ABC: Foley E-mail was between Foley and an 18 year old!

[ELOrocks17]

So reports Drudge---nothing wrong with that...alot of apologies due!

[patsfan13]

No apologies. What Foley did was wrong. I for one is glad he is out. the pages are politically motivated kids who are out to make career enhancing contacts to further their future careers (Jeez when I was 16-18 al i cared about was track, surfing Girls and the Grateful Dead, not building a political career). They are easy target for people in a position of power.

I do object to the un substainted allegations that Hastert turned a lbind eye to abuses by Foley. Also differentiate between the emails to the kid in LA and the IM's from 2003.

[patsfan13]

I went to the website Drudge references after looking over the material it does put things in a different light. here is a link to the website with the info about the guys who got the explicit IM's. He was over 18 when the exchanges with Foley took place he was also out of the Page program. Leagally the guy was an unmarried adult. Foley was an unmarried adult.

Given this what was Hastert to do?

Would the dems have called Hastert and the republicans homophobes, for try to regulate the sex life of a gay male (Foley) and his interactions with other adult males?

At what age is internet sex between OK? 18? 21? 22?

How bout it Patters, How much input should Hastert have (if he had known about these IM's) into the sex life of a gay middle age and another adult male?

[ELOrocks17]

Forget it--Patters will never give you a straight answer.

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by patsfan13

How bout it Patters, How much input should Hastert have (if he had known about these IM's) into the sex life of a gay middle age and another adult male?

Don't try and make the Democrats to be the hypocrites

I'm no fan of 55 year old men being attracted to 18 year old men. But outside of that issue, I have failed to be overly distracted by this whole thing. AFAIC, 16 should be the age of consent anyway, once you're 16 you know what you're doing and what you want.

[ELOrocks17]

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

Don't try and make the Democrats to be the hypocrites

I'm no fan of 55 year old men being attracted to 18 year old men. But outside of that issue, I have failed to be overly distracted by this whole thing. AFAIC, 16 should be the age of consent anyway, once you're 16 you know what you're doing and what you want.

Isnt 16 the legal age in DC?

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by ELOrocks17

Isnt 16 the legal age in DC?

Yeah, it is. 18 in some other places.

[Harry Boy]

The republican Homosexual has turned the Democrats into a party of Homophobes.

The backlash is starting, their hatred and thought of Bush beating them "twice" has driven them all nuts.

The country should not be turned over to these "insane jacka$ses" in a time of war.

CASTRATE ALL PEDOPHILES BEFOR XMAS
SEXUAL BACKGROUND CHECKS FOR ALL POLITICIANS AND SCOUT LEADERS

[Patters]

Originally Posted by patsfan13

How bout it Patters, How much input should Hastert have (if he had known about these IM's) into the sex life of a gay middle age and another adult male?

First, from this morning's Washington Post:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...500008_pf.html

"Some of the instant messages were previously reported by ABC News. The conversations occurred between December 2002 and October 2003, according to the date stamps on the computer files. The vast majority of the messages were between Foley and one of the two former pages. Some of the exchanges took place before the boy turned 18."

Second, the Republicans brought this upon themselves. By investigating (and spending $40 million of taxpayer money) Clinton's affair with Lewinsky, they elevated private sexual behavior into a Constitutional issue. As a result, it is clear that if the House leadership knew that Foley was sending inappropriate emails to young pages, they had an obligation to investigate. The reason that the Repugs are turning on each other is because some of them felt that more should have been done, and that Hastert failed them. I strongly suspect that there's more to this story than we know right now.

Third, patsfan13, it doesn't matter that Foley is gay. (As you know, Clinton wasn't gay.) It matters that he's using his position to take advantage of young people and that the House leadership, aware of his inappropriate behavior, allowed him to be a leader on child abuse issues.

[patsfan13]

With the caveats Patters, and let's not confuse email and IM's, the ones with sexual content took place after the guy was 18, and after he was a page.

The emails (or IM's we don't know) that took place before the kid were 18 may not have been of a sexual nature (ie 'innocent') remember Foley knew the laws and may have played the game to stay within the law.

It is unusal to find heteros ~50 having a relationship with someone in the 18-21 age group, as I am not familiar with the social patterns of gay people, would it be very unusal for an older gay man to have a relationship with a youger (but legal) gay man?


Again this situation is evolving very rapidly. The Soros group behind the disclosures may have overstepped. Having said that I think this Oct suprise even if fraudelent (ie the sexual emails were between adults and legal) the oct suprise will work to the dems favor, even better than the dui thing in 2000.

BTW the young man has lawyered up with Mr Jones from Ok, they guy who defended McVeigh, he has some high powered talent there, and a defense atty. HMMMM