Republicans are scum!

[Gary]

I just heard on the news last night, that those emails are closely monitored, so who is doing the monitoring ? DJ, just like what was said earlier, I beleive it is gonna come out that BOTH parties are guilty of covering it up or holding back on this info in order to gain political leverage. It is gonna be messy.

Is it possible that some still don't understand the politicians of today? I find it tragic that people actually think that one party is honest and looking out for there rights, while the other is filled with selfish, lying scum. To live in a fantasy world that says, Republicans are scum and Democrats aren't so bad, is to either be ignorant or naive.

A motto I like to live by is, stop watching so much damn TV.

[bachanon]

Whoa, slow down there, Bach. U 2, Tomika. U gotta show some examples on the thread if you're gonna call someone out.

Back to Bach. There's a problem with your examples of scum. It's one thing to have people do what your examples did (and Clinton was just being a Democrat), but it's ANOTHER thing to do what happened in the Foley case. Why? Because other Republicans actually TRIED TO COVER IT UP. Gay people never tried to deny Dahmer. Arabs never tried to deny Bin Laden. No white dude I knew tried to cover up the unabomber. And I'm sure another Democrat was taping Clinton's latest film "The Whiter House".

But Foley? C'mon, man! First, people in the Republican party and in office tried to cover up the scandal for their political survival, THEN turn their backs on him as if they didn't know him once the story came out to the media, just so other Republicans wouldn't have to answer Foley questions when Election Day came. It's not about the bad apple in the tree. It's about the fact that other people tried to paint the rotten apple red in order to show that there were no bad apples in the tree. If a Republican came out and turned Foley in AS SOON AS THEY KNEW something was wrong, this story would have turned out much differently, and the entire party wouldn't have looked so bad.

i wasn't defending the republicans. i was stating that it's not productive to place blame on a group of people because of one person (or a minority within the group) behaving badly.

this story makes both parties look bad.

would ben franklin or thomas jefferson have survived the current media hysteria over dirty old men? i think not.

[Gary]

i wasn't defending the republicans. i was stating that it's not productive to place blame on a group of people because of one person (or a minority within the group) behaving badly.

this story makes both parties look bad.

would ben franklin or thomas jefferson have survived the current media hysteria over dirty old men? i think not.

Good post.

[MidtownCoog]

If Reps are scums, all gay men are boy chasers.

How's that for logic?

[DJ V Lawrence]

i wasn't defending the republicans. i was stating that it's not productive to place blame on a group of people because of one person (or a minority within the group) behaving badly.

this story makes both parties look bad.

would ben franklin or thomas jefferson have survived the current media hysteria over dirty old men? i think not.

This was never about placing blame on a group of people....until some of our leaders had a blatant chance to do something about it and didn't. I'm not saying the Foley's act makes Rebublicans the ones to blame (HE'S the one to blame for his acts, and needs to be held accountable.) But other leaders in Congress stooped down to his level by keeping his actions quiet and LEAVING HIM IN OFFICE for the sake of no making themselves look bad. In my opinion, ANYONE who purposely did just that in Congress should look bad.

Why does this remind me of a Congressional Watergate?

[bachanon]

dirty old men have been around forever. i named a couple (jefferson and franklin) in my earlier post. these guys weren't sending dirty letters, they were actually having sex. jefferson had children with slave women (or were they girls?). of course, jefferson and franklin would have been hung or shot for messing around with men.

it's insane to see liberal democrats, of all people, waxing puritanical on this issue. this story should be a blip on the radar screen (as should the monica lewinsky mess). i'm embarrassed for our country. not so much because of a dirty old man, but the over-the-top, national reaction to his behavior.

don't get me wrong, foley doesn't deserve a pass. he was abusing his authority. however, i don't think it garners the amount of press and hand wringing it's receiving.

