Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity
About Chris Cillizza  |  On Twitter: The Fix and The Hyper Fix  |  On Facebook  |  On YouTube  |  RSS Feeds RSS Feed

Florida's 16th District: Rep. Foley Drops Out

Rep. Mark Foley (R-Fla.) today resigned from Congress, putting his congressional seat up for grabs just 39 days before the election.

Foley has represented the 16th District since 1994 and has regularly been mentioned as a potential candidate for statewide office. He was a candidate for the U.S. Senate briefly in 2003 before dropping out, citing his desire to spend more time with his parents.

His abrupt decision to step down from his seat comes one day after ABC News reported the existence of e-mails sent by Foley last fall to a 16-year-old boy who formerly served as a congressional page. In the messages, Foley reportedly asked the boy what he wanted for his birthday and requested that the boy send a photo of himself to Foley. (The St. Petersburg Times caught up with the boy some time ago but waited to report on it until today.)

Foley's departure is likely to create havoc for Republicans in the district. The district carries a Republican tilt -- President George W. Bush won it with 54 percent in 2004. But given the controversy and press attention likely to engulf Foley, this seat could well emerge as a late-breaking opportunity for Democrats.

UPDATE: Rep. Foley's name will remain on the Nov. 7 ballot, although Republicans will be allowed to designate a candidate who will receive all of the votes cast for the outgoing incumbent.

The legal explanation for the so-called "replacement candidate" goes back to 2004 when former Wilton Manor Mayor Jim Stork (D-Fla.) dropped out of the race against Rep. Clay Shaw (R-Fla.) with just 40 days remaining before the election. At the time, the Republican Secretary of State denied Stork's request to withdraw, meaning that Democrats were left without a candidate. The Democratic Party appealed and won a court decision that allowed officials to pick Robin Rorapaugh as the replacement candidate who would receive Stork's votes. Shaw won easily.

Here's what the Florida election statute says:

(4)(a) In the event that death, resignation, withdrawal, removal, or any other cause or event should cause a party to have a vacancy in nomination which leaves no candidate for an office from such party, the Department of State shall notify the chair of the appropriate state, district, or county political party executive committee of such party; and, within 5 days, the chair shall call a meeting of his or her executive committee to consider designation of a nominee to fill the vacancy. The name of any person so designated shall be submitted to the Department of State within 7 days after notice to the chair in order that the person designated may have his or her name on the ballot of the ensuing general election. If the name of the new nominee is submitted after the certification of results of the preceding primary election, however, the ballots shall not be changed and the former party nominee's name will appear on the ballot. Any ballots cast for the former party nominee will be counted for the person designated by the political party to replace the former party nominee. If there is no opposition to the party nominee, the person designated by the political party to replace the former party nominee will be elected to office at the general election. For purposes of this paragraph, the term "district political party executive committee" means the members of the state executive committee of a political party from those counties comprising the area involving a district office.

Here's a link to the statute. Go to page 31 for the relevant text.

By Chris Cillizza  |  September 29, 2006; 6:36 PM ET
Categories:  House  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Wrapping up the Ohio River Ramble
Next: Frist Recruits Two Key Players


Although Hastert's actions regarding Foley and Foley's actions in their own right warrant both being removed from Congress, I actually consider the Republican leadership's failure to introduce a resolution to expel Bob Ney to be even worse.

Foley and Congressman Jefferson are entitled to the presumption of innocence no matter how true it appears that allegations against them are. However Bob Ney is an admitted felon awaiting sentencing for breaking federal laws regarding the misuse of his office for his own personal gain.

Federal workers (even secretaries and clerks) are suspended indefinitely upon being indicted and never permitted to return to work if convicted. Even if they are exonerated in many instances they remain dismissed because the standard of proof to take their job is substantially less than the standard of proof to support a criminal conviction.

Failing to put forward a resolution to expel Ney is an affront to American values regarding ethics in government and another example that the pious, self-righteous party that impeached Bill Clinton over an affair has double, gutter standards when applying that piety and self-righteousness to itself.

Posted by: NonAmnesiac | October 3, 2006 12:14 PM | Report abuse

GOP = Group Of Pedophiles? Sick, sick, sick.

Posted by: Nomad | October 2, 2006 8:29 PM | Report abuse

Hey, what happend to Jeff Guckert

Posted by: Anonymous | October 2, 2006 7:35 PM | Report abuse

Hey, what happend to Jeff Guckert?

Posted by: Anonymous | October 2, 2006 7:07 PM | Report abuse

the latest wisdom from His Majesty of Zouk:

"the R resigned. the D s don't. a simple point but clearly beyond your comprehension."

what i would say:

1. Nixon resigned, too. Remember him?
2. Sadly, Cheney and Rumsfeld have yet to follow suit.
3. finally, do you refer to a legal situation involving some Democrats which has yet to be resolved? Didn't think so. Foley is recent AND relevant, especially representing as he does the party of Jay-sus and Good Christian Living.
4. Teasing Republicans is both easy and fun, especially these days.

Posted by: karl | October 2, 2006 6:41 PM | Report abuse

From the NYT; this could have been written by us:

"Mr. Foley gets triple bonus points for hypocrisy. As co-chairman of the House caucus on missing and exploited children, he has been a fierce advocate for tough sanctions against people who sexually exploit children over the Internet. Not that Democrats have been pointing this out relentlessly since the news broke or anything.

Or reminding people that Mr. Foley was a big supporter of President Clinton's impeachment.

"Part of his thing was, 'What do we tell the children?'" recalls the longtime Clinton aide Paul Begala. "Apparently, we'll tell them in a sexually explicit e-mail."

Gleeful, anyone? It's unclear exactly where this fits in, but any story about politicians and sex scandals feels incomplete without the iconic quote from Edwin Edwards, the rascally former governor of Louisiana: "The only way I can lose this election," Mr. Edwards once boasted to reporters, "is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy."

He said nothing about instant messaging, however."

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | October 2, 2006 2:21 PM | Report abuse

Okay let's try and focus on what matters here. The boy was underage, Foley was one of the members working on legislation to protect children from pediphiles preying on children, Republican members on the committee responsible for the Page program let Foley continue even after being notified in September 2005, the only Democrat on the committee was kept in the dark.

So now does the GOP stand for Grand O'Party or Grand O'Pediphiles?

Posted by: josh | October 2, 2006 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Well, for anyone who hasn't read some of the e-mails, they should, but then Foley came out today and said IT WAS THE BOOZE, I read the e-mails and it's obvious this isn't the first incident for this guy. It's also apparent that Hassertt and Bohner knew about this more then six months to a year ago and simply shut up. Oh what a terrible web we weave, so I guess the knew slogan for the Repubs should be, vote for us, were the party of corruption, pedophiles, crooks, liars, big money, big business and the best part, avid churchgoers who are the MORAL MAJORITY! I am so disgusted with our government every single one of them on both sides including Bush, Cheney, Rummy, Rove, Rice and everyone in this administration. Grannysue

Posted by: Sue Filutze | October 2, 2006 10:23 AM | Report abuse

OD is right. Not telling the 9/11 commission abt the July meeting is highly highly suspect. Im glad this stuff is starting to come out. Their negligence was apparently at the catastrophic level.

Hastert needs to resign, Rumsfeld needs to resign and Bush needs to resign.

Posted by: F&B | October 2, 2006 2:54 AM | Report abuse

Disturbing as these implications are, a homosexual pedophile chairing the Committee on Exploited Children while attempting to sexually exploit a sixteen-year-old Page, we should wait until the F.B.I. concludes its investigation into the nature of their correspondence before condemning the entire morally righteous Republican Party for its possible foreknowledge, and lack of action regarding the security of our nation's children. Although homosexuality is not a crime, it is considered immoral by most Republicans, but pedophilia, is held by both parties to be both immoral and criminal. So, if the Congressman is found to have solicited this adolescent male for sexual favors over the Internet, a crime was likely committed.

Posted by: Nightlance | October 2, 2006 2:33 AM | Report abuse

The worst of it is, the GOP scandals come so thick and fast, that the Foley business might even help them distract attention from this infinitely more serious matter:

Members of the Sept. 11 commission said today that they were alarmed that they were told nothing about a White House meeting in July 2001 at which George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, is reported to have warned Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser, about an imminent Al Qaeda attack and failed to persuade her to take action.

Posted by: OD | October 2, 2006 2:23 AM | Report abuse

The GOP has lost 4 Congressmen so far to scandal this year, but the Foley fiasco and the possible cover-up mean more heads could role even before the election. Regardless, these events threaten to turn a bad November for the Republicans into a 1994-style earthquake. The monumental hubris of the ruling party has earned it an extended turn as the minority party.

Posted by: Nomad | October 2, 2006 1:59 AM | Report abuse

They'll undoubtedly change the subject, just as they always do when confronted with facts.

Posted by: peixegato | October 2, 2006 12:02 AM | Report abuse

I was shocked to hear that the Florida GOP could name a replacement for Foley and that the replacement, who would not be able to have his/her name on the ballot, could receive all the votes cast for Foley! When Senator Paul Wellstone was killed in a plane crash just days before the 2002 election, those of us here in Minnesota who had voted via absentee ballot were not allowed to recast our votes for the replacement candidate (Walter Mondale), nor were our votes counted toward his candidacy. We were disenfranchised. Yet every vote for Foley will count for the Republicans. That's just sick ...

Posted by: Barb, St. Paul | October 1, 2006 11:20 PM | Report abuse

do you believe in karma? the GOP and it's right wing/moralist cohorts are reaping it for what they have done to the clintons. serve them right. the irony is their religious leaders won't even say anything about this foley case or if they do, not as intense or as vicious when the monica case came out.are they really men of God? or patrons of corrupt politicians and system?

Posted by: scorpio | October 1, 2006 11:16 PM | Report abuse

subject?? What subject?? KoZ and Bhoomes never have a subject. They like to ramble about nothing and blame it on the Dems.

Posted by: Rob Millette | October 1, 2006 9:01 PM | Report abuse

You know, as shocking as it is, a lot of wingers are trying to make it away under the cornfield... just clap your hands over your ears and screech 'slick willy' at the top of your lungs. It's unbelievable, or would be if we didn't already know how brainwashed and braindead they are.

The true cultists of the base will find a way to forgive or ignore, they will say it's 'one bad apple' like they always do. They've been rationalizing and justifying for so long it's a kneejerk impulse. They have so deeply internalized the demonization of democrats that I'm sure they honestly believe no matter how bad R's are, D's are bound be worse.

Wait and watch....zouk and bhoomes and the rest of that ilk will come back soon and you'll see. They truly have no shame.

Posted by: drindl | October 1, 2006 8:04 PM | Report abuse

I want my party back. It has been highjacked by total nut case perverts. DOnt think for a minute the Southern Baptists dont have womanizers, pedophiles, and others masquerading in their mists. Lets not forget the foundation of the right wing movement came about by televanglists Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggert, and the nut case of all nut cases Pat Robertson. The brainwashing of America has been in fashiion for over 25 years. Now is the time to restore the fundamental rule of separation of church and state. Just look at Iran and other areas where a theology is used to run a government. This is what Bush presidency is about.. A theoracy, not a democracy.

I'll take a Colin Powell Republican any day of the week over any of these nut cases. Hell, I'll take Hillary Clinton over the Bushies.

Posted by: An Ashamed R | October 1, 2006 8:01 PM | Report abuse

The difference between Democrats' sexual morality and Republicans' sexual morality is that Democrats believe in live and let live provided everyone consents. A minor can't consent, neither can an animal etc. And they generally think that extremely disgusting and harmful stuff should be avoided -- like bodily injury and incest. Sex in general is not seen as bad or particularly dangerous.

Republicans on the other hand have a weird amalgam of quips from the Bible, mainly Old Testament, mixed together with a rigid 1950s ideal of traditional gender roles. Sex is seen as impure and dangerous, and in need of strict rules and controls, lest everyone go mad and start raping one another on the streets. With such a gothic point of view, I tend to think that Repub's trend kinky, if not outright perverted like their representative from Florida.

Posted by: Callie | October 1, 2006 7:56 PM | Report abuse

The talking points memo will go out this weekend and tell every good rightie to talk about how corruption and bad seeds are on both sides of the isle and that it should be rooted out, regardless of whether it is a republican or Democrat.

I saw Bay Buchannan on the Situation Room a few days ago with James Carville and she had the nerve to say that just as many Democrats are under investigation as Republicans. Sounds like this is the way they are going to spin it.

They will make this arguement while ignoring the fact that House leaders knew what was going on long before this story become public.

Posted by: Peixegato | October 1, 2006 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Hilarious JEP. "R" rated indeed.

When is Hastert going to take responsibility and resign for enabling online sex predation in his caucus? Place yer bets.

