Log in  
Sign up

Play online chess!

Pages:  1 2 3 Next »
From	Message
soulcrates 03-Oct-06, 21:22	Republican Pedophile Coverup Mark Foley has been in the news lately for his inappropriate actions towards underage pages. Most want the American public to think this is an isolated event, but it is not. Yet another black eye to the GOP party. Here are some links to keep you occupied, and perhaps give you something with which to continue this thread. www.armchairsubversive.com" target="_blank">-> www.armchairsubversive.com www.the7thfire.com" target="_blank">-> www.the7thfire.com
thumper 04-Oct-06, 00:50	With the efficiency of a Stalinist historian, the homosexual group Log Cabin Republicans (LCR) has purged this photograph of former Florida Rep. Mark Foley, disgraced homosexual and seducer of teenaged boys, from its website. Foley was among the politicians and pundits whom LCR proudly recorded as speaking at its 2003 national convention in Washington, D.C. But they’re not so proud anymore. It’s one of the worst congressional scandals ever. A top House Republican who denounced sex predators as “animals” stands accused of acting like one. Mark Foley had served as a Deputy Majority Whip in the House and co-chair of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. His forced resignation, after being exposed as a homosexual pervert who talked dirty to young boys, has done more damage to the GOP than George Soros could ever think of doing. But it remains to be seen whether the liberal media and the Democrats can successfully exploit this scandal.
flcrackers 04-Oct-06, 19:02	soulcrates writes... << Most want the American public to think this is an isolated event, but it is not.>> I cant help but focus on that word "Most". To me 'most' means nearly all or just about everybody. Who are the "most". Identify those "most" to me and quote where they said this is an isolated incident or something close to it. I would like to know who these "most" people are. I haven't seen or heard anything remotely close to those people trying to gloss over this incident. Does this mean that the "left" dosen't want Gays in Government? Thats what it says to me. I really hate to be picky here but maybe some people are reading between the lines and drawing inappropriate conclusions. Help me out here. Show me the light. Point me in the right direction. Help me understand how you came to this conclusion. Let me peek into your muddled mind. Take me down that yellow brick road. I know there's some old guy behind that curtain, there has to be. This is more of the "Left" thought Police.
soulcrates 04-Oct-06, 21:01	My title was REPUBLICAN pedophilia coverup REPUBLICAN. When I said, "most want to make the American people think this is an isolated event" I mean that since a majority of republicans is what it takes, or "most" republicans to elect a speaker, and this person is Dennis Hastert. Since it was he who was negligent in removing Mark Foley from his same party, and he was voted in by fellow republicans, it is easy to say that most republicans allow this type of behavior. Not only that, but when you see them on television, or hear about them in the news, they won't tell you that, so that means "most (republicans) want to make the American people think this is an isolated event." which it is not. Here again this type of coverup is not only republicans, but in this instance it is. Since my title specifically said "REPUBLICAN" when I referred to the "most" who tried covering this up, I meant that party.
katonah 04-Oct-06, 22:12	Once again a political smear campaign helped along by the media. Amazing that this story surfaces, gee, right about time to vote, coincidence, I think not. I am sure Barney Frank pedophile prostitute seller and cigar using "I did not have sex with that women," Clinton are laughing. But the media enables the Dems and slaughters the Reps. These elected officials are all guilty of sins in major and minor degrees of black and white. Those there and here who are not without sin cast the first stone!
thumper 04-Oct-06, 22:31	The dems and neo-libs have been sitting on this information for at least a year, waiting to spring it at the most opportune time. Too late to replace Foley on the ballot. The speaker knew about the mild e-mails, which he made Foley stop sending at the parent's request, but not the out-of line instant messages. He was ambushed with the IMs by the dems just a couple of days ago.
soulcrates 04-Oct-06, 22:59	Thanks for the info thumper I didn't know much about how he contacted the illegal minor, but he admitted it and says now that he's also gay, and has been molested by a priest as a young boy. What a reason to not only investigate the rest of congress, and the senate, but also the Catholic church or whatever institution that allowed his molestation. Like the bible says, "Violence begets Violence" or "molestation begets molestation".
soulcrates 04-Oct-06, 23:03	Alright, timing or not this makes me sick! Kirk Fordham, who was Foley's top aide until January 2004, said he had "more than one conversation with senior staff at the highest level of the House of Representatives asking them to intervene" several years ago. I cannot believe they'd cover this type of behavior up, and then sit back while our good young men and women are dying for them. It's evil, plain and simple.