[Gary]

dirty old men have been around forever. i named a couple (jefferson and franklin) in my earlier post. these guys weren't sending dirty letters, they were actually having sex. jefferson had children with slave women (or were they girls?). of course, jefferson and franklin would have been hung or shot for messing around with men.

it's insane to see liberal democrats, of all people, waxing puritanical on this issue. this story should be a blip on the radar screen (as should the monica lewinsky mess). i'm embarrassed for our country. not so much because of a dirty old man, but the over-the-top, national reaction to his behavior.

don't get me wrong, foley doesn't deserve a pass. he was abusing his authority. however, i don't think it garners the amount of press and hand wringing it's receiving.

Once again, good post.

[nmainguy]

This was never about placing blame on a group of people....until some of our leaders had a blatant chance to do something about it and didn't. I'm not saying the Foley's act makes Rebublicans the ones to blame (HE'S the one to blame for his acts, and needs to be held accountable.) But other leaders in Congress stooped down to his level by keeping his actions quiet and LEAVING HIM IN OFFICE for the sake of no making themselves look bad. In my opinion, ANYONE who purposely did just that in Congress should look bad.

Why does this remind me of a Congressional Watergate?

In the other thread http://www.houstonarchitecture.info/haif/i...?showtopic=8061 I linked NRCC Chair Tom Reynolds' press conference where he rented a daycare center filled with kids to cover his ass from explicit questions by reporters. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o946ObydUO8&NR

We've had Hastert and Limbaugh suggest the Democrats, ABC and Soros are behind the original release of the emails [turns out it was a Republican staffer].

We've had Blunt and Boehner pointing fingers at Hastert.

We've had all kinds of fingers on the left and right pointed at "Gay Pervs."

Now we have this:

"These kids are actually precocious kids," Cannon, R-Utah, told KSL Radio's Nightside. "It looks like uh, maybe this one email is a prank where you had a bunch of kids sitting [around]egging this guy on."

And in a pervese kind of way, the only guy who's done the right thing so far is Foley because he actually quit.

So, when are we going to get back to who knew what when and stop all this deflection? After all, it did happen on Hastert's watch and I have a hard time believing "I don't remember".

I'd like to know.

The voters would like to know.

I'm guessing the kid's parent are wanting to know more than any of us why something like this was allowed to happen.

BTW, I heard a good analogy today: If this had been a 50 year old school teacher emailing 16 year old boys for "pics" and the principle had even the slightest suspicion, that teacher would have been outta there in a NY minute. In case you didn't know, Hastert was a teacher in his former life.

[TheNiche]

BTW, I heard a good analogy today: If this had been a 50 year old school teacher emailing 16 year old boys for "pics" and the principle had even the slightest suspicion, that teacher would have been outta there in a NY minute. In case you didn't know, Hastert was a teacher in his former life.

Actually, a principal that fired a teacher at the "slightest suspicion" would stand a good chance at getting his school district sued for wrongful termination. And then, regardless of whether his mere suspicion turned out to be accurate or not, that principal may still lose the case (or at least settle for a big chunk of money) and rack up a bunch of legal expenses, prompting likely retaliation on the principal by the superintendent.

Very poor analogy. Not only is it logically weak to apply something that might occur in one context to completely different context, but it doesn't often play out as described.

[TJones]

"The who knew what and when", is coming. I do believe Pelosi and a couple of other high ranking Dems. will be called to testify also. Duhn-Duhn-DUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHNNNNN !

[nmainguy]

"The who knew what and when", is coming. I do believe Pelosi and a couple of other high ranking Dems. will be called to testify also. Duhn-Duhn-DUUUUUUUUHHHHHHHNNNNN !

Nice try but it still remains that Hastert is in charge of the show, people know it and ultimatly don't care where the information came from-what they care about is the truth and the truth is Foley was enabled by the house leadership.

Besides, the Republicans have their hands full already what with their circular firing squad and their $3.95 All You Can Eat of Your Fellow Republican Buffet! [11:30 AM-2:00 PM M-F]

[TJones]

Nice try but it still remains that Hastert is in charge of the show, people know it and ultimatly don't care where the information came from-what they care about is the truth and the truth is Foley was enabled by the house leadership.