My guess is buried under some terrorism propaganda in the late Friday evening news cycle.

Predictions re: outcomes? Anyone else?

Posted by: F&B | October 1, 2006 5:58 PM | Report abuse

...did you hear the one about the "Desperate Housewives" spin-off for next season?

Its called "Desperate House Members".

Losts of sordid stuff, should be a real hit.

And it has an "R" rating!

Posted by: JEP | October 1, 2006 3:47 PM | Report abuse

From today's WAPO Foley story, comment from a poster;

"I wish it was your kid that a predetor was persuing and his bosses were trying to cover the predetors political butt."

Don't wish that on anyone's child.

Too many people have suffered irreparable damage to their psychological and sexual development because of these serpentine predators.

But I see your point, and I agree, if this poster who defends these pedophile R's first then asks questions later, was personally connected, either as the victim or a parent of the vicitim, they would not be so quick to dismiss it as "political."

Actually, it is an even bigger shame the republicans aren't being judged for their epidemic political, military and diplomatic failures, their no-bid billionaire contracts and systemic election cheating. Instead,it will be the closet hypocrisy with their own sexual perversion issues that finally wakes up their numbed-out cult.

Our rights have been eroded, we are in a no-win trillion dollar war, we pay billions for non-existent Iraqi and New Orleans reconstruction, our own White House outs one of our CIA agents, and the whole world hates us, (except Poland.)

Lots of very good reasons for the American people to demand and effect a change in Washington DC.

But, unfortunately, all that wasn't enough to tip the scales against these no-bid, book-cooking neocon nationwreckers, it took a Republican pervert fiddling around with the Congressional Pages to shock some of the diehard Republican apologizers into their real moral senses.

This will be a most historic week in American politics.

I am fairly certain before it is over, in political-history reference books of the future, many Bush era Republicans will wear a scarlet asterisk as pedophile enablers, possibly even as pedophiles themselves, if some of those suburban legends that are circulating on the blogs are actually true.

And what a strange, perverted twist it has taken, it makes Clinton's White House escapades look wholesome in comparison.

Not only was Monica of legal age, she was an adult WOMAN, not an impressionable underaged boy!

Even our state, local and federal legal codes recognize there surely IS a difference.

The Republican Christian fundamentalists should all understand that simple comparison.

It really puts the moral Republicans on the spot, because they either have to defy their own convictions to defend the perverts, or admit there are perverts in their midst and hold to their convictions.

After this latest Republican perversion scandal, Clinton's personal excess doesn't seem quite as unseemly as it did back then.

I bet there's more than one confused Republican who yearns for those simple good-old days of trumped-up heterosexual scandal.

This news about a perverted MALE Republican trying to turn an obviously bright kid into a boy-toy, is just too embarrassing and incredible for them to digest.

Posted by: JEP | October 1, 2006 3:28 PM | Report abuse

I'm amazed that anyone is even mentioning Clinton in the same breath as internet paedophilia. You Americans are so hung up on sex.

When Britain's deputy PM was caught cheating on his wife this summer the media flap lasted about a week, and even that was only because he'd misused government property for his trysts.

Yep, you Americans are really weird about's just that Republicans are even weirder. Downright creepy, in fact.

Posted by: OD | October 1, 2006 1:30 PM | Report abuse

This government administration only knows how to spin a story. They are too incompentant to actually run a government.

Posted by: An Ashamed R | October 1, 2006 1:04 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone else find it ironic, that if a Democrat was accused of these shenanigans would have been vilified on every wing-nut talk-show from Clear Channel to Fox.

Instead they're spinning it desperately, I wonder how wingnut psuedo-pundits like Ann Coulter and Sean Hannity will deal with this one.
They risk being perceived as pedophile enablers if they stick to their party lines.

Yet any other course but their typical defending of the Republicans and neocons will make them seem weak and wrong, so their only opportunity is to spin it in some wierd fashion, and try to deflect it onto the Dems somehow.

This should be good.

I wonder how the White House will respond?

Posted by: JEP | October 1, 2006 10:17 AM | Report abuse

"It was not the creepy emails, which the boy realized immediately what was up, but the explicit IM sex talk between Foley and other pages that lead to the resignation."

The boy's revealing of the emails just exposed the tip of the iceberg, even before the IM's came out, we all suspected there was a lot more 'berg hiding neath the surface, and when the other IM's came out, we knew for certain.

And this iceberg will sink the Republican's Titanic, at least the neocons stranglehold on the party will be broken due to the sheer weight of hypocrisy.
No matter how they spin it, this is a Republican mess of monumental proportions, and will make Clinton's Monica asterisk look downright wholesome in comparison.

Yalk about pure gall, there's a few posters working the reply box of the Republican pervertgate story this morning here in the Post, who are actually suggesting the Dems are to blame because they knew all about it and didn't do anything until closer to election time, then they "released" it.

Now there's some Machiavellian strategy worthy of the 21st Century Neocon Republicans.

Is Rove working for the Dems now?

Sounds like one of his schemes.

Wonder what old Turdblossom is wearing?

Posted by: JEP | October 1, 2006 9:43 AM | Report abuse

First shorter GOP House leadership: Nothing to see here!

Next shorter GOP House leadership: Pound sand.

FInal shorter GOP House leadership: It's the other guys fault!

Posted by: vienna local | October 1, 2006 8:33 AM | Report abuse

It was not the creepy emails, which the boy realized immediately what was up, but the explicit IM sex talk between Foley and other pages that lead to the resignation.

When is the media going to report on the other GOP officials whose secret sex lives set them up for illegal activities and later blackmail?

Posted by: Gary Denton | October 1, 2006 4:31 AM | Report abuse

Predatorgate latest:


The timeline of what Speaker Dennis Hastert knew and when he knew it, has seemed to change throughout the last 48 hours. Late 9/30 p.m., the Speaker's office released a fairly detailed explanation of when Speaker's office first learned of the complaint. (See below post). But the explanation doesn't answer every question.


"Anyone who was involved in the chain of information should come forward and tell when they were told, what they were told and what they did with the information when they got it," said Representative Peter T. King, Republican of New York. Mr. King called it a "dark day" for Congress and said, "We need a full investigation."

Representative Christopher Shays, Republican of Connecticut, said any leader who had been aware of Mr. Foley's behavior and failed to take action should step down. "If they knew or should have known the extent of this problem, they should not serve in leadership," Mr. Shays said.


So the centerpiece point of the Hastert statement this evening appears to have been a fabrication.

It stood up for maybe three or four hours.

At present, the Speaker is committed to portraying himself as a sort of Speaker Magoo. We're supposed to believe that pretty much everyone in the House GOP leadership knew about this but him.

These fibs and turnabouts amount to a whole far larger than the sum of its parts. Even the most cynical politicians carefully vet their stories to assure that they cannot easily be contradicted by other credible personages. When you see Majority Leaders and Speakers and Committee chairs calling each other liars in public you know that the underlying story is very bad, that the system of coordination and hierarchy has broken down and that each player believes he's in a fight for his life. -- Josh Marshall

And lastly, ironically...

Keeping Kids Safe in Cyberspace FEATURED on Hastert's website...

Dennis Hastert keeping online predators away from unsuspecting teens is like Bush keeping us safe from terrorist attacks. They should both be forced to resign.

Posted by: F&B | October 1, 2006 3:26 AM | Report abuse

'Even if Charlie Crist is gay, to imply that a pedophilia scandal involving another politician should affect him would require the most ridiculous bigotry to even conceive of it.'

He's gonna be in trouble with GOP voters then.

Posted by: OD | October 1, 2006 1:18 AM | Report abuse

Well even if Crist is gay, at least he is not like McCreepy the former govenor of NJ. The difference is Crist is not married and is not lying to his wife like McCreepy did.

Posted by: An Ashamed R | October 1, 2006 12:26 AM | Report abuse

Why would "this" do anything at all to Charlie Crist? Other than the fact that both Mark Foley and Crist are Republicans from Florida, there would seem to be no connection. Even if Charlie Crist is gay, to imply that a pedophilia scandal involving another politician should affect him would require the most ridiculous bigotry to even conceive of it.

Posted by: Staley | September 30, 2006 11:59 PM | Report abuse

Why is anybody buying this hogwash that nobody saw the email because they wanted to protect the family's privacy?

If there's one thing this bunch knows well, it's the fine art of redacting documents. Why couldn't they simply remove the name and email address?

Am I really the only person who is seeing through this gaping hole in their cover-up?

Posted by: Rob (D) | September 30, 2006 11:39 PM | Report abuse


'An aide to Rep. Tom Reynolds, the New York congressman who heads the National Republican Campaign Committee, said he knew about the matter a year ago.

Majority Leader John Boehner, an Ohio Republican, learned about the contacts from Louisiana Rep. Alexander in the spring, said Boehner's spokesman, Kevin Madden.

"It was Congressman Alexander's opinion that the contact was not of a professional nature," Madden said.

Boehner blocked a vote Friday on a resolution offered by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi asking the House Ethics Committee to begin a preliminary investigation into Foley's conduct and the GOP leadership's response to it.

The California Democrat's resolution would have started an investigation of "when the Republican leadership was notified and what corrective action was taken," according to her statement.'

Posted by: DRINDL | September 30, 2006 11:37 PM | Report abuse

My oh my, what an interesting kettle of (stinking) fish!

Comparing Studds to Foley is like a minnow to a marlin. Studds had sex, bad but no biggie, what Foley's done is downright creepy.

Besides, like as not, pedophilia isn't the same issue in 2006 as it was in 1983.

Funny that all Republicans know how to do is blame Democrats, even when it's their own laundry is dirty.

But the bigger issue here isn't just Foley, it's Reynolds and Hastert. What did Hastert know and when did he know it? Was he taking advice from the Vatican?

Posted by: equern | September 30, 2006 11:03 PM | Report abuse

Foley may have invented a new term.. p.....diddleing as in pedophile diddleling

Posted by: An Ashamed "R" | September 30, 2006 10:55 PM | Report abuse

I guess I'm stupid, because i have so many 'misimpressions' about the invasion of Iraq:

" President Bush on Saturday challenged "misimpressions" about the Iraq war as he battled a gloomy intelligence assessment of the conflict and the fallout of a book portraying him as in denial over it.

Bush used his weekly radio address to hit back at critics who cited the newly declassified National Intelligence Estimate as evidence the Iraq war has worsened the terrorism threat. He said early leaks about it created "a lot of misimpressions about the document's conclusions."

"Some in Washington have selectively quoted from this document to make the case that by fighting the terrorists in Iraq, we are making our people less secure here at home," he said. "This argument buys into the enemy's propaganda that the terrorists attack us because we are provoking them."

--'Some in washington' -- you know, those insiders, not like much of a ripoff is this of reagan -- 'some of those fellas'--it's truly pathetic. 'buys into the enemy's propaganda' -- yes, by criticizing the conduct of the king. Oh, excuse me.

Posted by: drindl | September 30, 2006 10:32 PM | Report abuse

Looks like this story will be the front page headline of Sunday's NY Times.

"Pagegate" has now begun.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 30, 2006 10:29 PM | Report abuse

What does this do to Charlie Christ? The single, no child, sometimes accused of being gay (even by his R primary opponent) (not so directly, but still implied) R Candidate for FLorida Governor.

He's been serving as AG while Foley has been at least attempting to diddle the underaged page. Where will be his outrage, or will it simply be his out-ing?

Did they go out together? Do they?

Posted by: florida voter | September 30, 2006 8:34 PM | Report abuse

Something tells me that Congress's 25% approval rating is going to drop even lower thanks to this Foley scandal. Imagine if we had an aggressive watchdog media to delve into this scandal rather than the corporate lapdogs that would rather perpetuate lies than seek out the truth. Corruption and cover-ups dominate modern politics because our press no longer fulfills it's proper role as fourth estate to our government.
The GOP will doubtlessly try to make this appear as though only Foley is involved. While Foley is doubtlessly the main culprit, it MUST be looked into whether or not he had any enablers covering up for him. We all learned a lesson about human nature with the Catholic priest scandal from not long ago; It'd be naive to think the GOP leadership in Congress wasn't trying to do the same thing... enabling/allowing pedophilia privately so as not to be damaged by it publicly.

Posted by: ErrinF | September 30, 2006 8:00 PM | Report abuse

To much dismay, I am hereby declaring my total abandonment as registered voter of the party of Lincoln.

G.O.P.takes on a new meaning. What a hoot. Get the t-shirts and bumper stickers ready.

SO now the Dems have been given yet another gift from the right. Can they capitalize?

This has been one heck of a week and I suspect the turning point in the 2006 elections. Bush and by affiliation has stymied the Dems progress and had made modest rebound in their GOP Base. Now the die-hard are going to have a tough time standing for the party of Lincoln.