katonah 05-Oct-06, 06:19	Modern Seat of Power these guys are ruthless at obtaining and maintaining power by any means possible. As the sage said, the only way to get kicked out is be found with a live boy or a dead girl. And to think this is the first incident with underage pages, and yes there are underage girls, also is hard to embrace as a one off. I mean Kennedy got away, Frank, McGreevey on Oprah, sick and pathetic but the corrupting enticing elixir of power is all encompassing!
pawntificator 05-Oct-06, 06:41	Deleted by bobbynox on 05-Oct-06, 07:48.
bobbynox 05-Oct-06, 07:48	Deleted by bobbynox on 23-Jan-07, 09:21.
bobbynox 05-Oct-06, 08:40	Deleted by bobbynox on 23-Jan-07, 09:21.
bobbynox 05-Oct-06, 08:42	Deleted by bobbynox on 23-Jan-07, 09:21.
a_professional_idiot 05-Oct-06, 09:02	I think its funny how there are complaints that there is somehow a Democratic Party conspiracy, when Fox News was displaying Foley as (D-FL). For everyone who complained about Clinton have a consensual extramarital affair, shouldn't you be moving to absolutely crucify the Rupublican party for knowingly hiding a pedophile in their ranks?
katonah 05-Oct-06, 09:25	Where is everyone getting sumstantive accusations of Foley being a Pedophile? Test messages and groping with the intent are worlds apart. I am not standing up for his behavior but he is not a pedophile. Personal demons yes and now dragged thru the public is enough stress for any person. This is polarizing under the banner of political hack job. Were he not an elected offical, and yes they should be held to a higher degree of scrutiny, this wouldn't make the want ad section of the National Enquirer. It is all a bunch of he said she said at this point, with half truths and innuendo. This party that party neither will do a credible job if elected and there will be more scandals and guffaws later.
zorroloco 05-Oct-06, 09:36	kato there are explicit emails that he wrote to boys as young as 16. hello? text messages and groping are not worlds apart! they are baby steps apart. you are living in a fantasy world if you think those 'chit-chat messages' with a page are ok. a congressman and a page should NOT EVER have a chummy relationship. it is like a teacher or a doctor seducing a student or patient. disgusting!
katonah 05-Oct-06, 10:11	Where in any of my posts do you percieve my condoning his behavior or is that a leap of symantics on your behalf? I do understand your feelings on this issue, but adding the moniker of pedophile is not correct. It may be automatically associated with behavior related to under 18 year olds but it is not a proven fact. Character flaw yes, do we all have them, yes. But it where not the fact that this now demonized person where not an elected official of a certain political affiliation, news worthy, not a chance! This is how the fifth column makes it money, not by factual even codified news but sensationalist claims. Tabloid journalism at it's worst and most puerile! Better that he be tried in the court of public opinion then a court of law, that way we can lynch him fairly with a lamp cord on Independence Avenue.
zorroloco 05-Oct-06, 10:50	<It is all a bunch of he said she said at this point, with half truths and innuendo.> <Test messages and groping with the intent are worlds apart.> i did not intend to convey that you condone the behavior. pardon me. however, i do think your demarcation of where a healthy relationship ends and pedophilia begins is a bit too clear. and i think you are wrong about it not getting attention if he were not a public officila. if he were a teacher, doctor, lawyer, or day care worker, it would be news...just not as big news...but that goes with the territory when one is a public offical. and there seems to be ample evidence beyond he said he said at this point.
katonah 05-Oct-06, 12:05	Excuse me for missing the point but where is this sordid tale of a befallen man is there a story line of healthy relationships? Are you implying that setting your teenager into decadant halls of power they will be as lambs or lambs to a slaughter? Obviously the victimization, that is a loose classification, and probably more a social catch phrase then an actual fact, happened. By the media graphicalizing the text of the messages is as sordid and pernicious. So brass tacks, who cares. This story is stale already and no one would have cared one iota if it wasn't November election time. And I iterate above that public officials should be held to a high standard of moral ethics not moral turpitude. Being this is not a perfect world, I suppose it is within resonable bounds to find flawed men and women in all professions; be it doctor lawyer or Congress person. Their degrees don't automatically ingratiate them with a moral backbone only a piece of paper announcing their achievements. Yes in a resonable world you would (expect, hope) that this would be a springboard for these young people not an embroglio. Only the Shadow knows what evil lurks in the hearts of men!
zorroloco 05-Oct-06, 12:26	<where is this sordid tale of a befallen man is there a story line of healthy relationships?> the page was working for the congressman so there would need to be a relationship between them. a professional relationship would be healthy. a personal relationship between them crosses the boundary. foley was an author and proponent of a bill toughening laws designed to protect children from exploitation. nine weeks later he resigned due to sexually suggestive e-mails and instant messages sent to congressional pages. are you defending him? if not, what are you arguing? he is a sleeze ball and it does not matter if it is a media generated hubub. why am i explaining this to you?
