In an age of homosexual, bisexual and transgender sexual tolerance, does anyone have the right to determine that Congressman Mark Foley did something immoral? According to the Democrats and liberal Main Stream Media, what he did constitutes a scandal and is disgraceful.
This is laughable coming from the Democrats.
*The same Democrats who insist that public school students be forced to not only accept, but advocate homosexuality by “conveying respect” for a lifestyle that may violate their personal and religious beliefs.
*The same Deomcrats who censure the word GOD from all of television but allow shows promoting homosexuality and the likes of Madonna nailed to a cross to air.
*The same Democrats who insisted that oral sex isn't sex when Bill Clinton's trist with 19-year-old intern Monica was discovered. And then when they finally capitulated that sex may have occured, it's only sex was the mantra. It's not as if he did something illegal... Where were the Deomcrats when Juanita Broderick accused President Clinton of raping her?
*The same Democrats who should have thrown New Jersey Governor Jim McGreevy out on his keester when it was discovered that he cheated on two wives with young men. I hear he is on the talk show circut making no apologies for his new-found fame and fortune.
*he same Democrats who were strangely silent when it was discovered that Congressman William Jefferson used his freezer to store his bribe money. Where were the moralists of the Democrat party demanding that he step down? Where was big moral mouth Nancy Pelosi? Or Harry Reid?
Children used to be taught that disgusting and shameful behaviors had consequences. Townhall columnist Cal Thomas writes: "behavior once thought shameful is now paraded openly and promoted proudly to sell books." Liberals preach incessantly that no one should judge himself or herself morally superior to others. "But that does not mean the standard for "right" behavior should be eliminated simply because many appear unwilling to conform to that standard."
Democrats demanding justice while exhibiting moral indignation at Foley's depraved behavior is rich. As Cal Thomas said, "Scandal? Disgrace? I think not. Foley and others could only be so labeled if popular culture condemned, rather than promoted, immorality."
Moral indignation from the same people who support and reelected Bill Clinton, Congressman Gerry Studds (sexually abused congressional pages as well) and Teddy Kennedy. Spare me the lecture.
As I wrote yesterday, Mark Foley is a repulsive predator who needs to be removed from society. We all seem to agree on this. But why won't the Democrats enforce this same rule when one of their own committs a reprehensible crime? Instead, they reelect them.
Duane R. Patterson: The Obama Mind Trick
7 hours ago
6 comments:
Again, most interesting....
RUSH has a interesting view on the topic as well.
While what was done could perhaps BE foul/wrong? What was ACTUALLY done? Emails? And? IM's?? And??
Who's at fault here.....the perpatrator, or the ones who KNEW yet said nothing.......was this all to protect the 17 year old? Or to size up someone for ' political assasination??? '
There are many abuses of power that Congressmen pull....sexual or other wise. Pages?? If they're THAT exposed?? Remove the PAGES from the offenders, or at least PREVENT the occourance.
While we're at it, remove INTERNS too...given how Slick Willie did up Monica.
Then again, I feel they should also purge out those who KNEW, but FAILED to report these activities...after all, it's about SAVING THE CHILD, right??
Wait.....at 17, are they still children? Doubtful, given how we have laws that allow for 17 yo's to do their own thing. Let's hang the parents too, for endagering the child.....and hang the other congressmen for not REPORTING the abuses, and AIDING in the crime.
Then, BBQ the NEWS for NOT reporting this to the police!!!
Wait......what are we saying.
Report what? What's the charge???
Oh, my appolgies, there IS no charge, only speculation and allegations....more of the DEMOCRATIC way of judicial oversight.
The congressman's homosexual and dealing with kids who aren't kids.
Yet, we've not heard from the KID in question. Why not???
RUSH is right on one point:
What was supposedly perpatrated was wrong, what is going ON with this story, is worse.
Very well put. Yes, this is the usual hypocrisy and yes, Foley is scum.
I'd also like to note that we shouldn't be lumped together. Just because Foley is a republican doesn't mean the party is to blame.