Besides, the Republicans have their hands full already what with their circular firing squad and their $3.95 All You Can Eat of Your Fellow Republican Buffet! [11:30 AM-2:00 PM M-F]

From what I'm hearing, the DemoLib websites are all touting how they had the information back in early June. Why wait 'til now ? Nmain, I'll just give you THIS to chew on.

"• In 1983, then-Democratic Rep. Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was caught in a similar situation. In his case, Studds had sex with a male teenage page -- something Foley hasn't been charged with.

Did Studds express contrition? Resign? Quite the contrary. He rejected Congress' censure of him and continued to represent his district until his retirement in 1996.

• In 1989, Rep. Barney Frank, also of Massachusetts, admitted he'd lived with Steve Gobie, a male prostitute who ran a gay sex-for-hire ring out of Frank's apartment. Frank, it was later discovered, used his position to fix 33 parking tickets for Gobie.

What happened to Frank? The House voted 408-18 to reprimand him -- a slap on the wrist. Today he's an honored Democratic member of Congress, much in demand as a speaker and "conscience of the party."

• In 2001, President Clinton, who had his own intern problem, commuted the prison sentence of Illinois Rep. Mel Reynolds, who had sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer and pressured her to lie about it. (Reynolds also was convicted of campaign spending violations.)"

Nmain, do you think those men mentioned above deserved a reprieve, or the full extent of the law ? I believe what Foley has done is a slap to the position in which he was elected, as he represents what people of this country are to be able to trust, and make the right decisions. How a "drunk", would be molestor, gets into such a position of power is beyond me. He did the right thing by withdrawing immediately, but I wish just once the media would focus on the person, and not the party. The media always gives the Dems. a pass. Hopefully, it won't be that way if the Dems. ever get back in power.

[nmainguy]

From what I'm hearing, the DemoLib websites are all touting how they had the information back in early June. Why wait 'til now ?

And some Republican Congressmen and their staffers say they've know for 3 years. Why wait till now?

Like I've said all along, I'm more interested in the welfare of the kids involved more than I am interested in covering Hastert and his gangs collective ass by saying "From what I'm hearing...blah, blah, blah..."

Let's take care of these losers then we can debate who the messenger was.

I was typing as you posted your edit but I understand Eisenhower supported his mistriss during WWII and while he was President and I've heard Thomas Jefferson had a negro slave mistriss.

Yeah, If I was trying to duck my responsibilities, I'd dig up the ancient past as well. But like I've said, I'm on the kids side-not the politicians.

[TJones]

And some Republican Congressmen and their staffers say they've know for 3 years. Why wait till now?

Like I've said all along, I'm more interested in the welfare of the kids involved more than I am interested in covering Hastert and his gangs collective ass by saying "From what I'm hearing...blah, blah, blah..."

Let's take care of these losers then we can debate who the messenger was.

I agree, we have to protect the kids. But, if the top leaders in both parties are not willing to cooperate, who CAN you trust ? Don't fool yourself though, you know Dems. get treated waaaayyyy differently for their extracurriculars than Reps. do. What will you say about your own party if and when it comes out that they KNEW of Foley's wrongdoings, but were asked to keep it "hush hush" until right before an election ?

I give a rat's A$$ who the messenger was, I am more interested in who the messengers WEREN'T, and you should be also.

[nmainguy]

I agree, we have to protect the kids. But, if the top leaders in both parties are not willing to cooperate, who CAN you trust ? Don't fool yourself though, you know Dems. get treated waaaayyyy differently for their extracurriculars than Reps. do. What will you say about your own party if and when it comes out that they KNEW of Foley's wrongdoings, but were asked to keep it "hush hush" until right before an election ?

I give a rat's A$$ who the messenger was, I am more interested in who the messengers WEREN'T, and you should be also.

So far we know who the messengers are and it's only radio talk-show "family values" drugged out whack job frauds accusing everyone BUT Republicans, there-by doing the Republican's dirty work for them.

Oh yeah, I forgot to tell you earlier: LINCOLN WAS GAY!!!!!!!!! Just ask the Log Cabin Republicans got their name!!!

[TJones]

Oh yeah, I forgot to tell you earlier: LINCOLN WAS GAY!!!!!!!!! Just ask the Log Cabin Republicans got their name!!!