Lets see: Clinton get the ball rolling with his Shermanesque stance to stop the right wing proganda. This revs up Democratic base.

Then the NIE confirms Bush's decision has spread terrorism and the world is not safe. This questions Bush's own rhetoric and validates Dems arguments.

Then Woodward publishes a book on the hoodwinking or LIES being told to the American people.....AGAIN calls into question the White Houses lies.

Then Foley pagegate breaks open.....reinvorating the Culture of Corruption charges by Dems

NOW, look at the book preview on Colin Powell that is coming out on Oct. 10th. Powell, the most sincere and person of integrity in the GOP being forced to sellout his principle by a ruthless and arrogant White House.

Folks only an idiot of the neocon variety can not see what has happened to our government. We have a puppet dictator at work that is supported by the extreme right wing under the guise of christianity. The American people has a chance to reverse course and get this country back to the principles of our founding fathers. Our constitution is under attack by the most extreme elements of a few people. Look at the ways:
1. Terry Schiavo
2. No WMD
3. Outing Valerie Plame
4. Iraq War not justified
5. Bases of Iraq war built on lies
6. Gitmo
7. Phone survelliance
8. Legal rights of prisoners of war
9. Interogation techniques
10. Paying reporters to sell the war.
11. Abramoff scandal
12. Foley Pagegate
13. No congressional oversight
14. Inserting language into signed legislation the President reserves the right to decide to obey the signed legislation or not. What the heck is this but a incredulous statement of arrogance.
15. Bush asleep at the wheel before 9/11
16. Katrina????

Folks I am 50 years old and never have I seen an administration that is as inept, arrogant, and intolerant as this President and the people that surrounds him. And I am a registered R. I am embarrassed to be called a R. I will be registering as an independant and will never return to the GOP as until the right wing of the GOP is vanquished from power.

It is a sad day when Barry Goldwater looks like a liberal.

Posted by: Good Ole Pedophiles | September 30, 2006 7:50 PM | Report abuse

Boehnert, Hastert and Shimkus have a whole lot of explaining to do...

I don't think Foley's will be the last resignation we see out of this. Covering for pedophiles is NOT cool.

Posted by: Sexual Congress | September 30, 2006 7:40 PM | Report abuse

Hey, I wonder why my posts get all over the place -- no idea. What is marivingian time, though, sounds like I could get into it.

Jason from Whittier -- CA? Hi bro, I lived in Montebello for a while, long time ago. We'll see what the press does with it, won't we? Will they wimp out or not? If this isn't a big story, why do we have a press? Are they not supposed to be there to tell us about outrages perpetrated by those in power? If enabling a pedophile is not an outrage, what then is?

It's not even poliltical--we should all be outraged at the abuse of children and even worse, covering it up --anyone who isn't outraged is a victim of the worst sort of cult brainwashing.

Posted by: drindl | September 30, 2006 6:15 PM | Report abuse


is your clock set fast?

Your posts are popping up at the end of the blog, with a time listed a bit ahead of the curve.

You on "Maravingian time?"

Posted by: Anonymous | September 30, 2006 6:10 PM | Report abuse

I keep reading politics in this story. Parts of it, if true, would seem to call for Criminal prosecution.

Was this another reason, beyond Bob Ney, that Speaker Hastert was so reluctant to have the FBI searching Rep. Jefferson's office?

The following is all predicated on the assumption that what we have heard so far is true. - I suspect that the "leadership" would claim that the cover-up is not subject to investigation under the Separation of Powers. But, while they were playing politics, they were also aiding and abetting a criminal.

Would not protecting a Criminal be a "high crime?"

And, paraphrasing Sen. Baker, "Who else knew; and when did they know it?"

I think that this story is far more than just about a perverted Congressman. It looks to be like a major ehtical, if not Criminal, lapse on the part of the Republican leadership. Pagegate may never be the equivalent the "third rate burglary," to Watergate; but it sure seems to have some potential right now.

Where are the Director of the FBI, and his boss, the Attorney General on this?

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 30, 2006 6:04 PM | Report abuse

"jane, your grunts and squeals and snarls sound a lot like zouk's --are you the same person or just soul brothers in republican bile-spewing?"

Are you suggesting Jane is really Zouk in drag? Or are the R's just having a sex-identity crisis.

blogs are blind.
We can only speculate.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 5:59 PM | Report abuse

Has the media had a chance to actually question Rep. Tom Reynolds about the allegations this hasa been "on the books" for over a year?

S'cuse my ignorance, but who's Reynolds Democratic opponent?

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 5:40 PM | Report abuse


Remember when the Lewisnky story broke?

Remember the tsunamai of hectoring, savagely critical press coverage? The outrage, the prolonged howling from republicans and editorial board everywhere?


The republican party runs a pediophile protection society and no newspaper has a problem wiht that? It's not even on the front page of the Post, which is really sick. For chrissake, these were CHILDREN.

This poor kid... I can't believe Hastert let this go on almost a year... did anyone stop to think how much this might be damaging him?

I really throught I was beyond outrage, but this is obscene. If this is the b est coverage they can manage, I suggest the Post and other editorial boards just give up and quit. You no longer have any relevance or use whatsoever.

Posted by: drindl | September 30, 2006 4:58 PM | Report abuse

oh knock off all of this partisan banter. show us the money. we demand the ims' that show that even the lowest of the low get off.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 30, 2006 4:41 PM | Report abuse

Drindl, be patient! This is the weekend. This will be a HUGE story on Monday. Not only will former Rep. Foley's seat turn blue, Rep. Reynolds is in huge trouble (polls showed his lead dramatically lower than earlier) and he needs to talk about his role in covering this up.

Posted by: Jason (from Whittier, CA) | September 30, 2006 4:29 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Tom Reynolds (who heads the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee (RCCC) clearly knew and no one is denying he knew about this and yet he has refused to comment (last I heard). He can't be allowed to continue to ignore this issue. Hopefully the media, his Democratic opponent and the Democratic party will not let him off the hook.

Posted by: Jason | September 30, 2006 4:27 PM | Report abuse

I thought I was reading a parody or a prank when I first read some of the posts from the emails... I laughed at it, seriously thinking I was reading a comedian's rendition of those emails.

But they are not contrived, they are the real thing. Which takes all but the most base humor out of it.

Absolutely outrageous. If these are accurate, anyone can see this kid was trying to keep it above the covers, again and again, and this predator, with all the subltety of a serpent, slithers word by word into the sleazy exchange this youngster clearly wanted no part of.

I was completely appalled.

Fiction will never be more outrageous than reality. I expected the R's to come unglued under the weight of their hubris and their corruption.

I figured an Abrahamoff pay-for-play deal or a particularly egregious pre-war lie would be uncovered and the public would use it as their last straw.

But I never imagined the republicans would lose their moral majority like this.

What a twist of fate!

Figures, this comes out over the weekend, it will take a lot of digestion by the blogs to keep it on the front pages throughout the week.

Talk radio wingnuts will try to bury it or retro-convert it to Clinton somehow, but they can't defend or apologize for Foley, or they look like pedophile enablers.

This is going to be a very interesting week in the history of American politics.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 4:22 PM | Report abuse

bhoomes' buds beg to bugger boys

Posted by: yoohoo bhoomes | September 30, 2006 4:02 PM | Report abuse

"third the hypocrisy of Foley given the position he held may be a perfect metaphor for the charge of hypocrisy for the rep. party

as someone said earlier this could be very similar to '94"

This Republican scandal machine has more legs than a centipede.

There's some more Ohio shoes to drop any day now, and a big one in California, not to mention the $20 billion question mark on Iraqi reconstruction funds. And Texas isn't going to be very friendly to its favorite son, some real dirt coming out in the Lone Star State, soon to be a hotbed of transparent Republican hubris.

Their rose-colored world is falling apart around them, so we can probably expect an early October surprise, there's no option for them any more but to lose fair and square.

They certainly aren't ready for that, so watch for "the event" any week now.

Rove WILL make something happen, especially if it looks like the Democrats will have subpoena power of any sort. Rove's in too deep now to pull his head out of the cowpie, so its either stink or drown.

Considering all the suburban legends about Turdblossom's preferences, it kind of puts a whole new meaning on the question "Has Kaarl Rove ever had any connections to Congressman Foley?"


Makes the Abramoff scandal seem downright wholesome.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 3:52 PM | Report abuse

A few years ago, at a fundraiser for a nonprofit taking place in Union Station, Rep. Foley hit on me and my boyfriend. At the time, I was bemused and somewhat annoyed that a GOP Congressman from the anti-gay "family vales" party was such an aggressive horndog. It rankled me then, but the newest scandal just disgusts me. What's even worse is that his GOP colleagues knew about his behavior but did nothing because they didn't want to threaten their precious Congressional majority. For them, right and wrong don't matter: It's all about the power. How profoundly frightening.

Posted by: Male DC resident | September 30, 2006 3:29 PM | Report abuse

bhoomes' buds beg to bugger boys

Posted by: yoohoo bhoomes | September 30, 2006 3:03 PM | Report abuse

Just got some interesting news from Iowa, apparently there is an unusually lopsided number of absentee ballot requests from seniors who are Democrats, almost 60%.

Seems as if that republican Get Out the Vote advantage has just plain gone up and went.

Regular, everyday people are apparently so motivated to vote this time around, they are reaching out to the system rather than the other way around.

And this is per-populii, a spontaneous occurence of necessity.

There's no million-dollar campaign war-chest to lure and bully these people into voting. This is real democracy, it comes from the heart, not the wallet.

So, what's in YOUR heart?

The public demand for democracy seems to be outstripping the limited supply these Republicans want to offer... They prefer supply-side democracy.

Democracy on Demand, now there's a phraze worth coining.

Quite a concept.

Scares the geewhillikkers out of those book-cooking, trickle-down, greed-challenged totalitarian monopolists (neocons for short) who want to keep running our country into the ground.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 2:21 PM | Report abuse

My wife and I worked in every Pres. campaign from '68 to '92 -- we both served 4 years in the Carter administration -- I was ex. dir. of the DNC for almost 2 years --- over this period of time we came to know hundreds of elected officials both Dem. and Rep. --- over the years we came to understand a basic "truth" --

as amazing as it might seem the vast majority of our elected officials of both parties are honest, hard working, ethical, patriotic americans --- egos, you bet -- do some (many?) fall to temptation? -- yes --- are some "rotten" when they arrive? -- yes --- does the system over time wear them down ? --- many times

in short they are us

do we believe that republican administrations have been more corrupt than dems.? --- of course we do -- because they clearly have --- starting with Nixon (sorry to go so far back but we are kinda old) -- his VP sitting in his office taking cash bribes -- his henchmen breaking into peoples homes -- his AG signing off on blackmail, money laundering, and bribes --- we could go on and on all the way up to this gang

so what to make of this sad, sick event --

first thanks to "Steve in Princeton" (11:19pm) -- we agree with almost everything you say --

second the real damage to the GOP and the reason this ugly story will have legs is the fact that the leadership knew and should have acted -- after all a 16 year old boy wrote " sick, sick sick ----" 13 times and it was common knowledge among the pages to avoid Foley --- it will be hard to claim that they didn't know they had a problem ---

third the hypocrisy of Foley given the position he held may be a perfect metaphor for the charge of hypocrisy for the rep. party

as someone said earlier this could be very similar to '94

Posted by: Paul in Hawaii | September 30, 2006 2:09 PM | Report abuse

Jack Abramoff and his pals are considered radioactive in Washington DC these days.

I would guess Foley's begun to glow in the dark.

Bet his list of willing "associates" is growing exponentially smaller as the day passes.

Wonder if he'll show up at any Republican fundraisers over the next couple months?

Maybe he can sit with Delay, Ney and Gannon...

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 2:05 PM | Report abuse

Grand Ole Pedophiles!

Posted by: Anonymous | September 30, 2006 2:04 PM | Report abuse


Two Months Before 9/11, an Urgent Warning to Rice

Sunday, October 1, 2006; Page A17


Tenet and Black felt they were not getting though to Rice. She was polite, but they felt the brush-off. President Bush had said he didn't want to swat at flies.


...there was a raging debate between the CIA and the Pentagon about who would pay for it and who would have authority to shoot.

Besides, Rice seemed focused on other administration priorities, especially the ballistic missile defense system that Bush had campaigned on. She was in a different place.

Tenet left the meeting feeling frustrated. Though Rice had given them a fair hearing, no immediate action meant great risk. Black felt the decision to just keep planning was a sustained policy failure. Rice and the Bush team had been in hibernation too long. "Adults should not have a system like this," he said later.


Black later said, "The only thing we didn't do was pull the trigger to the gun we were holding to her head."

