SDWC weighs in on Foley e-mails and messages to page: Ick, and you bet he ought to be investigated.

The Democratic blogs are doing a lot of finger-pointing at my side of the aisle over the Congressman Mark Foley thing. And as a parent of six kids, I'm going to weigh in on this myself.

Ick.

If it's true, Foley has breached the decorum of his high office, as well as abused the trust of those young people serving our government to further their education. If the investigation shows the accusations are warranted, he should be fully prosecuted under federal law.

I don't care if it's a Republican Congressman from Florida or a Democratic State Legislator from South Dakota, or a non-partisan Judge from Iowa. Party doesn't matter in these types of situations. What's wrong is wrong. People in positions of authority not only have the requirement of following law, they have the added responsibility of being in a position of leadership.

An elected official allegedly asking a 17-year-old male page if "he's horny," among other things deserves a swift and severe response.

Comments

PP said…
Anon, I'm not insinuating anything, and I'm deleting your comment because i'm making the statement as a simple point. It doesn't matter who does it, it's bad.
Anonymous said…
What's troubling is that leadership knew of this sickness and kept it under wraps, and now are throwing out the red herring of alcohol. Yeah, that's it, he was just drunk.
Nicholas Nemec said…
The House leadership that ignored this for a year or more needs to be investigated also. Perverts like Foley shouldn't be in office and leaders who ignored it for political reasons resign too.
Nicholas Nemec said…
"Democratic state legislator from South Dakota"

That is a damn cheap throw away line Pat. I think I understand your sentence but you are getting a little close to starting rumors. The real story here is how the Republican leadership of the US House knew about, and covered up for, a Republican congressman from Florida who is a pervert stalking young people over the internet.
PP said…
My point to those pointing fingers is that it's not party or location specific.
Nicholas Nemec said…
But, in this case it is party and location specific.

The Republican party and US House leadership are guilty of ignoring this situation when they had the opportunity to do something about it. It blew up in their faces when they chose to put political gain above child safety.
Brad S said…
Nicholas, are you really sure you want to push the "coverup" angle? I would think you'd have at least some historical memory of what happened in neighboring Minnesota in 1990.

To refresh, the GOP candidate for Governor, one Jon Grunseth, was accused of diddling with a pre-teen girl. The incumbent DFL Governor, one Rudy Perpich, pushed the issue to the point where Jon Grunseth ended up dropping out.

The man who replaced Grunseth eventually beat Perpich, with only a week of campaigning. That was the same election that got Paul Wellstone elected. I'm not here to discuss whether the Foley thing is covered up or not. I'm just saying you may be creating a backlash that will be far-reaching.
Anonymous said…
Be careful what you wish for Nick. Frankly I agree with you about investigating the leadership who ignored it, but I wonder if you'll agree when it's someone from your party. And when it's covered up by others from your party...
Anonymous said…
When one party controls all branches of government, it's just a matter of time before they become corrupt. They cover things up. They look the other way because there is nobody to investigate them or to hold them accountable.

This happened with the Democratic congress after 40 years of control. It happened with the Republican congress after only 12 years of control. Foley is just the latest example of many: Bob Ney, Duke Cunningham, Tom DeLay.

It happens in South Dakota too, with the governor's secret slush fund - the Governor's Club, using the plane for personal trips and reimbursing the taxpayers only after getting caught, exclusive no-bid license for Tom Rounds to sell merchandise at Vietnam Veteran's memorial dedication.

Two party government is good government. Government needs accountability.
mjb said…
"exclusive no-bid license for Tom Rounds to sell merchandise at Vietnam Veteran's memorial dedication"

Care to produce some evidence?

Or are you just generating something out of your rear besides the noise of flatulence.

I have a relation on the committee, and they say that charge is crap.
Anonymous said…
Nicholas:

It was your party who gave three standing ovations to Congressman Gerry Studs after he was censured by the House of Representatives in 1983 for having sex with an underage male page. See: http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1589/is_2004_Sept_28/ai_n7577029

Congressman Studs was hailed by his Democratic colleagues during the censuring proceedings. Hailed I say!