Not that there is anything wrong with that.

[DJ V Lawrence]

dirty old men have been around forever. i named a couple (jefferson and franklin) in my earlier post. these guys weren't sending dirty letters, they were actually having sex. jefferson had children with slave women (or were they girls?). of course, jefferson and franklin would have been hung or shot for messing around with men.

it's insane to see liberal democrats, of all people, waxing puritanical on this issue. this story should be a blip on the radar screen (as should the monica lewinsky mess). i'm embarrassed for our country. not so much because of a dirty old man, but the over-the-top, national reaction to his behavior.

don't get me wrong, foley doesn't deserve a pass. he was abusing his authority. however, i don't think it garners the amount of press and hand wringing it's receiving.

Don't get me wrong; we've celebrated the lives of lots of dirty dudes in our history. Disney made a movie about Pocahontas and John Smith. And Edgar Allen Poe's baby mama was a relative of his. And I'm sure there were others who signed the Declaration of Independence who would have probably ended up on the Maury show's "Who's your daddy?" episode if they were alive today.

But here and now, our society has decided that what John Smith did back then is unforgivable today. By the way, I agree with you that the Monica Lewinski mess should have been a blip on the radar screen. Only reason why it was talked about was because Clinton flat-out came out and said he lied about getting his Quagmire on. But that's all tabloid stuff; not a subject for congress.

I'm not a liberal or democrat (I'm 100% independant, yo). My issue with the Foley case now is the fact that people who we depend on to make our federal laws may have tried to protect him to make them look good. They would have looked better if they were the whistleblower. This is the kind of story that deserves the national press because other congressmen may have actually kept it a SECRET that Foley was getting his Dateline on, and as a result, may have allowed Foley to do this longer than he should have been able to.

You don't think Congressmen letting a fellow congressman lure teens into god-knows-what deserves the press it's recieving?

[nmainguy]

I'm not a liberal or democrat (I'm 100% independant, yo). My issue with the Foley case now is the fact that people who we depend on to make our federal laws may have tried to protect him to make them look good. They would have looked better if they were the whistleblower. This is the kind of story that deserves the national press because other congressmen may have actually kept it a SECRET that Foley was getting his Dateline on, and as a result, may have allowed Foley to do this longer than he should have been able to.

You don't think Congressmen letting a fellow congressman lure teens into god-knows-what deserves the press it's recieving?

You hit the nail on the head. Back when Reagan ran on the "New Morning in America" banner no one mentioned he had fathered a child [Patty] out of wed-lock with Nancy Davis. No one is slamming Eisenhower for keeping a mistress. No one is calling for Drier's resignation because he is gay. No one is crying out that Hastert and the leadership covered Foley's ass because he was a safe seat-never mind kids were being compromised. But find out Kennedy may have got it on with MM or Clinton getting it on with Monica and it's all about liberals accused of destroying the fabric of America by Gingrich, Livingstone, Hastert, DeLay, Cunningham, Reynolods, the serial divorcee Carol Keaton and the soon to be outted Melhman and Drier.

It's beyond laughabale.

[TJones]

The track record shows that Dems. always get a pass on these kind of issues, while Reps. get the political Guillotine. It is my belief though, that anyone that is guilty of wrongdoing should suffer the SAME consequences, and not have a double standard. Nothing ever happened to Kennedy, nor has anything ever happened to Teddy either. Please don't try to bring up any Kennedy as your point, they are the Teflon family of this country, and it has been proven time and time again. If Foley is guilty of more than a few disgusting emails, then he should be locked away. I do liken him with the pervs you see on Dateline, where these P.O.S.s come in looking to hook up with some underage teen that they have been talking to on the internet, only to be busted by the news crew. Whatever penalty that holds in Florida is what I believe Foley should be subjected to.

[RedScare]

The track record shows that Dems. always get a pass on these kind of issues, while Reps. get the political Guillotine.

There is a reason for this, but it appears that this reason escapes you, or you merely do not wish to admit it.