katonah 05-Oct-06, 12:53	This seems to be an across the aisle issue. I have tried to be civil and tactful and not lower my tone. What is it you are trying to explain to me, that you are confusing your biases with the facts? It is of no consequence whether he was an author of a bill, where is that relevant to this subject? Are you trying to be asssumptive to the duplicity of Foley? Any boundry that was crossed; by a page or pages was crossed by both parties. Under 18 does not mean innocent. Why didn't the parents know this was happening? Because these innocents were hiding the fact from any person of authority, namely mom and pop. Call it the cult of personality. Where and what are you reading in these few short paragraphs my tacit agreement to defending him? I am not arguing, I feel my wording and direction have been quite mild and subjective. Sleeze ball maybe a bit jocular and coarse, flawed; using your position to enchant and incline a teenager, indecent, shameless, but not illegal. He has resigned, he is being castigated, he will for his lasting born days be constantly reminded of his devious nature, that should be sentence enough.
zorroloco 05-Oct-06, 13:13	not illegal <using your position to enchant and incline a teenager, indecent, shameless, but not illegal.> in fact, it is illegal in many jurisdictions. it is called grooming. look up child grooming in wiki...it says some states have additional statutes covering seducing a child online. so, if i am misinterpreting you, tell me exactly what it is you are arguing.
katonah 05-Oct-06, 13:41	Well, the District of Columbia is not a state. So your grooming factoid would not apply to that jurisdiction. Also it wouldn't apply to some reading skills as in reading what I have said. For the second and last time, I am not arguing. But furthermore I don't want to carry on a debate of an esoteric quality with a person who doesn't know the difference.
kingofpawns 05-Oct-06, 14:11	katonah... You shouldn't believe everything or even most things Rush Lintball says. Mark Foley is an admitted pedofile. There is no excuse for his behavior and he belongs in prison. As for this being some democratic plot to bring an October surprise, here is what Brian Ross (who broke the story) had to say to the New York Times yesterday: "Mr. Ross dismissed suggestions by some Republicans that the news was disseminated as part of a smear campaign against Mr. Foley. “I hate to give up sources, but to the extent that I know the political parties of any of the people who helped us, it would be the same party,” Mr. Ross said, referring to Republicans." I have commend the republicans who outed the pedofile Foley for their courage.
soulcrates 05-Oct-06, 16:37	Yes, if more republicans would stand up against this it wouldn't look so disasterous for them in November. Hassert being one of them responsible for not doing anything when reports hit his desk 3 years ago.
soulcrates 05-Oct-06, 16:38	Yes, if more republicans would stand up against this it wouldn't look so disasterous for them in November. Hassert being one of them responsible for not doing anything when reports hit his desk 3 years ago.
deadofknight 06-Oct-06, 13:48	To assert that this is a REpublican only problem provokes a list from me: Here are the TopTen Democratic Scandals and how they were handled by Democrats. 10. Sen. Daniel Inouye. The 82-year-old Hawaii Democrat was accused in the 1990s by numerous women of sexual harassment. Democrats cast doubt on the allegations and the Senate Ethics Committee dropped its investigation. 9. Former Rep. Gus Savage. The Illinois Democrat was accused of fondling a Peace Corps volunteer in 1989 while on a trip to Africa. The House Ethics Committee decided against disciplinary action in 1990. 8. Rep. Barney Frank. The outspoken Massachusetts Democrat hired a male prostitute who ran a prostitution service from Frank’s residence in the 1980s. Only two Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to censure him in 1990. 7. Former Sen. Brock Adams. The late Washington Democrat was forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988. 6. Former Rep. Fred Richmond. This New York Democrat was arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16- year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election—before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession. 5. Former Rep. John Young. The late Texas Democrat increased the salary of a staffer after she gave in to his sexual advances. The congressman won re-election in 1976 but lost two years later. 4. Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976. 3. Former Rep. Gerry Studds. He was censured for sexual relationship with underage male page in 1983. Massachusetts voters returned him to office for six more terms. 2. Former Rep. Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office. ( one of my personal favorites that soulcrates has forgotten and democrats seem to have collective amnsesia over) 1. Sen. Teddy Kennedy. The liberal Massachusetts senator testified in defense of nephew accused of rape, invoking his family history to win over the jury in 1991. So how do democrats explain all of this fun stuff? or at least admit that the whole Hill is full of powere mongering predators from both sides of aisle. Personally, I think Foley should be hung. Soon...but a response to this list from the Left will be interesting to me. I mean, gimme a break, Bill Clinton pardons Reynolds after the bastard was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault on a 16 yr old? WHere is the unprejudiced liberal in here that will stop using this incident as a political tool to smear good people like Hastert, when their party's poster boy owns the sexual predator of the century title...and pardoned such sins without a thought for the 16 yr old that was assaulted, for the law, etc...Liberals never like these arguments to end up like this, but facts are facts. The letter next to the perp's name ought to have nothing to do with the outcome, which should be severe, quick and fatal.
