Let's stop trying to defend Foley, or give him ANY benefit of doubt

[boolean]

If this had been a Democrat, do you think the freeptards and the media and the repugs would be extending such courtesy?

Time to fight fire with fire. Let them defend themselves and define "pedophile". Our job is to milk this motherfucker for all the political capital it's worth. I didn't see any conservatives siding with Clinton during the Monica thing, why are liberals trying to give Foley the benefit of the doubt? Yeah, yeah, I know it's in our nature and all, to be defenders of truth and righteousness.

But that's not how you win an election. This scandal is a gift from God! It's exactly the type of thing we need to sway all the apolitical sheep out there to our side. Let's not waste it.

As far as I'm concerned, karma's a bitch. This is the type of thing the GOPers deserve after years of sleaze and hypocrisy. Fuck 'em.

[BlooInBloo]

1. Can you name one dem/progressive who has given Foley anything?

[Kagemusha]

3. DU'ers insisting he's not a pedophile.

That's all I can recall offhand.

[boston bean]

5. me too. It really puts me off. nt

[BlooInBloo]

6. And that has *what* to do with "giving him the benefit of the doubt"?

***PLEASE*** tell me the relation between those two! I'm burning with anticipation!

[Kagemusha]

15. Well if he isn't a pedophile then he didn't really do anything 'wrong'.

At least that's the way it'd read to other people, isn't it?

I know there's some term for those interested in teenages (who are adult themselves) but, normal people can't remember it. For years I didn't even know what pedophile meant before the usage of the term seemingly exploded.

[BlooInBloo]

24. No, I haven't seen ANYONE read it that way...

There are lots of things a person can do that are wrong. Taking/acting on a sexual interest in pre-pubescent children is only one.

[tkmorris]

7. Well, he's not

Sorry, but words have meanings. It is important to me that they be used properly. It's part of a larger concept wherein I have a tremendous respect for the Truth, capital T, because without it I'm just one more amateur spin doctor.

It's part of the reason why I am a Democrat in the first place. Don't ask me to give that up. I won't do it.

[KittyWampus]

9. here is the defintion of pedophile- why any DU'er doesn't think it applies

is beyond me:

an adult whose primary sexual interest is in children; some professionals make a differentiation between a pedophile, whose sexual partner of choice is a prepubertal child, and a hebephile, who is aroused by adolescents.

[tkmorris]

10. To me, a pedophile is interested in the prepubescent

I an fairly certain that is the more widely accepted definition, and by that standard Foley doesn't qualify.

[boolean]

12. WHO CARES?!

If the sheep want to think he's a pedophile, let them!

Do you guys understand that this is not OUR fight?

[yardwork]

14. Look up the definition, and you will find that you are wrong

Pedophilia is widely and commonly understood to include an older adult's sexual interest in an adolescent. Also, it's illegal. When an adult has sex with someone under the age of eighteen, it's a crime.

[Matariki]

21. That isn't correct

In many states the legal age of consent is 16. In Washington DC it's 16. Here's a link: http://www.webistry.net/jan/consent.html

or: http://teenadvice.about.com/library/weekly/qanda/blageofconsentchart.htm

[karlrschneider]

18. You're right, and you will be skewered by ignorant DUers who don't

understand the distinction. For all their insistence on accuracy, objectivity and facts don't count in this particular case. It's almost humorous. But not really.

[H2O Man]

16. Correct.

Those are the right definitions. Foley is scum. He was using some of the classic grooming tactics favored by sex offenders who attempt to exploit minors. He is a piece of shit, who belongs in jail.

[mcg]

20. No, that is not THE definition of pedophile.

The word pedophile has more than one meaning.
You're trying to say that this particular meaning
is the only one that *should ever* be used. Nonsense.

If we say that Foley is a hebephile or whatever most people
won't know what the hell we are taking about.

Words should communicate, not obfuscate. Using
a little known word in this situation would be stupid.
The audience is the general public, not medical professionals.

Besides, Foley's primary sexual interest just might
be in children. That we don't know. Do we have evidence
that he's interested in adults?

[mcg]

22. The word 'pedophile' in dictionaries, read it.

http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/pedophile

One definition:
An adult who is sexually attracted to a child or children.

---

A 16-year-old boy is not an adult.

[Matariki]

19. There's a DAMNED good reason

People here have the good sense to realize that the issue could easily turn to equating being gay with being a pedophile. If the LEGAL age of consent is 16 and all the boys he emailed were over 16 then he did nothing illegal, despite whatever you might think about it.

On the other hand, and this is important, he seriously violated house ethics rules. He seriously violated his position an trust people had when sending their high-school age children to work in congress.

Either way, it's a godsend and it's karma.

[Kagemusha]

25. Sir or madam, in this Congress, violating house ethics rules is NOTHING.

Violating his position of trust may be something. Violating the law he co-sponsored making it illegal to groom boys under 18 (not 16, 18) over the 'Net may be a criminal act based on when it occured. I just resent the idea that somehow the worthless, corrupt system that couldn't lay a pinkie finger on Tom DeLay, somehow is the only system under which Foley might have made a little boo-boo for which he should get a teeny slap on the wrist and sent on his merry way.