I am content to merely sit back and enjoy the spectacle of grown men...and their supporters, who have previously trumpetted their morality and piety, contorting themselves into pretzel like shapes, as they try to prove to the world that they are not what they had condemned. Naming others who have done the same does nothing more than amuse me further, as I know that these grown men used those very names as reasons why they were the better candidate.

Watching the hypocrites crumble is such grand sport!

[TJones]

Agreed Red, If you don't put yourself out there as a Stallworth of Morality, then I guess you can't be condemned when your evil ways come to light. Still doesn't change the fact that these are all people that WE, the American public, are supposed to be able to trust, with our very lives. Hate to write it up as Politics as usual, but that is what it is. I agree with watching Hypocrites crumble also. Don't spout off about it, if you can't tow the line for it.

[DJ V Lawrence]

The track record shows that Dems. always get a pass on these kind of issues, while Reps. get the political Guillotine. It is my belief though, that anyone that is guilty of wrongdoing should suffer the SAME consequences, and not have a double standard. Nothing ever happened to Kennedy, nor has anything ever happened to Teddy either. Please don't try to bring up any Kennedy as your point, they are the Teflon family of this country, and it has been proven time and time again. If Foley is guilty of more than a few disgusting emails, then he should be locked away. I do liken him with the pervs you see on Dateline, where these P.O.S.s come in looking to hook up with some underage teen that they have been talking to on the internet, only to be busted by the news crew. Whatever penalty that holds in Florida is what I believe Foley should be subjected to.

That's my problem with this subject when it comes to the media: It becomes a political story instead of a Foley story. Why should it matter what Clinton, Kennedy, Delay, Gingrich, Limbaugh, etc. did when this is supposed to be strictly a Foley case. Each one is unique, and I don't think it should be a "if it was a Democrat/Republican in office, things would have been treated differently" kinda thing. And if we do compare Foley to anyone, it should be a Dateline dude. There shouldn't be any comparison with any other scandals of the past in order to decide his news coverage or legal fate.

TJones, I agree with U 100% that he should be held under the penalties of Florida if found guilty. I also think though that there should be a Congressional hearing after the Foley trial to expose those who didn't investigate when they had the information given to them. No one has to resign yet. Just let the voters decide if they should stay in office or not in their next election with the truth known.

[dalparadise]

Once again, good post.

Yours is even better.

[TJones]

Yours is even better.

Apparently Gary has a fan, or a fanatical troll. Watch your 6 Gary. I know Dal is.

[TOMIKA!]

the title of this thread is whack. if republicans are scum because of foley then:

gay people are scum because of jeffrey dahmer,

democrats are scum because of bill clinton,

white people are scum because of the unabomber,

arabic people are scum because of osama bin ladin (sp?), and so on.

ever heard of a republican environmentalist? or how about a democratic evangelical, pro lifer? as someone said earlier........."what's wrong with a gay republican?"). it is inflammatory (and i'm guilty of it too) to generalize about a group of people based on a bad apple (or two, or ten ).

this foley guy is simply a dirty old man. if this were female pages it wouldn't have half the attention it's getting. the media and the democrats homophobia is showing.

I'm a Democrat and, although I don't think it was right, I personally could give a darn what Foley did. Whatever he did was FAR less harmful to this country than what else is being done by Republicans. I think it is laughable (and very sad) that the hoards of people are dying in Iraq, the fact that our civil rights are being yanked away, and the fact that our environment is on the verge of disaster is not even being discussed...yet a few emails sent to teenage boys gets everybody all excited (no pun intended).

The part I'm so ecstatic about is that Republicans in this case are reaping what they've sewn. They're holier-than-though, intolerant attitude is biting them in the ass. I love it! Republicans really are scum, but not because of some stupid emails; it's all the rest of the crap. It's just funny our country likes to turn away from all the REAL problems and focus on things such as a gay pedophile. Gotta love it!