Bush, Rice, Cheney. There can be no doubt based on the facts as they happened that these individuals are responsible for not preventing 9/11. A "Sustained policy failure" in not protecting America. of all things, wouldnt ya know. Matters of National Security. Protecting us from a massive terrorist attack. 9/11. Protecting the Homeland. Protecting NY and Washington DC. Sustained Policy Failure. Lets all think of that come election time when Bush announces that they are making us safer.

The Bush Admin's decision to focus on a strategic missle defense system instead of Osama Bin Laden and Al Qeda should be investigated. Clearly. These people must be held accountable for their gross negligence and dereliction of duty.

Posted by: F&B | September 30, 2006 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Breaking news about GOP's sex scandal!

For uncensored news please bookmark:

Sep. 30/Oct. 1, 2006 -- Major cover-up suspected in GOP's "Pagegate" now rocking Capitol Hill. Capitol Hill sources report that the congressional page sex scandal that has barraged the Republican leadership weeks before the general election is a re-flash of a similar scandal in the late 1980s. In June 1989, openly gay Massachusetts Rep. Barney Frank, two months before he admitted that his aide was using his Capitol Hill home for prostitution purposes, threatened to expose the identities of a number of closeted gay Republican members of Congress after a Republican National Committee surfaced that suggested then-House Speaker Thomas Foley was gay. The Republican leadership went into immediate crisis mode and wanted to sweep the matter aside. However, the story of Republican lobbyists and members of Congress procuring the services of underage male prostitutes soon hit the newspapers.

The scandal surrounding GOP congressmen having sex with minors first burst onto the headlines in October 1980 when Maryland conservative Republican Rep. Bob Bauman resigned after his arrest for having sex with a 16-year old male prostitute. In 1983, Massachusetts Democratic Rep. Gerry Studds was censured by the House for inappropriate sexual contact with a 17-year old male page. The Republicans clearly pulled their punches amid calls for Studds to be expelled by the House. However, after Studds' admission he was gay, he was re-elected in 1984.

Although Studds was the first House member to admit his homosexuality, the GOP was worried about starting a trend of self-disclosure. They had their own skeletons to be concerned about. In 1989, the Barney Frank-male prostitute aide scandal broke. However, Frank cooperated with the House Ethics Committee in its investigation and he quickly fired the aide involved. The year 1989 would also introduce the American public to the underground sordid world of GOP underage male prostitution rings -- a story that emanated from a scandal involving male congressional pages that culminated in headlines in The Washington Times beginning in June 1989 that reported underage male prostitutes had been given midnight tours of the White House. As WMR reported yesterday, these tours involved the private quarters of the White House.

With the scandal surrounding Florida Republican Rep. Mark Foley's sordid e-mail and Instant Message exchanges with 16-year old male pages, including one who was sponsored by Lousiana Republican Rep. Rodney Alexander, those familiar with the 1989 scandals are taking a closer look at House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

Congressional sources told WMR that Hastert, while working from 1964 to 1980 as a popular history/government teacher and wrestling coach at Yorktown High School, in Yorktown, Illinois -- a suburb of Chicago -- was the subject of persistent rumors about inappropriate contact with male members of his high school wrestling team. The culture of the times usually resulted in such alleged behavior being covered up by public and parochial school authorities. However, the rumors were enough for his Yorktown constituency to reject him when he ran for an open seat in the Illinois House of Representatives in 1980. However, Hastert lucked out when another sitting Republican House member who represented the three-seat district had a stroke and declined to run for re-election. The GOP machine bosses selected Hastert as the replacement candidate.

Hastert served in Springfield from 1980 to 1986, six years to make the transformation from wrestling coach with a cloud surrounding himself to politician. In 1986, Hastert received an unexpected promotion. After incumbent Republican Rep. John Grotberg was nominated by the GOP for a second term, he was diagnosed with terminal cancer and fell into a coma. The Illinois Republican Convention selected Hastert as the replacement on the ticket, a virtual election to the U.S. House of Representatives in the strongly Republican district.

In 1989, when the allegations of homosexuality among GOP congressmen arose during the first "Pagegate" scandal, Hastert's name was one of those whispered. In 1995, Hastert became Chief Deputy Whip under now-disgraced GOP Majority Whip Tom DeLay. Hastert would luck out again. In late 1989, amid scandal, House Speaker Newt Gingrich resigned. After Louisiana Rep. Bob Livingston was elected as Speaker by the GOP House Caucus, he too resigned after admitting to an extramarital affair -- an amazing development since the House had impeached President Bill Clinton for lying about his own extramarital affair. Hastert, without much scrutiny, emerged as the compromise candidate for Speaker, after the GOP deadlocked on Majority Leader Dick Armey (also the subject of various rumors after he called Barney Frank, "Barney Fag") and Majority Whip DeLay.

Now Hastert is fending off allegations that he knew about the page problem with Mark Foley for 11 months and refrained from taking any action. It is also noteworthy that the Chairman of the House Page Board is Republican Rep. John Shimkus, a close ally of Hastert's from Illinois. Allegations of cover-up are also surrounding Louisiana GOP Rep. Rodney Alexander, the sponsor of the 16-year old Louisiana page to whom Foley sent messages concerning masturbation and erections, and New York Republican Rep. Tom Reynolds, the chairman of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee. Both representatives stand accused of covering up Foley's activities for as long as 11 months.

And the Pagegate scandal threatens to turn into a tsunami that could sweep a number of GOP congressmen from office on November 7. Jeffrey Ray Nielsen, a Christian fundamentalist activist lawyer who was a legislative aide for California Republican Rep. Dana Rohrabacher and a close associate of Orange County GOP chairman Scott Baugh, has been charged by Orange County, California police with repeatedly engaging in sex with a 14-year old Westminster, California high school freshman male in 2003 and amassing a large amount of child pornography in his Ladera Ranch condo. Nielsen, an attorney for Manatt, Phelps and Phillips, also reportedly engaged in sexual activities from 1994 to 1995 with a northern Virginia boy, who was 13 and 14 at the time. Nielsen, at the time, was a legislative assistant to Rohrabacher. Prosecutors in Orange County have been accused of dragging their feet on the Nielsen case -- charges that involve political pressure from the GOP.

In addition, WMR has learned of possible connections between GOP lawmakers and former school teacher John Mark Karr, who was arrested in Thailand and deported to the United States after he claimed, falsely, that he killed six-year old Jon Benet Ramsey at her Boulder, Colorado home in 1996. After Boulder prosecutors declined to prosecute Karr for JonBenet's death, he was transferred to Sonoma County, California to face misdemeanor child pornography charges. However, U.S. intelligence source report to WMR that the high degree of interest shown by U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and U.S. intelligence officials in Karr -- including having one CIA officer in Bangkok intercede, along with DHS Bangkok attache Ann Hurst, with Thai law enforcement authorities after Karr's arrest -- was due to Karr's knowledge of the involvement of top U.S. government officials in a major pedophilia ring.

On Sept. 19, 2006, former DHS press aide Brian Doyle agreed to a plea agreement entailing up to five years in prison for engaging in cyber-sex with what he thought was a 14-year old girl but who turned out to be a Polk County, Florida detective. Doyle is scheduled for sentencing on Nov. 17.

House GOP pedophilia: links emerging between cases of John Mark Karr, Mark Foley, Jeffrey Ray Nielsen (one time aide to California's Dana Rohrabacher), and House Speaker Dennis Hastert.

Law enforcement and intelligence officials point out that if there are no arrests in Washington stemming from "Pagegate," it can be assumed that this second major eruption of scandal involving top Republicans and pedophilia has been swept under the carpet once again.

Excerpts of Instant Messages from Republican Rep. Mark Foley (Maf54) to 16-year old male page from Louisiana:

Maf54 (7:46:33 PM): did any girl give you a haand job this weekend

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:38 PM): lol no

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:40 PM): im single right now

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:57 PM): my last gf and i broke up a few weeks agi

Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): are you

Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny

Xxxxxxxxx (7:47:29 PM): lol...a bit

Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself

Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:04 PM): no

Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy

Maf54 (7:48:33 PM): wow...

Maf54 (7:48:34 PM): i am never to busy haha

Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:51 PM): haha

Maf54 (7:50:02 PM): or tired..helps me sleep

Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:15 PM): thats true

Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:36 PM): havent been having a problem with sleep though.. i just walk in the door and collapse well at least this weekend

Maf54 (7:50:56 PM): i am sure

Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:57 PM): i dont do it very often normally though

Maf54 (7:51:11 PM): why not

Maf54 (7:51:22 PM): at your age seems like it would be daily

Xxxxxxxxx (7:51:57 PM): not me

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:01 PM): im not a horn dog

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:07 PM): maybe 2 or 3 times a week

Maf54 (7:52:20 PM): thats a good number

Maf54 (7:52:27 PM): in the shower

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:36 PM): actually usually i dont do it in the shower

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:42 PM): just cause i shower in the morning

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:47 PM): and quickly

Maf54 (7:52:50 PM): in the bed

Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:59 PM): i get up at 530 and am outta the house by 610

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:03 PM): eh ya

Maf54 (7:53:24 PM): on your back

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:30 PM): no face down

Maf54 (7:53:32 PM): love details

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:34 PM): lol

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:36 PM): i see that

Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:37 PM): lol

Maf54 (7:53:39 PM): really

Maf54 (7:53:54 PM): do you really do it face down

Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:03 PM): ya

Maf54 (7:54:13 PM): kneeling

Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:31 PM): well i dont use my hand...i use the bed itself

Maf54 (7:54:31 PM): where do you unload it

Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:36 PM): towel

Maf54 (7:54:43 PM): really

Maf54 (7:55:02 PM): completely naked?

Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:12 PM): well ya

Maf54 (7:55:21 PM): very nice

Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:24 PM): lol

Maf54 (7:55:51 PM): cute butt bouncing in the air

Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:00 PM): haha

Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:05 PM): well ive never watched myslef

Xxxxxxxxx (7:56:08 PM): but ya i guess

Maf54 (7:56:18 PM): i am sure not

Maf54 (7:56:22 PM): hmmm

Maf54 (7:56:30 PM): great visual

Maf54 (7:56:39 PM): i may try that

Posted by: che | September 30, 2006 1:57 PM | Report abuse

Next Democrat Campaign Commercial:

Guess who run a pedophile protection ring in Washington?

Posted by: Anonymous | September 30, 2006 1:46 PM | Report abuse

Ohio Guy: How did you get these im's suppossedly of Foley and this kid? Has there been an investigation opened criminally? If so, I am doubting the prosecution released this info. If not, where did you get the info.?" - reason

reason -

You think I made these up? LOL. They're from an news article:

And the one I posted is not the half of it. Click on the link at the bottom of the article.....

Posted by: Ohio guy | September 30, 2006 1:35 PM | Report abuse

At a minimum, Boehnert, Hastert and Shimkus know about this evil behavior for a long time. They did nothing to protect young people working in Congress."

Boehner, Hastert, Shimkus...

Makin' a list, checkin' it twice, gonna find out who's...

Who else was part of Foley's own inner circle?

The old birds-of-a-feather addage applies in Congress, there is no doubt about it, some of those "flocks" are actually called "caucuses."

Others go unspoken and unlabeled, but still are apparent to anyone looking in.

If Foley had an "inner circle," of House associates, who would be in it, and are any of them running for re-election?

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 1:27 PM | Report abuse

The GOP knew about this months ago and did nothing about it!!!!!!! That is amazing. Hope they get want they deserve in 5 weeks.

Posted by: Josh | September 30, 2006 1:20 PM | Report abuse

Just in;
From CNN
"-- Rep. Mark Foley "was not honest" about his e-mails to a male teenage page, the chairman of the House Page Board said Saturday, a day after Foley resigned."

"was not honest"..

When are these Republicans ever going to admit they "LIED" about something, it always gets framed in some softer version.

Here's what the headline would be if he was a Democrat;


Just call it what it is. Another big lie.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 12:42 PM | Report abuse

Jane: Many of the examples you post are from decades ago. Didn't you argue in the WP chats about Allen that things that happened decades ago are irrelevant? So which is it? Relevant or irrelevant?

Posted by: Hillman | September 30, 2006 12:29 PM | Report abuse

At a minimum, Boehnert, Hastert and Shimkus know about this evil behavior for a long time. They did nothing to protect young people working in Congress.

Shame on all of them: as the young man who reported this case said Foley is clearly "Sick, sick, sick...". But these "leaders" had an absolute responsibility to protect the pages and appropriately investigate this awful behavior. They should also forfeit their positions in congress!

Posted by: windserf | September 30, 2006 12:16 PM | Report abuse

According to the Babington/Weisman article, the page's sponsor (Alexander) said the boy's parents didn't want the matter pursued. My guess is that Hastert was in on that discussion. There was protection going both ways.