zorroloco 06-Oct-06, 14:09	dok the world is coming to an end. i agree with you 100%. this issue has ZERO to do with the party of the accused. there are enough perverts and screw ups to go around. hang 'em high!
thumper 06-Oct-06, 14:46	Great post DOK Jeff This 'issue' has EVERYTHING to do with the party of the accused. The 'It has nothing to do with party affiliation' tactics are quite transparent. They care nothing about the page. The neo-libs have no interest in the 'safety' or 'wellbeing' of the 'youth'. They've demonstrated that over and over. It's all about gaining power for the democrats and smearing the republicans. No matter what. Almost very time it's mentioned, he's classified by the liberal media as the REPUBLICAN pedofile. Why is that? Why not the homosexual pedofile, hmmm?
kingofpawns 06-Oct-06, 15:03	Dok... When you just copy and paste republican talking points, you should know better. Republicans like to "swift boat" averything. Knowing that you do like to copy and past republican talking points, I'll cut and paste a nice response to them. Of course, both republicans and democrats, and other politicians sometimes engage in criminal activities, but the list of republicans, at least in recent times, is much larger and more perverted. The republicans claim they are the party of "family values" and they protect a pedofile in their own ranks for purely political reasons ************** Someone's Got Their Talking Points Down! Posted by Chris Snethen October 4, 2006 20:55 Couv Operator Index The bane of any inbox is the forwarded e-mail. Anything with a subject line that begins "fw:" generally ends up in the trash without so much as a glance. I make exceptions every now and then, but for the most part it's a rule which has served me well. The forwarded e-mail can take many forms. A chain letter. A lame joke. An urban legend. And the political talking point. Generally the last two are so full of hooey they're laughable. Unfortunately many folks take them as gospel truth without doing a simple Snopes search on the thing. Believe me, by the time *anything* reaches your inbox, Snopes has already de-bunked it. The political talking points can be a little trickier. And that's why we're here today. Last night I posted some on this Mark Foley situation. OregonLive linked to it on their front page. Readers read it. And one person, anonymously, copied and pasted some Republican talking points as a response. Very nice. The thing is, this isn't 1996. We're a lot more savvy now and have a lot more information available to us. It's a lot easier to spot the half-truths today than every before. And it's even easier to quickly and accurately respond. To wit. I respond to my anonymous friend. Hey-- why do democrats see more of a scandal over IMs then after blatant acts of rape, sodomy, and pedophilia? Interesting you would include sodomy in your list of blatant acts. What consenting adults do behind closed doors, we learned during the gay marriage debate, is none of our business. And that includes acts of sodomy. Rape and pedophilia are VERY different than sodomy. You might wish to look that up. Here is a list of transgressions by democrats... please note the disturbing lack of consequences... Once you and I are done here, I'll be posting an even longer and equally icky list of transgressions by Republicans also noting a disturbing lack of consequences. 10. Sen. Daniel Inouye. The 82-year-old Hawaii Democrat was accused in the 1990s by numerous women of sexual harassment. Democrats cast doubt on the allegations and the Senate Ethics Committee dropped its investigation. Here's a neat history of what actually happened (you're gonna have to scroll down a bit). The primary accusation came out during Inouye's re-election campaign and was actually initially aired in a Republican campaign ad. The voters didn't buy it and came down hard on Inouye's Republican opponent. The "several other women" may or may not exist. No one else has come forward. Democrats didn't put the kibosh on it so much as the possibly fictitious women's failure to actually accuse the senator. 9. Former Rep. Gus Savage. The Illinois Democrat was accused of fondling a Peace Corps volunteer in 1989 while on a trip to Africa. The House Ethics Committee decided against disciplinary action in 1990. Yeah, Gus. He was certainly a problem. And voters took care of him in 1992 by sending in Mel Reynolds. We'll get to Mel in a bit. In the meantime, you got me with Gus. So in the interest of equal time, let me introduce you to John "The Hugger" Peterson. The Hugger continues to represent Pennsylvania's 5th District to this day and unlike Savage has yet to apologize for his past misbehavior. 8. Rep. Barney Frank. The outspoken Massachusetts Democrat hired a male prostitute who ran a prostitution service from Frank's residence in the 1980s. Only two Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to censure him in 1990. Oh yeah. That. The voters have spoken seven times since. And about the censure vote. See you'd like the reader to believe Democrats didn't want to rebuke the congressman and that's plain untrue. It is true he wasn't censured, it's also true that the House voted 408-18 to reprimand him. So either there were only 20 Democrats in the 1990 house (which was controlled by Democrats, you might recall) or Democrats overwhelmingly voted to reprimand the congressman. You can read the difference between a censure and a reprimand in this handy copy of the House Rules, published in 2002 by the Republicans. 