[nmainguy]

I'm a Democrat and, although I don't think it was right, I personally could give a darn what Foley did. Whatever he did was FAR less harmful to this country than what else is being done by Republicans. I think it is laughable (and very sad) that the hoards of people are dying in Iraq, the fact that our civil rights are being yanked away, and the fact that our environment is on the verge of disaster is not even being discussed...yet a few emails sent to teenage boys gets everybody all excited (no pun intended).

The part I'm so ecstatic about is that Republicans in this case are reaping what they've sewn. They're holier-than-though, intolerant attitude is biting them in the ass. I love it! Republicans really are scum, but not because of some stupid emails; it's all the rest of the crap. It's just funny our country likes to turn away from all the REAL problems and focus on things such as a gay pedophile. Gotta love it!

Your second part answered your first part. Yes, the party of "family values" has shown they place power at the top of their values list and now they been exposed.

However not all Republicans are scum-they just happen to be lumped in with the somewhat ethically-challenged leadership.

As far as giving a darn about what Foley did, I give a HUGE darn when an adult preys on a child. It has nothing to do with being gay. It has to do with a powerful man using his position to prey on adolescents and then having the leadership empower him by covering it up.

As someone else in the Korea thread so callously put it: this is not a "petty sex scandal". This is about those in power who choose power first above all. There is nothing petty about that in the least.

[TheNiche]

As someone else in the Korea thread so callously put it: this is not a "petty sex scandal". This is about those in power who choose power first above all. There is nothing petty about that in the least.

I suppose historians will unrelentingly harp on the congressional sex scandal of 2006? I think not. Sex scandals have been a recurring theme in politics throughout the history of civilizations throughout the world. This is nothing new and you can expect nothing to change.

What'll matter are issues related to human rights, the interactions of economic institutions throughout the world, and geopolitical conflicts. So, as sweet as the irony is with respect to this petty sex scandal, I'm still very much convinced that there's too much focus on this issue and not enough focus on the big issues.

[Mark F. Barnes]

I'm a Democrat and, although I don't think it was right, I personally could give a darn what Foley did. Whatever he did was FAR less harmful to this country than what else is being done by Republicans. I think it is laughable (and very sad) that the hoards of people are dying in Iraq, the fact that our civil rights are being yanked away, and the fact that our environment is on the verge of disaster is not even being discussed...yet a few emails sent to teenage boys gets everybody all excited (no pun intended).

The part I'm so ecstatic about is that Republicans in this case are reaping what they've sewn. They're holier-than-though, intolerant attitude is biting them in the ass. I love it! Republicans really are scum, but not because of some stupid emails; it's all the rest of the crap. It's just funny our country likes to turn away from all the REAL problems and focus on things such as a gay pedophile. Gotta love it!

I suppose historians will unrelentingly harp on the congressional sex scandal of 2006? I think not. Sex scandals have been a recurring theme in politics throughout the history of civilizations throughout the world. This is nothing new and you can expect nothing to change.

What'll matter are issues related to human rights, the interactions of economic institutions throughout the world, and geopolitical conflicts. So, as sweet as the irony is with respect to this petty sex scandal, I'm still very much convinced that there's too much focus on this issue and not enough focus on the big issues.

What bothers me more than anything is the fact that society has trained a majority of people to accept the possibility of a pedophile, or the possibility abuse of any child, less an issue than anything. There are no victims in Iraq wearing a uniform. Every man and woman over there are volunteers, they are all adults, they chose to take the road they are on. My son Jason has had chances to come home several times, however he chooses to extend his stay because he feels he has a job to do, and that he is not finished.