Why the party let him run again in a safe Republican district is beyond me. Why there wasn't any party pressure against Cunningham to run again in my district (CA 50), another safe Republican district, given what was known about him (if not in the gory details) is also beyond me. I'd conclude that House leadership (in either party) has a lot less control than people posting here give them credit for.

Posted by: Keith | September 30, 2006 11:52 AM | Report abuse

"It looks like foley never acted on his urges..."

How ludicrous.

These , graphic, sick, illegal emails clearly represent Foley acting on his urges.

This poster seems to be suggesting Foley can be totally and illegally outrageous via email, but he's exonorated because he never consumated his perverse proposals?

What about all the other propositions we don't know about, did any of those end in something our trolls would actually consider inappropriate?

I'm beginning to suspect at least one of our trolls considers pedophilia on a par with taking bribes, and doesn't understand the implications of this scandal compared to, say, the Abramoff mess.

They don't seem too concerned for the impressionable young hearts and minds being scarred. In order to protect their Republican cult(ure) of very pernicious corruption, they are much more intent on trivializing the crime than they are on punishing the criminals.

They claim Dr. Jeckyl as an upright member of their ranks, but pathologically deny Mr. Hyde even exists.

I wonder, has this Foley character spent much time with the young children of his more naive friends, political minions, and relatives?

Was he a scout leader or Sunday School teacher???

Is it fair to ask, has he used his authority to "impress" other young people?

What other venues besides the United States Congressional Page's quarters might this Dr. Jeckyl have haunted in enabling his Mr. Hyde personae.

And if he was a Democrat, would our trolls be so quiet?

Remember, all you neocon trolls, we have learned that on this particular blog, your silence is the same as admitting you are wrong.

The only time you apologists shut up is when you are so embarrassed by the hypocrisy of your own words you can't even type them, and this is one of those situations.

Your only defense of this pedophile is to accuse others, none of whom were ever so hypocritically positioned in Congress.

Surely you must agree, Hastert should have boosted the guy from his "pedophile" committee when he found out over a year ago Foley might be what we now know he is.

So ironic and disgusting, Foley, the stalwart Republican Congressional defender of his own young victims.

Absolute, irrefutable proof that the foxes are "guarding" the henhouse.

At every level.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 11:52 AM | Report abuse

Thanks, Steve. Your email was right on target. There are scumbags in both parties.

But the one question remains: apparently a lot of high ranking Republicans knew about this back in 2005. Why didn't they do anything about it? Maybe there's a legit explanation. If so, we need to hear it.

For those mentioning Barney Frank...... Barney Frank is gay. That is NOT the same thing as being a pedophile. His high profile situation came from a young man of legal age apparently being a sex for hire boy in Frank's English basement. I remember so many in the 'liberal media' reporting that he was operating out of Frank's house. Just not true. For those of you not familiar with DC, many of our houses have a separate apartment in the basement. This young man was living in this separate apartment. Frank was by all accounts unaware of the activity, and he put and end to it immediately upon finding out about it.

So stop bringing up Barney. He's gay. That's not a crime.

Posted by: Hillman | September 30, 2006 11:48 AM | Report abuse

Ohio Guy: How did you get these im's suppossedly of Foley and this kid? Has there been an investigation opened criminally? If so, I am doubting the prosecution released this info. If not, where did you get the info.? I'm really unaware of the facts of the case and can't make any type of judgement at all. This is really baffling to me. But, if Foley is a pedofile I hope he is prosecuted as anyone else should be. His immediate withdrawl makes him look guilty, everyone must admit that. I wonder how closely associated Foley was/is with former Ill. Senator Fitzgerald (I think that's what his name is). He took his wife to some "sex club" out of the country and made her perform sexual acts with him in front of people at the perverted club. Anyone remember that? He dropped out of the senate race and the Republican's brought in Keyes from Md. who got slaughtered by Obama in 04'. Wonder if Foley and Fitzpatrick has or had any connections? Wonder how many trips Foley has taken to wherever the Hell it was Fitzpatrick went? Wonder how many other senators/congressmen have went there? I think that type of thing is sick to the core and anyone that participates in these type of things should be prosecuted, and in some cases, even given the death penalty. This goes way futhur than party lines and no party supports molestation of children. Despite calls on this blog that Republican's have "perverted clubs that protect one another" that is non-sense. No party, I'm sure, would condone such actions and if Foley is proven guilty he should swing quickly instead of going to prision and getting rich on books he will write in the future!

Posted by: reason | September 30, 2006 11:31 AM | Report abuse

Somebody upthread wrote "On the other hand, I don't know how I feel if this story came out because of Mahoney's opposition research."

What you should feel is complete and total outrage that the House GOP leadership protected a child sexual predator and that it required "opposition research" to bring it to light. (That's assuming of course, that the story came out through that route, and there is no evidence for that at all.)

Posted by: Ba'al | September 30, 2006 11:27 AM | Report abuse

"I am deeply sorry and I apologize for letting down my family and the people of Florida I have had the privilege to represent."

..what about the boys whose lives you have affected so perniciously?

Any apologies there, Mr. Foley?

Or are there future conquests still to be made?

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 11:10 AM | Report abuse

"And now we see that the same GOP leadership was protecting an obvious pedophile in their ranks for more than a year."

Surely, this is a case where assuming there's only one bad apple in that Republican Congressional bushel is naive, at best and denial, at worst.

Who are Foley's close associates in Congress? Who else "knew" and never told anyone?

Anyone know Foley's friends? Who is he close to that would have known?

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 10:31 AM | Report abuse

"Republicans at least resign when they're caught." - Jane

Yeh, Jane, Bob Ney and Conrad Burns resigned just as soon as he was caught, didn't he???

Oh, that's right he's (Ney) still serving and retains all of his committee posts.......and Burns still denies everything.....

"Republicans at least resign when they're caught." - Jane

LOL. Filth like this should be deleted by the moderators. Intelligent readers shouldn't be subjected to reading the mindless partisan ramblings of idiot posters.

Posted by: Ohio guy | September 30, 2006 10:24 AM | Report abuse

Mark Foley is typical of the Christian hypocrites who run and dominate the Republican Party. Every time their immorality and dishonesty is exposed, it is a victory for a return to the proper Congressional oversight. Too bad there was such an unreasonable cover-up of this pervert by the local newspaper and his Republican colleagues that delayed this so long--fortunately, Nancy Pelosi was pushing for propriety!

Posted by: LTS | September 30, 2006 10:23 AM | Report abuse

"fell on his blade for the GOP."

yeah, right, a real noble gesture..

Don't be naive, he's trying to stay out of jail, not politics...

...more excuses. Why can't they just admit there's some real sleazebags in the Republican party, and that they constantly enable each other's perversions, regardless of how disgusting.

Wasn't there a group of Republican judges in the Dakotas with some of Foley's personal bad habits, who got caught but never charged, they were all protecting each other in some strange pervert-club?

Anyone remember something about that? I am quite vague on the issue, but I know it is still out there, it was covered up quite effectively.

Maybe this is, as Drindl suggests, evidence of a much more pervasive hypocrisy in the Republicans than we know. I mean, if we are willing to send Cathoilic priests to prison for these types of perversions, why would we be so forgiving of our Republican politicians.

Just how pervasive is this Republican pervert club in Congress?

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 10:19 AM | Report abuse

I am simply AMAZED at all of the morons on here who don't think hat this is a big deal and that Foley did nothing wrong:

Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:11 PM): have fun campaigning
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:17 PM): or however you spell it
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:18 PM): lol
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:25 PM): ill see ya in a couple of weeks
Maf54 (7:46:33 PM): did any girl give you a haand job this weekend
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:38 PM): lol no
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:40 PM): im single right now
Xxxxxxxxx (7:46:57 PM): my last gf and i broke up a few weeks agi
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): are you
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny
Xxxxxxxxx (7:47:29 PM): lol...a bit
Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:04 PM): no
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy
Maf54 (7:48:33 PM): wow...
Maf54 (7:48:34 PM): i am never to busy haha
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:51 PM): haha
Maf54 (7:50:02 PM): or tired..helps me sleep
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:15 PM): thats true
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:36 PM): havent been having a problem with sleep though.. i just walk in the door and collapse well at least this weekend
Maf54 (7:50:56 PM): i am sure
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:57 PM): i dont do it very often normally though
Maf54 (7:51:11 PM): why not
Maf54 (7:51:22 PM): at your age seems like it would be daily

Posted by: Ohio guy | September 30, 2006 10:17 AM | Report abuse

"...a congressman in my area is a monster."

Apparently that is true. And I would suggest there's more shoes to drop from this centipede.

Now the question for the blogs to digest is, who are Foley's closest friends in Congress and around DC, and what have they all been up to?

When a member of the committee to protect children gets caught making friendly with a minor, it makes one wonder, is there some silent subculture, a secret club of young, male Republican interns that is being exploited in ways that make Monica seem downright wholesome.

This latest Foley story only fuels such speculation.

Surely Foley has associates in high places who knew of his "problem", and failed to act.

Now he'll cry like a Cunningham and beg our forgiveness, all in hopes he doesn't get arrested and tossed in the slammer like any other pervert would for getting caught doing what Foley did.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 10:00 AM | Report abuse

"But give him some credit at least he had enough character to resign, more than you can say about Jefferson or Mollohan." for having character?

This guy was out playing with "the boys, all while he was on the committee to protect them from people like himself.

Drindl, you are right, so many of these people are cultists, and some are probably closet pedophiles. Otherwise, they could not so easily equate this crime to run-of-the-mill white collar corruption.

Could you actually vote for someone you wouldn't trust to watch your children?

This typical troll-post offers the only thing the Republicans have left, other than their manupulated fear factor.

Excuses, escuses, excuses...

Will we ever see conrition?

Apparently not from pedophile-enablers like these.

Posted by: JEP | September 30, 2006 9:49 AM | Report abuse

I feel a sense of disappointment to know that one of our leaders may be a monster. Politics aside, this is a tragedy. I'm not willing to judge Mark Foley before we know the facts, but if he turns out to be a predator; it says terrible things about our ability as a community to identify people like that.

I'm a Democrat who opposes the Republicans on moral grounds, but what I've seen in the last few hours makes me very uncomfortable. CBS News described Mahoney as "the luckiest politician in America." That may be true, but in an interview Friday afternoon he took blatant political advantage at a time when I believe the community needs healing. When a politician dies during a campaign, his opponent usually understands the need to step back and not gloat at his good luck.

It was not as if Floey cast a bad vote in the House that favored right wing special interests. This was, at the very least, a personal tragedy for Foley's ailing parents. The fact that someone as ambitious as Foley resigned is indication that there is more to come. I have no sympathy for Foley if he turns out to be guilty. On the other hand, I don't know how I feel if this story came out because of Mahoney's opposition research. I've been waiting for the Republican hate campaign for months. As a Democrat, I want to believe the people who share my beliefs are morally superior to the people from whom we hope to take control of Congress.

BEST CASE SCENARIO: This story came out for legitimate reasons. Let the chips fall where they may.

WORST CASE SECEARIO: Foley is guilty of nothing more than incredible stupidity and naiveté. Mahoney's opposition research uncovered a conversation taken out of context.

Which do I want to believe? The first choice is that a congressman in my area is a monster.

I haven't voted for the guy in fact, I no longer live in his district. I was outraged at his vote to impeach Clinton and vowed never to vote for him again. It never occurred to me that he could be guilty of child abuse.

Mike Dowling
West Palm Beach, Florida

Posted by: Mike Dowling | September 30, 2006 9:47 AM | Report abuse

It's the coverup that really gets them in trouble. Boehner and Hastert knew about these allegations and covered them up. Who else knew?

Posted by: Tom | September 30, 2006 9:31 AM | Report abuse

The standard for harrassment is not the intention of the alledged harrasser, it is the perception of he who is being harrassed. If as ABC reported the 16-year old boy emailed his colleague that he found the former congressman's e-mail "sick, sick... sick", then it is clear that the boy found the e-mails seriously inapropriate. And it should not be forgotten that the Congressman is an adult, and the page was not only a minor at the time of the e-mail, but was younger at the time he served as a page. Given the history of scandals involving congressional pages, at a minimum the ex-Congressman's e-mails show a serious lapse in ethical judgement.

Does anyone know if any House ethic rule governs communictions between page and the membership?

Posted by: Brooklyn Ford | September 30, 2006 7:50 AM | Report abuse

Earlier this week a Fox reporter asked Bill Clinton, in effect, if he wasn't to blame for 9-11. Clinton responded forcefully that while he tried to kill bin Laden, Bush et al did nothing for months prior to 9-11; and moreover, that GOP senators and congressman criticized him at the time for attempting to take action against bin Laden and the Taliban. Actually, all of that is true, even the fact that Bush did essentially nothing about bin Laden. Certainly, with just a little Googling it can be easily shown that many in the GOP accused Clinton of attempting to divert attention from the much more important issue of Monica Lewinsky. Wag the Dog and all that. In about five minutes I unearthed a host of comments to that effect from many GOP leaders still in congress.
Nevertheless, the Big Story in the media during this last week is that Clinton was Angry, Unhinged even, and the substance of his comments is essentially ignored. By most anyway.