That's not important. That's the least important thing about this, and is no godsend at all.

It's about why a known sexual predator abusing his awesome power over wards of Congress under the protection of a system under the Speaker of the House (just as the capitol police are under the Speaker) was allowed to ply his trade, so to speak, without consequence, for years, when he wasn't yakking it up about going after sexual predators with Mr. America's Most Wanted. This is not an argument that all gays are predators, or all gays in congress are predators. But this one, is. He goes after the weak, knowing he has awesome power to ruin these kids' lives and take anyone down with him who he wants to punish. I don't find that acceptable from straight men.

Ever.

[yardwork]

28. I'm gay and I consider what he did pedophilia

I don't give a pass to 54 year old men or women who send explicit emails to teenagers. I have teenage children myself. Their bodies may look adult, but they are children in this society.

In any case, I don't get this splitting of hairs about the definition. If you want to fuss about something, ask the larger question -

Why do Republicans care about explicit emails to teenagers when they don't seem to give a damn about children in Iraq being tortured, raped, murdered, and set on fire????

[Matariki]

31. There is a LEGAL definition

which is separate from the ETHICAL implications. In D.C. the legal age of consent is 16, and at least what has been reported so far, the boys he emailed were 16 or older. Now whether the laws of Foley's state, where the age of consent is 18, take precedence, or the state of the teenagers, I don't know.

However, and this is a big however - what he did, whether legal or not, is a despicable breach of trust and use of his position. And certainly breaks ethics rules set by congress.

[Garbo 2004]

29. Actually under Fed law Foley's online sex talk w kids < 18 may well be a

criminal offense in itself, regardless of the local jurisdiction's age of consent law for actual in-person consensual sexual activity. Ironically, this was legislation that Foley himself supported.

[Matariki]

32. Ah - now that's interesting.

[malaise]

2. BIngo n/t

[C_U_L8R]

4. whatchutalkinboutwillis??

this is 100% republican stink

[sweetheart]

8. defend him!!

Give him a cushioned noose and a pillow on his gallow's trap door.

[in_cog_ni_to]

11. I AGREE! Let the repukes defend him as not being a pedophile when he's

been caught preying on a 16 year old boy. Let 'em defend it! NOT US! Monica was an ADULT. A 16 year old is NOT. Give them the noose to hang themselves. How many people are going to accept their defense of Foley? NOT MANY!

This is the time to take the guns to the gun fight.

[NNN0LHI]

13. You'd think we wouldn't need a thread like this after what we been through

Something isn't right here.

Don

[seabeyond]

17. i dont LIE for anyone. i have no desire to be them, i insist they

start feeding off of us. there is MORE than enough damage in honesty than throwing in lies or manipulations.... wont do it.

[calimary]

23. Who's defending foley? Anybody around here?

Admittedly, I haven't been here all day today OR yesterday, but what I've seen I wouldn't characterize as defending the guy. Besides, what's to defend? I don't see much of anything that's defensible myself. I certainly wouldn't defend him. Nobody around our house has been doing so, either.

But I AM thrilled about him. ESPECIALLY regarding what I read about his Congressional seat previously having been considered safe. NOW, it's most DEFINITELY in play. Last quickie poll I saw in a Florida newspaper asked whether you'd vote for the Democratic candidate who'd been running against foley, or a GOP last-minute insertion. The Democrat got something like 82 percent of the vote when I checked it. That WAS a safe seat for the bad guys. Now, it's not! We just got a potential freebie! EXCELLENT! THANK YOU, foley!

[farmbo]

30. The word police at Daily Kos are out in force...

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2006/10/1/23045/4791

[WHAT]

26. Personally, I'm worried about his interest in funeral homes...

it might parallel/(or mirror) his interest in child exploitation. His other interest, outside of children, was the death industry. Was he doing anything untoward there?...(this is another emotional-laden issue susceptible to scams).

[madmusic]

27. What would Foley say?

ATTY. GEN. ASHCROFT: Thank you very much. Look forward to the hearings. Mark Foley is the congressman from Florida, southern part of Florida. His interest in this matter is reflected in his chairmanship or co?chairmanship of one of the caucuses in the House that is specifically devoted to the safety of children. Congressman Foley.

REP. FOLEY: Thank you. The High Court, in siding with pedophiles over children, forced us into action. Today, united, we begin reversing the damage of that decision.

This legislation is a pedophile's worst nightmare. It virtually guarantees we are helping to protect America's children. It doesn't make a difference if the child engaged in sex is real or virtual. In other words, an old simple saying: If it walks like a duck, talks like a duck, it is a duck. The courts obviously didn't have a chance, as Chairman Lamar Smith suggested, to see the kind of virtual reality that is on computer terminals today. It's as close to reality as possible.

These pedophiles may have gotten a stay of execution from the Court's decision, but I
am thrilled the attorney general has acted so quickly.

Chairman Smith is calling hearings. Legislation will be marked up. And I know President Bush eagerly awaits to sign a bill that will in fact reverse the damage of last month's decision.

EDIT: http://www.justice.gov/archive/ag/speeches/2002/050102ag-transcriptschildpornography.htm

While I think these laws were as often political as genuine concern, to keep us afraid under control, what would Foley say?