Children that are preyed upon by pedophiles are victims. None of them took oaths to be molested, non of them volunteered to be preyed upon. Some of them made bad choices and put themselves in the position to be preyed upon easier, none the less the were preyed upon. An individual with an incurable disease sought them out and either committed a crime upon them or was caught just prior to. That is an inexcusable crime. One from which there should be no appeal in my opinion. I am not talking about the 19 year old boy that got caught in bed with his 16 year old girlfriend, I am talking about the 30 plus year old and the adolescents. The 5, 6, 8 and 10 year olds; the 12 year olds etc. How can you begin to compare this to the war in Iraq, the environment, civil rights, etc. etc. etc. The are no longer heinous victims of civil rights violations, outside of a few isolated incidents like James Byrd. I can remember when civil rights was a huge issue, when they were still dragging people through the streets of Jackson Mississippi, burning down churches. I remember black and white segregation, separate toilets and water fountains and such. Those were bad times, but they were still not comparable to raping a child in my opinion. Two totally different and incomparable tragedies none the less. The world is far from perfect today when it comes to civil rights, but it is a whole lot better. I am curious if you know the difference between civil rights and civil liberties?. (Red Help me here if I am wrong) Civil liberties are rights that individuals have against government. Citizens of the United States refused to ratify the Constitution unless a Bill of Rights was added, specifically protecting them against official infringements of their "inalienable rights." Among our civil liberties are the right to free expression, the right to worship (or not) as we choose, and the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. After the civil war, the 14th Amendment added the Equal Protection Clause, prohibiting government from treating equally situated citizens unequally. The 14th Amendment also applied the provisions of the Bill of Rights to all levels of government -- not just the federal government, as was originally the case, but also to state and local government agencies.

Only the government can violate your civil liberties. Civil rights took a lot longer and were a lot more controversial.

It was 1964 before Congress passed the Civil Rights Act. Civil rights laws protect people against private acts of discrimination -- discrimination in employment, in housing or education. The original Civil Rights Act applied to businesses engaged in interstate commerce -- businesses that held themselves out to be "public accommodations" but were, shall we say, "selective" about which segments of the public they were willing to accommodate. State and local civil rights acts followed. Civil rights laws generally include a list of characteristics that cannot be used to favor some people over others: race, religion, gender and so forth. There was a lot of resistance to civil rights laws, and there is still a widespread, if covert, attitude of "What business does government have telling me I can't discriminate?" That resentment has redoubled as new groups have lobbied for protection. The fiercest resistance has come from people opposed to extending civil rights to gays and lesbians. Those opponents have taken advantage of the widespread confusion of civil liberties with civil rights to argue that the 14th Amendment already protects gays, so amending things like Indiana's civil rights law, or Marion County's Human Relations Ordinance is unnecessary. (After all, that's easier than taking a public position that "those people" don't deserve equal civil rights.)

But again none of this is comparable to the actions of a pedophile. Not dragging James Byrd down the back roads of Jasper County, or Matthew Shepard, who was killed in Wyoming in 1998. Heinous yes, deplorable yes, but not comparable. And to be labeled a petty sex scandal so easily is down right scary. Society has been programed to accept it so easily it is beyond me. You want to worry about global warming great, let's protect our kids from being raped before we worry whether or not our climate is changing or the ambient temperature has risen 4 degrees in 200 years; or whether the sea level has risen 4 inches in 50 decades. Then in the same breath so easily dismiss dear Uncle Bubba slipping the meat to your little brother every night before bedtime in lieu of having to struggle through reading Dr. Seuss to him with his 5 grade education, as a petty sex scandal.

[bachanon]

mr. barnes, we are talking about young adults chatting with a dirty old man online. no sexual contact. no prepubescent having their innocence stolen. this was a misuse of authority, not sexual abuse. sexual harrassment, not rape.

i think that some people would be far less dismissive of this petty sex scandal if it were children under 12. being that it was 16 & 17 year olds who had demonstrated the maturity to become pages and there were no sexual encounters involved, i can't see comparing foley to someone who's a REAL pedophile.

as i've said earlier, i do not believe that foley deserves a pass. however, i do not think it is prudent to compare someone who is having sexual contact with children with someone who is being verbally lude with young adults.

there are more important issues facing our country than the foley issue.

[nmainguy]

What bothers me more than anything is the fact that society has trained a majority of people to accept the possibility of a pedophile, or the possibility abuse of any child, less an issue than anything.

Great post, Mark.

I'd have to disagree with you about the majority. I still have faith that those who would write this off as a "petty sex scandal" are in the minority. The polls show it and common decency demands it. The world is full of problems and callous individuals with seemingly no regard for the welfare of kids. I'm just happy not to be living in their skin.