But who can forget the moral outrage about the Blue Dress? The pious laments about "what will we tell the children?" and all that. It went on and on and on.

And now we see that the same GOP leadership was protecting an obvious pedophile in their ranks for more than a year.

What will the Washington Post say about this? Should Hastert be toast? And the rest of the House GOP leadership? And the entire GOP in light of the stench that follows them everywhere? Mr. Hiatt? Mr. Keller? Anybody?

Posted by: Ba'al | September 30, 2006 6:28 AM | Report abuse

Hastert is going down like Cardinal Bernard Law. And the GOP is going down like the Archdiocese of Boston.

Cardinal Law also tried to "take care" of a pedophilia epidemic in the Archdiocese of Boston. Quick transfers of priests. Hushing of complaints and appeals to loyalty. It didn't work. The archdiocese was cratered by the onslaught of suits and ended up having to sell off churches and the Cardinal's own mansion.

The scandal had been brewing for a while but one case involving a priest who'd abused a number of kids broke the floodgates some years ago. After that case took root and grew literally scores of young and not-so-young adults stepped forward and filed their own cases against yet other abusive priests.

When this is over the GOP will be nearly completely depopoulated and the rolls of NAMBLA will have probably doubled.
NAMBLA and the GOP | 09.30.06 - 4:17 am | #

Posted by: Larry LaFever | September 30, 2006 4:17 AM | Report abuse

AUTHOR: Edwin W Edwards, Governor of Louisiana
QUOTATION: [I could not lose unless I was] caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy.
ATTRIBUTION: On 1983 race against David C Treen, recalled on his grand jury indictment for racketeering and fraud, Time 11 Mar 85
SUBJECTS: The World: Politics & Government: Politicians & Critics

Simpson's Contemporary Quotations, compiled by James B. Simpson. Copyright © 1988 by James B. Simpson. Published by the Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.

Click here to shop the Bartleby Bookstore.

Welcome · Press · Advertising · Linking · Terms of Use · © 2005

Posted by: Anonymous | September 30, 2006 2:54 AM | Report abuse

'For such a homophobic party, they've got a lot in their ranks. Sounds like they've got a bad case of the Ray Cohn syndrome in the Republican party.'

It may be a conservative thing. The British Tory party has always counted many closet gays among its ranks.

Posted by: Sexual Congress | September 30, 2006 2:48 AM | Report abuse

Isn't it kind of funny how Jane and Zouk vanished when it came out that Denny and the Boyz knew about this a year ago...and did nothing?

Sort of kills that "resign" meme they were pushing, doesn't it?

Posted by: Heh | September 30, 2006 1:53 AM | Report abuse

The parallels to 1994 are getting remarkably eerie in similarity abeit a differnce in the facts.

Leading upto 1994, Gingrich rattled the Democratic establishment on a daily basis and forced the resignation of Speaker Wright. He continued this theme and then caught a break with the House banking scandal. A sort of arrogance of power was portrayed America turned against the Dems in droves.

Fast forward to 2006, the GOP has established a pattern of culture of corruption. However, it was waning as an issue for many voters. Dems catch a break, Foley commits an upardonable sin and gets caught. The issue here is not going to go away with a simple Representative resigning. Look at the Post's story on line... GOP leadership all the way to the Speaker, the GOP Party KNEW of this incident and told him to stop. They did not investigate this? They kept it a secret!.. Amazing hypocrisy of not just Foley's behavior but wasnt this the bunch that has been pushing the Gay Marriage Admendment? The holier than thou self righteous, right wing zealots who think Bush and anyone that has an R after their name is God. Now that is total arrogance of power. Americans should permantly halt the assalt on our constitution by replacing every single neocon rigt wing nut case. VOTE your consciou America, ignore the party affiliation. Vote for America

Posted by: Dejavu | September 30, 2006 1:06 AM | Report abuse

As usual the cover-up may be bigger than the crime. The Republican Party leadership knew about Foley and the kid for a year. And what did they do? They kept it quiet of course.

Foley is definitely Mr. "Missing and Exploited Children" -- but not in the way the party would like you to think.

It's "No Child's Behind Left Behind" !

Posted by: David Ehrenstein | September 30, 2006 12:52 AM | Report abuse

I thought I was beyond being shocked. But the fact that Hastert, et al, knew about this and let Foley continue to interact with pages really stunned me.

Oh, and Boehner's confirmed that he knew and told Hastert.

Posted by: JoshA | September 30, 2006 12:16 AM | Report abuse

Hastert knew. Alexander knew. Tom Reynolds knew. John Shimkus knew. And they did nothing. Kept him on as the co-chair of the "Missing and Exploited Children Caucus." And they've known about this for a year. 'Nuff said.

Posted by: BarbinMD | September 29, 2006 11:58 PM | Report abuse

This guy Foley is really sick here are teo of his emails with 14 year old boys.
Maf54: What ya wearing?
Teen: tshirt and shorts
Maf54: Love to slip them off of you.

Maf54: Do I make you a little horny?
Teen: A little.
Maf54: Cool.

Posted by: Tom | September 29, 2006 11:57 PM | Report abuse

Thanks for the update on the IMs. I knew there had to be more.

Posted by: Yockel | September 29, 2006 11:31 PM | Report abuse

If that's a real post he should be hammered to the wall. Simply put, what can you say? Its just wrong. This isn't partisanship talk, its just real life. Is this the kind of person who should be a part of our legislative body? Please.

Partisan talk would be to say that the impeachment of Clinton on grounds far less substantial than anything Hastert or the rest of those idiots feel is newsworthy w/in their own party is (and continues to be) an embarrassment. Please try to compare the two based on the above link, and when you're done...explain our lying President and our bent over Congress.

That might be a great story if someone from the WaPo had the stones to take it on, as opposed to kissing the current administration's ass in the hopes of being invited to the next press conference of lies. Expose them all above the fold, left, right, Dems and Repubs - come the next election do something they won't do themselves - clean house and vote every incumbent out. We've become the embarrassment.

Posted by: steve | September 29, 2006 11:26 PM | Report abuse

Well, there are sure a lot of jerks posting here tonight. Are there any adults around? Here's the word:

Does Foley "prove" something nefarious about Republicans? Of course not. There are scumbags in both parties, occasionally they are outed and disgraced. This is as egregious a scandal as we've had in modern times; nonetheless, for each Republican scandal I could give you a Democrat scandal, you could name another Republican scandal, and we could play I-spy all day and night. The removal of such people from government benefits our society and democracy -- all of us. To declare this event proves your party's superiority displays your thoughtlessness and pretention.

Does this help Democrats? As of this writing, undoubtedly, yes. The timing and nature of this scandal clearly harm Republican chances. And make no mistake: At some point in the future, an ill-timed Democrat scandal will harm Democrat prospects. It is a tide that evens out in the end -- one reason our two-party system is so stable. It is hardly even relevant if the Mahoney campaign were behind the disclosure -- the alleged acts are too serious to ignore no matter their source. But Democrats would be wise to keep their glee to themselves. Those of you gloating about new Democrat hopes should consider how heartless you appear, to think first of small partisan advantages when youths may have been hurt or traumatized. By the same token, should it be proven that Republican House leaders actually suppressed possible crimes (and not merely the open secret of Foley's homosexuality), they will deserve a round comeuppance in November for this event alone. Nothing excuses predation of minors -- it should be neither suppressed by Republicans nor celebrated by Democrats for partisan advantage.

Is Foley guilty of a crime? Not until so proven in a court of law, by a jury of citizens. But based on the uncontested public record, he certainly deserves our contempt until and unless the final accounting exonerates him of the Instant Messages reported by ABC.

The scorn, squabbling, and name-calling in these comments are truly disheartening. Both Democrats and Republicans should be glad to see Foley go under the circumstances, can equally doubt his true contribution to "Child Safety Legislation" and similar initiatives, and can rightly acknowledge the sudden advantage Democrats have gained for this House seat. Then, we should all go back to discussing policy, improvements in government, and practical compromises. That isn't what we were doing before? Isn't that the real scandal?

Posted by: Steve in Princeton | September 29, 2006 11:19 PM | Report abuse

Not only is it "take out the trash" day (Friday) for politically damaging news, it's the last day before congressional recess before election! You've got to give it to those r's, their timing and secrecy is impeccable. Wonder if Rove was consulted on this . . .

Posted by: naptown | September 29, 2006 10:36 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: | September 29, 2006 10:14 PM <--COWARD

Apparently your "morals" don't include standing by what you say. Anonymous gutless wonder.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 10:18 PM | Report abuse

Once caught, Republicans take responsibility for their actions, and resign. Yeah right:

"Foley's aides initially blamed Democratic rival Tim Mahoney and Democrats with attempting to smear the congressman before the election."

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 10:15 PM | Report abuse

I saw the IM transcript and all I can say is GUILTY. I'm glad that guy is out of our party--- as for all you dems calling republicans hypocrites, we'll I'd rather be a hypocrite than have no morals at all.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2006 10:14 PM | Report abuse

Hastert, apparently Delay, and several other senior House leaders apparently knew. I imagine "The Post" will be on top of this story.

Posted by: Mike Meyer | September 29, 2006 10:04 PM | Report abuse

response to (Jane | September 29, 2006 04:56 PM)

Nice try with the red herrings. But you're forgetting some things. Republican party is supposedly the party of social conservatives and "family values." Consider the fact that Log Cabin Republicans is only a marginal group in the party. And consider the fact that most real social conservatives frown upon any type of porn. Thirdly, consider the fact that part of Foley's job was to -fight- child porn. Due to those factors, it's not surprising that Foley resigned. Also, you failed to note that Republicans may have sat on the allegations involving Foley until the press got wind of it. The fact that Hastert said that he was unhappy about the incident speaks bundles. He's more concerned the seat being lost to Democrats, than the neinousness of Foley's actions. That's very problematic.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | September 29, 2006 9:53 PM | Report abuse

Let Jane and king of zouk blab away like the blind partisans they are. People like them always degenerate to demonizing liberals/Democrats no matter what the subject is. BFD... Cookie cutter rank and file reactionaries. Too much Rush Limbaugh and FOXnews rots the brains. What a world of delusion those two live in.
Pedophilia and closet homosexuality aside, bottom line in all this is that the Democrats are now one more seat closer to taking the House. Foley's name remains on the ballot; Somebody else may get those votes if they run, but who wants votes from Foley, and who's going to vote Foley now? Also, there are implications to all this that can effect the national election, especially if the scandal derails all the 'treason season' tactics of the GOP recently. The Foley incident is going to make Republican corruption and abuse of power a hot topic once again. Not something the GOP wants so close to the election.

Posted by: ErrinF | September 29, 2006 9:49 PM | Report abuse

Does House Republican leader Denny Hastert have a soft spot for child sex offenders?

Seems so. Republican House Speaker Denny Hastert has some serious explaining to do, after today's revelations that they knew about ex-Congressman Mark Foley's sexscapades a good year ago, and did nothing.

Whether or not the kid's parents were fine with letting it go, which the story says is the case, why did Republican House Speaker Denny Hastert permit Foley to remain in the House GOP leadership for almost a year after they knew he was having sex talk with minors online, minors he met on the job?

Posted by: John | September 29, 2006 9:42 PM | Report abuse

Jane, KOZ -

Hearing "at least republicans resign when caught" means as much to me as "at least when Clinton lied nobody died" probably means to you. It's simply a way to rationalize an uncomfortable political perspective.

The issue that you cannot address is the blatant and continuing hypocrisy; republicans spinning their lack of tolerance as "family values". Now when it's shown once more that they are morally no better than those evil decadent democrats, you say "At least we resign when caught".

Hmnn. Now THAT would be a great campaign slogan.

Posted by: Moderate Mike | September 29, 2006 9:29 PM | Report abuse

The incident with Studds and Crane happened in 1973, It happened 33 years ago. It came out 10 years later. The minor in question contended that the sex was consensual and it was nobody's business. The minor in the Mark Foley case was creeped out by the Congressman's lewd emails. Not quite the same thing.

Sure, if Crane and Studds committed statutory rape, they should have been tried and convicted for that. Democrats have no control over that. So why weren't they tried?

And why does KOZ keep creating straw men to argue against? He still hasn't answered my questions asking when I said lying, under oath or otherwise, was ok. Nor does he address the FACT that House Republicans repealed the rule requiring indicted members to leave office, until months of outrage from the public forced them to reinstate it. We see clearly that what they really wanted to do was protect DeLay regardless of his ethical and legal violations. We also see that Bob Ney is still in office, despite having pleaded guilty to crimes and entering treatment for alcoholism.