Here's the difference between the Democrat Party and Republicans on this issue. Republicans don't give standing O's to these jerkwads, we kick the bums out.

Now when a Republican is caught doing this crap he's treated by D's the way that R's have always treated this stuff. It's refreshing but hypocrtical.

Last poster:

Your partisianship is disappointing.

It's not two party government that keeps us clean. Two party government creates divsions and acrimony. It's individuals who are willing to do the right thing regardless of party that keeps us clean. I wonder if you would have said the same thing while the D's were in control of Congress for over 40 years? We're going to hold you to it.
Anonymous said…
Anon 10:11 AM - Did all of that URL (website address) for the Gerry Studs article show up on the posting? I didn't have any luck with what is there, but it appears that parat of it is missing. Could you post that again and put a space in it so it will wrap to the next line and post in its entirety? Then I can just eliminate that space and it should work okay. Thanks.
Anonymous said…
Google him. He's all over the web today anyway. the story checks out.

I couldn't get the link to work but there's plenty more out there.

Turns out this guy was worse than Foley he actually went out there and pursued young males and had sex with one of them. Internet sex with kids makes you a super creep and Studs went and acted on it, even super creepier.

The reaction from his D colleagues is worse. A standing ovation? We should get a list of all the members of Congress at that time and cross it with who is currently serving. Those people should be asked if that is how they would treat Mark Foley today or why they are treating him differently when it's a member of the other party.
Anonymous said…
Anonymous 10:11 - I Googled Gerry Studds and read two pages of articles about him. NOWHERE is there any mention of anyone giving him one standing ovation after he was censured, let alone three! All it says is that he turned his back on them when they censured him.
Some of the websites I read were quite conservative, but there was nothing about the Democrats giving him a standing ovation.
Where did you get your information?
PP said…
Bonnie, I thought you weren't reading me anymore.

And I'm certainly not going to allow you to plug your website here.

Hence, find yourself removed.
foxgrandma said…
What I find so hilarious about the Republican's opinion on this matter is they can't seem to see the difference between Clinton/Monica or Barney Franks and his lover; and the difference between Foley being a child preditor. At least the Democrats that the republicans keep bringing up were messing around with consenting adults. Also there wouldn't be such a big "hullabaloo" when Republicans get caught doing something wrong, if they didn't run around with such a large "holier-than-thou" attitude.
Anonymous said…
Foley was jerking off online. He never touched a kid. He still had to go.

Gerry Studs had sex with a male underage page and the D's gave him a standing ovation in 1983.

That's the diff between Ds and Rs. We kick our riffraff out. D's keep it and clap at it.
Anonymous said…
Anon 3:40 pm - Please provide your source for the statement regarding the Democrats giving Studds a standing ovation. I researched that online, and I could find absolutely nothing to indicate that is true.

Unless you can supply the source of that story so that we can check it out, we are left with no choice but to believe that you are repeating an unfounded rumor or created it yourself.
Douglas said…
Republicans hear strange things. They hear Dean "scream" without knowing sound-cancelling mikes were cancelling out the crowd. They see a Wellstone memorial and claim there was booing at a "funeral".

I have no idea if Democrats did or did not cheer Gary Studs, but suspect that if they were so scared of their shadows they were afraid to vote against a detainee torture pushed by conscienceless Bush and amoral Dick Cheney, I would guess the idea of cheering for Gary Studs would leave them with filled pants.

Interesting too that the GOP leadership monitored Democratic e-mail, but none of the window-peakers claim to have had even clue one of their own perverts was sending odd e-mail.

Popular posts from this blog

Breaking News: After the television commercial salvo fired at them, Vote Yes For Life Fires back.

Heidepreim: Republicans are the party of hate

The Day in politics - October 24th