in a dramatic manner ~ right there at the top of the steps on the East Front.

Put it on TV.

Foley commits hari-kari ~

Only question might be about allowing him to have a "second". Maybe they could bring up one of the AlQaida fellows who has some head chopping experience from Guantanimo.

"I care about what Foley and the Republicans who looked the other way have done to that child."

I am not certain that Republicans looked the other way. These kind of situations are often difficult to investigate and it appears that the witnesses/victims may not have been anxious to cooperate. It is possible that limited information was first presented and only near the end of the investigation was there a full understanding of what was going on. If there was a cover up, well that would be problematic.

In your post at 165 you said in response to someone else's question: "How come its ok for queer dems? Because Foley's actions were directed at a child. THAT is the difference, and it's a crime. Barney Fwank isn't involved with a child."

His name is BARNEY FRANK, not BARNEY FWANK, but we all know who you're talking about!