And we still hear no response to the concern of conservatives here being not that crimes are committed, but that people are caught doing them.

I'm sure the righties will ignore the Yahoo story above too, showing that Hastert and his leadership KNEW about the emails Foley had sent a 16 year old former page but didn't act on. Shining examples of morality indeed. That's just like the Catholic church knowing priests abused little boys and merely shuffling them to new churches while paying the victims hush money. The people who knew about this months ago (almost a year) and didn't act on it should be resigning. I guess they don't find complicity or enabling to be immoral either.

But killing and torturing is! Ah, the culture of life.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 9:21 PM | Report abuse

You don't resign this quickly if you are innocent. You would stay and defend yourself.

Posted by: CB | September 29, 2006 9:18 PM | Report abuse

Jeeze, Hastert and the Repub leadership knew? And they sat on it?

All politics aside, WHAT ON EARTH ARE THESE PEOPLE THINKING?!?! Have the entire party lost their minds? Its gone beyond rabid ideology and has morphed into some twisted, ethically blinding, sick culture that permeates the entire side of the aisle.

Posted by: SWB | September 29, 2006 9:17 PM | Report abuse

OMG!! abcnews has the transcript of the instant messages. Unless it's a hoax posting, he is discussing m*sturbation technique with the 16 yr old. Woohooo!

Posted by: Michael | September 29, 2006 9:16 PM | Report abuse

OMG!! abcnews has the transcript of the instant messages. Unless it's a hoax posting, he is discussing m*sturbation technique with the 16 yr old. Woohooo!

Posted by: Michael | September 29, 2006 9:15 PM | Report abuse

The Republican House leadership KNEW about Foley's emails to this teenager and did nothing about it:

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 9:07 PM | Report abuse

I find three things problematic about the situation: 1) The page was underaged 2) Foley was supposed to be fighting child porn. 3) Hastert said that he was unhappy about the situation. The word "unacceptable" comes to mind, and Hastert should have used it.

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | September 29, 2006 8:32 PM | Report abuse

Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-La. knew about the emails 10-11 months ago and notified the House Republican leadership.

So how long has Hastert been sitting on this and did it endanger any other pages on Capitol Hill?

Posted by: Lisa | September 29, 2006 8:28 PM | Report abuse

I guess it's another case of Repub "family values."

Posted by: Dr. Don Key | September 29, 2006 8:26 PM | Report abuse

Just more hypocrisy from the GOP.

Posted by: robtomorrow | September 29, 2006 8:07 PM | Report abuse

Seem's to be a lot of stir about the page being a male. What difference does it make considering the victim was 15 years old?
And that Foley immediately cut and run screams guilt. There's some good old fashion family values for you.

Posted by: contumacious | September 29, 2006 7:52 PM | Report abuse

Read the text message transcript (link is above in earlier post) -- this is not some "misunderstanding" over ambiguous emails -- this is a man who abused his position of power to intimidate some poor kid and abuse him

Posted by: SMP | September 29, 2006 7:51 PM | Report abuse

Jane, try to be serious. Bob Ney has affirmatively refused to resign from Congress.

When you claim that Ney has "resigned," it is further evidence of the lengths to which some people will go to pervert language to serve partisan ends. You remind me of Lewis Carroll's Humpty Dumpty: "`When I use a word,' Humpty Dumpty said, in rather a scornful tone, `it means just what I choose it to mean -- neither more nor less.'"

Posted by: mark | September 29, 2006 7:50 PM | Report abuse

I wonder what sort of cushy lobbyist job Hastert et. al. arranged for Foley to resign so expeditiously. Usually these guys, dems and reps, put up a little fight and a little denial. The Republican thugs must have done to Foley what they did to Bob Ney--Quit now and we will get you a job. I hope the Post figures out what Foley got.

Posted by: Chris Beck | September 29, 2006 7:43 PM | Report abuse

It's way worse than reported in the above story --

Posted by: SMP | September 29, 2006 7:43 PM | Report abuse

'There is no need for any party to make political adds out of this.' Rabbi, I absolutely agree with you there. But it is important to point out the hypocrisy of the republican party with their 'family values' utter BS. They stand on their soapboxes lecturing the rest of us about morality while they conceal their own dirty little sins. I'm tired of it.

And Jane, get over it. Gary Condit was not 'caught with a dead girl' you lying winger.He had an affair with an intern who was proven to have been murdered by someone else. Condit was hounded by the 'liberal media' until he was ruined, though there was no evidence against him.

Joe Scarborough on the other hand, did get caught with a dead girl who worked for him. He was the last person to be seen wit her alive, at his office. She was found dead the next mornng eith what the first coroner said was blunt instrument trauma--being hit in the head with a weapon. Jeb Bush, however fired that coroner and brought in one who had been barred from practicing in every state but Florida, and this one said that the girl [who was a 30-year-old triathlete] had died from a hheart attack and hitting her head on the desk. Cute, huh?

Scarborough immeditely quit [not the action of an innocennt man] to 'spend more time with his family' -- and was promptly hired by the 'liberal media' to spew lies about Bill Clinton.

And I'll tell you why my mother is proud of me --because she taught me to stand up to bullies like you. Every word you write drips with venom- if you want to see bigotry, hatefulness, stupidity and willful ignorance, look in the mirror.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 7:31 PM | Report abuse

jane: i can't let pass that in trashing the current sleezy version of the party of lincoln "we" are not trashing half of the country, nor are intelligent people limited to a few enclaves: your ideology is only supported by about 39 or 40 percent of the country, mostly in place where fox and rush limbaugh are all the news they get and fear rules the day.

Posted by: spin | September 29, 2006 7:28 PM | Report abuse

Are there voters in that district who, even if they knew that their votes for Foley would go to a different GOP candidate, would still cast a vote for Foley? I doubt many.

Gotta expect this to be a pickup for the Dems.

Posted by: Shooty | September 29, 2006 7:26 PM | Report abuse

Another case of the fox guarding the chicken coup.

Posted by: reparations | September 29, 2006 7:22 PM | Report abuse

MikeB -- you are simply delusional. You've been singing that tired old song for 6 years now. Ad again your post just shows that Liberals have no fresh ideas that resonate with the American people, except in a few enclaves in CA, MA, NY and northern VA. To win you must resort to dirt and mudslinging. And as for wealth you are the party of Goerge Soros and MoveOn,org.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 7:15 PM | Report abuse

jane: you seem to miss the point of my post. my point was that you made a big deal of studds and never bothered to mention phil crane (r-il) who also got busted with his pants down with a page at the same time.

Re Clinton, he never promised to be a saint, so why what he did was wrong and what Gingrich (who also delivered devorce papers to his wife in the hospital while she was being treated for breast cancer, what a guy) did was not is beyond me.

There is a long history of politicans + sex, and both parties have their examples. The big point is that: (1) don't mess with underage people (or people you have control over) and (2) Don't be a hypocrate.

adding one and two together, there are about 10 republian sex scandels for every democratic one...

Posted by: spin | September 29, 2006 7:10 PM | Report abuse

Woohoo! Now, what we need are some of those photo's I keep hearing about with regards to Karl Rove... One thing the Republican's need to understand, this ain't 2004 any more, and we will dig up dirt on them, too. Liberals may not have the money of the right wing crowd, but most engineers, computer scientists, and tech savy people are LIBERALS (come to think of it, most intelligent people, at least those with ethics, are liberals) and we will do whatever it takes to pry this counry from the hands of Bush and his clowns.

Posted by: MikeB | September 29, 2006 7:09 PM | Report abuse

Bob Ney announced last month he was not seeking reelection, so in effect he did resign. Why does it have to be this cantankerous when discussing something such as the quality for people we choose to represent us? You people are just filled with hate for half of your fellow citizens. I am simply stunned.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 7:02 PM | Report abuse

Jane says "Republicans at least resign when they're caught."

Bob Ney is still in Congress.

I won't hold my breath waiting for Jane to issue a retraction.

Posted by: mark | September 29, 2006 6:59 PM | Report abuse

Dear Friends:

There is no need for any party to make political adds out of this. It is an excrutiating story for all involved. I am an openly gay man, a life long Democrat, a man of faith. And I must wonder, who wins here?

Posted by: The Rabbi | September 29, 2006 6:59 PM | Report abuse

drindle -can't you even talk without calling someone names. Self-righteous leftwingers simply cannot carry on a discussion on any issue without resorting to filth and name calling. So much for Democrats being the party of openess, inclusion, diversity, dialogue. All I've noticed on these posts is bigotry, hatefulness, stupidity and willful ignorance.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 6:58 PM | Report abuse

The WH War Criminal has flushed away half a trillion in illegal, immoral invasions.

Before rebuilding other countries, why not rebuilding the USA?

Now, the dirtbags are trying to buy the election with temporary cheap gas.

Posted by: Bill | September 29, 2006 6:58 PM | Report abuse

The WH War Criminal has flushed away half a trillion in illegal, immoral invasions.

Before rebuilding other countries, why not rebuilding the USA?

Now, the dirtbags are trying to buy the election with temporary cheap gas.

Posted by: Bill | September 29, 2006 6:57 PM | Report abuse

kingofzouk, you are a piece of work! I don't believe you believe all the ridiculousness you say. I think you make up your positions just to get a rise out of people.

By the way, why is it that the party that hate gays (that would be the Republican party) have so many in thier party? Can you explain that

Posted by: SteelWheel | September 29, 2006 6:53 PM | Report abuse

I did mention that Studds was censured. But the point is he was caught with a live boy and Condit was caught with a dead girl and Congress does nothng to police their own. And I'm so tired of Democrats saying we knew Bill was a cheater when we elected him. No we didn't. On 60 minutes they both said "pain in the marriage", but not that he was going to continue cavorting as President. We certainly didn't know he was an harraser and an accused rapist as well. Again total pass! Unlike Republicans, Democrats are never outraged by the quality of their party. Republicans at least resign when they're caught.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 6:53 PM | Report abuse

Wikipedia states:
Pornography and sexual offenses
Ironically, Foley was one of the foremost critics in the House of child pornography. Foley was chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. He introduced a bill in 2002 to outlaw websites featuring sexually suggestive images of preteen children, saying that "these websites are nothing more than a fix for pedophiles."[6]

Isn't it funny that the right wing christian types always shout out their support for the very abuse they are the ones's just too funny. He is a pedophile waiting to be exposed.

Posted by: Scott | September 29, 2006 6:52 PM | Report abuse

jane, your grunts and squeals and snarls sound a lot like zouk's --are you the same person or just soul brothers in republican bile-spewing?

Posted by: drndl | September 29, 2006 6:50 PM | Report abuse

Chandra Levy was not underage. I don't approve of it, but how is it different from Newt Geinrich? You know he is a serial adulterer, as is Rudi Guiliani.

Mel reynolds was wrong, and now I give you one example. But he went to jail and that rather belies your position that their are 'no consequences' when Dems get caught.

Aand the idea that Dems have 'twice the sex scandals' is something you pulled out of you know where.

And by the way Jane, my mother is very proud of me.

And Barney Frank did not commit a crime, so why do you even bring him up?

Posted by: drndl | September 29, 2006 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Again no facts drindle in your repsonse. Just more name calling from you. How sad that you truly have nothing to say. And anything that you might possibly want to contribute to the discussion must be spewed through your mindless taunts.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 6:47 PM | Report abuse

Republicans harbor all kinds of sicko self hating religious wack jobs, hell its in your platform. Foley was just the latest in a long line. I laughed when studds was pointed out above by some self satisfied republican, since he was censored with Crane, a fact only a republican could fail to mention. Studds and Frank came out after their experiences, but then they had not spend their time in office bashing gays either.

Democrats are at least consistent, that Bill got a you know what from you know who showed bad judgment, but then Bill never claimed to be a saint, and he certainly never ran as the "family values candidate."

we can't say that about two republican speakers of the house, crane, the mayor of Spokane, the MD whip whose name I can't remember, or now Mr. Foley, all of which got caught with their pants down and their hypocracy on display.

Posted by: spin | September 29, 2006 6:47 PM | Report abuse

I guess Foley didn't get the memo that reads: The only way to get messed up in Washington is to be caught with a dead woman or live boy. Typical G-O-Pedophile.

Posted by: Cdog | September 29, 2006 6:46 PM | Report abuse

As per drindle's request for more recent scandals. 2001 Democrat Gary Condit had sex with that poor murdered intern Chaundra Levy. 1994 -- Mel Reynolds Democrat Congressman had sex with a 16-year old campaign worker and went to jail. I'm not saying Republicans are immune to this sort of thing. It's just that Democrats have twice the sex scandals as Republicans, yet it's only news and there are only consequences when it's Republicans who are caught. Democrats ALWAYS get a pass! You get the politicians you deserve. So what does that say about all of us?