7. Former Sen. Brock Adams. The late Washington Democrat was forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988. Now see there you go again. "First surfacing in 1988." Dude, the allegations "surfaced" in 1992. The alleged assault took place in 1987. Adams gave up his campaign as he should have. And this was sort of the point of my previous post. Dirtbags should be exposed and expelled. Should Adams have been tried and gone to prison? Probably. 6. Former Rep. Fred Richmond. This New York Democrat was arrested in 1978 for s oliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election "before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession. Former Rep. Robet Bauman (R-MD) was arrested on October 3, 1980 for attempting to solicit sex from a 16-year-old male prostitute. Republicans tried to run him again in 1982, but he withdrew from the race. 5. Former Rep. John Young. The late Texas Democrat increased the salary of a staffer after she gave in to his sexual advances. The congressman won re-election in 1976 but lost two years later. Former Rep Jim Bunn (R-OR). Immediately upon winning election to Congress, divorced his wife of 17 years, and mother of his five children, to shack up with one of his aides. He promptly made her his chief of staff and gave her the highest salary of any aide the entire Oregon delegation. Bunn lost re-election in 1996 and was last seen guarding inmates in Yamhill County. 4. Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976. That story broke in May 1976. He resigned from the committee in June 1976 and from Congress on September 1, 1976. Less than five months. You want a stall? It took the president over a year to agree to agree to the creation of an independent 9/11 commission. And he even stonewalled them! Five months is nothing. Our chief executive can run the four corner offense with the best of them! 3. Former Rep. Gerry Studds. He was censured for sexual relationship with underage male page in 1983. Massachusetts voters returned him to office for six more terms. Don't forget Dan Crane (R-IL) who got caught in the same scandal! They would have gotten off with a reprimand, only a freshman back bencher named Gingrich, nearly 20 years before Bubba, demanded they be expelled. Studds actually used the same defense then that Foley's gonna try now, namely that the age of consent in DC is only 16. Go figure. 2. Former Rep. Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office. Now this is the one that really ticks me off. Reading that entry, you would think he never served a minute in prison and had his conviction expunged. Do you honestly believe that? HONESTLY? From Wikipedia: In August 1994, he was indicted for having sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer. Despite the charges, he continued his campaign and was re-elected in November 1994. Reynolds initially denied the charges, which he claimed were racially motivated. On August 22, 1995 he was convicted on 12 counts of sexual assault, obstruction of justice and solicitation of child pornography. He resigned his seat on October 1, 1995. Reynolds was sentenced to five years in prison and expected to be released in 1998. However, in April 1997, he was convicted on 15 unrelated counts of bank fraud and lying to SEC investigators. These charges resulted in an additional sentence of 78 months in federal prison. Reynolds served all of his first sentence and served forty-two months in prison for the later charges. At that point, U.S. President Bill Clinton commuted the sentence for bank fraud. As a result, Reynolds was released from prison and served the remaining time in a half way house. So to be clear. He served his full five-year sentence for statutory rape and has never been pardoned of that crime. In spite of Clinton's pardon, he's still a convicted felon and a convicted sex offender. Shame on you and the person you cut-and-pasted this from for suggesting otherwise. 1. Sen. Teddy Kennedy. The liberal Massachusetts senator testified in defense of nephew accused of rape, invoking his family history to win over the jury in 1991. I love how you people call him "Teddy". Like he's your friend or something. If your nephew were accused of rape would you testify in his defense? Would testifying automatically make you a bad person? I'm not sure I understand what you're getting at here. So there you have it. Listen, I'm not saying Dems are any cleaner than Republicans. I would argue that it's probably 50-50 back there. And that was sort of my point yesterday. Pelosi needs to make sure her shop is clean as well. ********
Pages:  1 2 3 Next »

GameKnot: play chess online, online chess puzzles, free online chess games database, monthly chess tournaments, Internet chess league, chess teams, chess clubs and more.