Also, as Inaranjoiv pointed out, the Dimowits knew about this a long time ago but they rather put more children in harm's way while they waited to pull the trump card out before the election.
Monica was 22, not 19. Still wrong, but she wasn't a teen.
Because Monica was 22, there's a difference in the predatory behavior? She was an intern. For the President of the United States to carry on sexually with an intern was deplorable and inexcusable.
There's no difference, except saying she's 19 makes it just a teensy bit more salacious. Why not say she's 25? That's as far off, but somehow doesn't make for quite as nice a story.
To reference the lyrics of The Mighty Mighty Bosstones' Impression I Should Get, I've had to "knock on wood" in my lifetime. The responses by congressional leadership following the Foley scandal recently reminded me of one of my life's "knock on wood" experiences.
During my last sea tour of my 20-year Navy career, I was presented with a dilemma. Two different people over the course of a weekend told me about a rumor. The rumor was that thy had heard my 23-year old division officer was being peeped at while she showered -- Both told me that they heard she had birthmarks on her body one couldn't see when she was in uniform.
I felt a quandary. I had no direct knowledge of any actual peeping, and both the people I heard it from told me they had heard it second hand -- they weren't the peepers themselves. I asked a female Chief Petty Officer friend -- someone was not assigned to my ship -- what I should do. She told me that I should tell my division officer the rumors I had heard, and if she had a birthmark where rumor said she had a birthmark, my division officer and I would know whether or not the peeping was fact or rumor. Then the Chief told me "Think about your division officer. How do you think she will feel if she finds out later you knew that the was being peeped at while she showered, and you said nothing?" Then the Chief asked me how I would feel if that were my mother or my sister being peeped at -- my division officer was someone's daughter and possibly someone's sister.
So, I screwed up my courage and told my division officer what I had heard the that Monday evening -- I watched the color drain from my division officer's face. It was a painful, hard experience.
Long story short, an investigation was opened, four people were implicated, and three of them were quickly kicked out of the Navy.
Reporting the peeping continued to be a painful, hard experience long after I thought it wouldn't be anymore. Basically, I took a lot of heat for not protecting the old boys' network. I had a Senior Chief Petty Officer from my command come up and tell me that I handled it the wrong way -- I should have tried to track down the source of the peeping, and then talk to those persons' supervisors. He told me it was a victimless crime as long as my division officer hadn't known she was being peeped at. My peers commented to me how they wouldn't have done what I did -- in part because reporting the rumor would have rocked the boat without them having direct facts. Better to let sleeping dogs lie. People didn't share rumors with me anymore.
What would have I had done if my division officer would have wanted me to keep the story of her being peeped at quiet? -- knowing full well that other female officers were probably also getting peeped at? I honestly don't know. I'm glad I wasn't faced with that extra dilemma.
From first hand experience, I know how difficult "knocking on wood" can be -- Being ethical in the face of negative consequences is extremely difficult, but is something many of us expect from people in leadership positions -- and heck, even in "followership" positions.
It's this "knock on wood" aspect of the Foley scandal that troubles me most -- even more than Foley's direct actions, as horribly bad as they were.
Congresspeople in the Foley Scandal...well, let me quote Mighty Mighty Bosstones lyrics:
I'm not a coward,
I've just never been tested,
I'd like to think that if I was I would pass.
Look at the tested and think there but for the grace go I -- might be a coward --
I'm afraid of what I might find out
I'm afraid I didn't like what I found out about some congresspeople at the breaking of the Foley Scandal -- it seems to me that these folk didn't pass their "knock on wood" tests.
As well as being a military veteran, I'm a transgender person; and my politics lean pretty far to the left. I've thought hard about this Foley Scandal, in light of my personal experience and my politics, wondering what I would do if the Democrats' and the Republicans' positions were reversed. And my answer is, for one or two voting cycles, I'd be voting Republican -- specifically so the Democrats would get the message to throw their uncharactered leadership out.
Post a Comment