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 6:41 PM | Report abuse

My, my Jane. Such irrational anger.

cmac: see earlier post. When a republican commits a crime, clap your hands over your ears and start shreiking 'Slick Willie slick willie slick willie unti your face turns blue.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 6:40 PM | Report abuse

I think it is sick that people on this board are implying that Republican's harbor pedophiles and will make excuses for our anyone in the party that would harm a child. This is not a political party issue, if Foley is guilty it is horrible and no one will be standing up for him. Shame on the posters that want to use this as a gotcha moment.

I seem to recall a lot of Democrats saying NOTHING when Clinton was boffing an intern. MOrals?

Posted by: cmac | September 29, 2006 6:28 PM | Report abuse

Maybe the SCOTUS should find Gingrich guilty of treason? From Wikipedia: "In law, treason is the crime of disloyalty to one's nation or state. A person who betrays the nation of their citizenship and/or reneges on an oath of loyalty and in some way willfully cooperates with an enemy, is considered to be a traitor. Oran's Dictionary of the Law (1983) defines treason as: "...[a]...citizen's actions to help a foreign government overthrow, make war against, or seriously injure the [parent nation]." In many nations, it is also often considered treason to attempt or conspire to overthrow the government, even if no foreign country is aided or involved by such an endeavour."

Works for me. Didn't Gingrich swear an oath or two every time he was re-elected?

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 6:26 PM | Report abuse

drindl-you are pathetic. And do't call me dear, you patronizing blowhard. I didn't realize there was a statue of limitations on pedophiles. Typical liberal response, if it didn't happen in the last 5 minutes, then who cares. That's old news. Perhaps you're the one having a knee-jerk psychotic attack. Still no facts or coherence in your response, just more name-calling.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 6:21 PM | Report abuse

When all else fails, bash Clinton. That's Rule No. 1 in the rightie playbook.

poor richard -- I looked up your cite and yeah... that is where they are going. It really is the most barefaced attempt to basically dismantle the Constitution, piece by piece, just like Hitler did in Germany. Step by step... destroy the separation of powers, destroy the courts, gut the legislature [and of course they don't have any guts, so that's one already done -- and continue to increase the power of the executive. Bingo! You've got fascism.

'Supreme Court decisions that are ``so clearly at variance with the national will'' should be overridden by the other branches of government, former House Speaker Newt Gingrich says.'

Posted by: dridl | September 29, 2006 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Watching Zouk defend homosexual pedophelia is almost as repulsive as watching him defend torture. Thanks for the "values" lesson GOP. Good riddance.

Posted by: F&B | September 29, 2006 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Poor richard: "Gingrich Urges Overriding Supreme Court."

Wow. That is news. Just when I thought Gingrich was beginning to moderate his positions he starts spouting support for feudalism.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 6:10 PM | Report abuse

'Drindl et al are always light on coherance, always ignore facts and always call names to hide the shortcomings'

Projecting, always projecting. zouk's spittle-flecked postings are always a case study in knee-jerk republican psychotic attacks. I always think of him as a red-faced drunk trying to pick a fight at a sleazy bar.

And Jane dear, think of an example that's not 20 years old and I might have something to say to you. As it is, you're not worth the time. zouk isn't either, but he's amusing--at least until he start vomiting again.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 6:04 PM | Report abuse

KOZ- Hmmm, cheating on your wife or Pedophilia? Only a republican would think those two sins are morally equivalent.

Hey, it just goes in line, after all, you are the party that claims to be more religious AND just okayed torture. So KOZ, who would Jesus torture?

Posted by: Will | September 29, 2006 6:03 PM | Report abuse

Um, king of zouk? Ney pleaded guilty to making false statements, conspiracy to commit fraud and violating post-employment restrictions for former congressional aides. He. Pleaded. GUILTY. And not in an Alford plea. His guilty plea is the equivalent of a finding of guilty by a jury. So the evidence is there, and the "guilty" finding may end up being a conviction. We will find out at his sentencing, I suppose.

Posted by: dc voter | September 29, 2006 5:58 PM | Report abuse

Florida_Rep_Voter: that's a relatively innocuous situation. I'd think a write-in candidacy would be a better choice in the current context.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 5:55 PM | Report abuse

I do not know if there was a crime. How did you get a jury together so fast? I am not sure if sending licentious emails is a crime. At least the man knows shame. do any of you?
the Delay rule - why do Dems not have this rule? why don't they have term limits for chairs? why isn't lying under oath a problem? If you really want to have a discussion about which party is better at policing their own, you will certainly lose on the facts. Historically, the data shows that Dems have had major scandels twice as often as Rs. One poor guy admits his faults (still to be seen), immediately resigns and you find cause to rewrite history and get all preachy about sex scandels. Wait until the sane people get hold of this and good ole slick willies behavior regurgitates again. I bet he's glad he's back in the news. He will always be the baseline for this subject. And I do mean base.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 29, 2006 5:55 PM | Report abuse

What a travesty with Foley.

Off topic but needs to be seen where this republican bunch is going.... check out this link and ask why AP via guardian will carry it but its not in the domestic press,,-6114830,00.html

Posted by: poor richard | September 29, 2006 5:54 PM | Report abuse

Who else besides Abramoff spent an awful lot of mytserious time in the White House? Jeff Gannon!

Nobody cares about gay, per se. Pedophilia, quid pro quo, policy deception, etc. -- these and not orientation are the real political issues.

Posted by: skimble | September 29, 2006 5:52 PM | Report abuse

In 2004 Clay Shaw's Democratic opponent dropped out shortly before the election due to health reasons. However it was to late to change the ballot. After a short court battle, the Democrats were permitted to field another candidate, but the name of the original candidate still apeared on the ballot.

Posted by: Florida_Rep_Voter | September 29, 2006 5:50 PM | Report abuse

DeLay stepped down because he had to, and Republicans had changed that rule because they KNEW he was about to get indicted! They only restored it under political pressure.

As I stated above (which you might see if you actually read the comments here), I called for Jefferson to resign 4+ months ago.

And I still find it most interesting that what concerns you is not the crime, but getting caught. A true Republican indeed.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:50 PM | Report abuse

I went to the Citizens for Responsible Ethics in Washington website to learn more about their take on the story. But the browser said "The page cannot be found." This could turn into an even bigger story than it is now.

Posted by: geneva | September 29, 2006 5:48 PM | Report abuse

When did I say lying about your orientation was ok? When did I say hypocrisy was ok?

It would help if you actually paid attention, and managed not to put peoples' words in their mouths.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:48 PM | Report abuse

When did I say lying about sex was ok?

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Judge, you are right. My apologies.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:44 PM | Report abuse

DeLay stepped down because the rs have a rule which requires even the accusation to cause the loss of a leadership position. This rule doesn't apply to Dems and was clearly manipulated by a partisan for advantage. Still no conviction of any kind in that case. Ney is gone, before any concrete conviction or any proven wrongdoings. where is Jefferson? What about WV monnahan and that judge from FL?

the overall point is that this story is less than 4 hours old and he has already resigned. clinton dragged the whole country through this for years and never would have "come clean" if it weren't for that blue dress. He was ramping up for an assassination of her character. see the difference? Rs don't excuse this behavior. Ds always play the victim. Talk about the real definition of hypocrisy. I didn't hear any of you up in arms about freezer-man and still he has his position.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 29, 2006 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Jane Eyre: loved your autobiography.

Actually, having Condi as a nominee would be fantastic. A very smart lady. However, what we make well-deserved fun of is the likelihood that the GOP would ever nominate her.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 5:41 PM | Report abuse

I thought lying about sex was just fine with you. I thought that any choice about sexual preferences was just fine with you. are you changing your story today? can you please come up with a long term position on morality that has a shelf life longer than a single day.

I don't think the gay constituency would want to be lumped in with pedophiles. you Dems sure love your bigoted stereotypes.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 29, 2006 5:39 PM | Report abuse

What did Cranston, Glenn, Riegle or Fauntroy ever do wrong? The Republicans didn't harbor DeLay, Ney, and Cunningham?

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:39 PM | Report abuse

Sandwich: that was me and I reposted immediately (see my entry at 5:20) when I realized my mistake. Also the WaPo system has been very finicky this afternoon for obvious reasons.

A bit more historical context: "In 1983, the House censured two lawmakers -- Daniel Crane of Illinois and Gerry Studds of Massachusetts -- for having improper relationships with pages."

Crane was an R; Studds a D. NEITHER of them resigned. Crane (IL) was defeated in '84. Studds kept right on serving until '96 courtesy of the voters of MA.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 5:36 PM | Report abuse

Ah but I bet if Condi runs for office, the left will suddenly concern itself over the "gay" issue I'm sure.

Posted by: jane eyre | September 29, 2006 5:35 PM | Report abuse

Gerry Studds' incident happened in 1973. He was censured for it in 1983. He retired from Congress in 1996.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:35 PM | Report abuse

That's right KOZ, it's not about pedophiles in Congress, it's about those big, bad Dems. How do you sleep at night knowing there are so many of us around?

Posted by: Will | September 29, 2006 5:35 PM | Report abuse

I wonder how many of these right wing extremists professed gay haters are actually covert gay lovers. These people talk a good game, but they are all liars and Frauds. Looks like the House is going blue and the Senate is in play but mostly likely will end up like the federal budget.

Posted by: Linda | September 29, 2006 5:31 PM | Report abuse

Here are a few of the more famous ones for you:
Dan Rostenkowski - jailed
Alan Cranston
John Glenn
Donald Riegle
Michael Myers - expelled
Carl Perkins
Albert Bustamante
Carroll Hubbard
Mary Rose Oakar
Walter Fauntroy
James Wright - one resigned
Dennis DeConcini
and this was just so easy to find. So we have one party who eliminates its rougues and another who harbors them. Interesting.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 29, 2006 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Dan Rostenkowski. Tony Coelho.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:30 PM | Report abuse

Drindl et al are always light on coherance, always ignore facts and always call names to hide the shortcomings. you will get a nice big disgusting taste of it now. here is how to point this out.

Name a single Dem congressman who actually resigned after a scandel emerged. hint there is one, thanks to Newt. now the easier task - list the ones who didn't resign. hint they are still around, smirking about cigars.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 29, 2006 5:27 PM | Report abuse

So let's get KOZ' argument straight: lying about your sexual orientation is not a problem. Building an entire political career on hypocrisy is not a problem. Preying on minors for sex is not a problem. As long as you resign ONCE YOU GET CAUGHT, it's ok.

Interesting. Do you happen to work for the Catholic church?

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: | September 29, 2006 05:17 PM <--COWARD!

Put your name on your posts!

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:22 PM | Report abuse


Barney Frank was never guilty of anything other than being gay. He shouldn't resign any more than David Drier should.

As for Studds, you're talking about something that happened 20 years ago. I was about 8 years old when that happened. The idea that I or Democrats in general carry some sort of shame because of that episode is just as absurd as if I were to criticize you over the Iran Contra scandal.

By the way, for anyone who is wondering, Florida election law says that they can't replace a candidate on the ballot once the primary results have been certified. Which they have. Foley will have to appear on the ballot. The Florida GOP is in much the same jam that the Texas GOP is with Tom Delay's seat. This one is probably an immediate write-off.

I've honestly lost count of how many gimmes the Democrats have been handed in House races so far. Between this, Delay's seat and the seat in Arizona which the GOP just effectively this past week, the Democrats essentially have 3 down and only 11 seats to go to take the House. Certainly there are enough highly competetive pickup opportunities where Democratic challengers are now running ahead or even that Mark Foley's dramatic embodiment of an old political chestnut could very well prove to be the mistake that costs the GOP control of House.

Posted by: Jackson Landers | September 29, 2006 5:21 PM | Report abuse

The job does not demand hypocrisy. You do not need to spend 12 years in office and running campaigns based on promoting yourself as a "family values conservative", trashing gay people all the while, and secretly being gay and *soliciting minors for sex* to serve in office. Sure, Democrats get into sex scandals, but they aren't the ones who claim for years to be paragons of moral virtue who win elections by criticizing the moral failings of others. We knew in 1992 that Clinton wasn't faithful, we elected him anyway. His political career was not built on parading himself as a holier-than-thou example of moral purity. That's the difference.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:21 PM | Report abuse

"However, Foley's name will still appear on the ballot; if he wins, the Republican Party's chosen alternative candidate will actually serve."

A study in nose-holding: asking a conservative, "gray-collar" Republican to cast a vote 'for' a known pedophile even if they know it will actually elect someone else. Talk about motivating people to stay away from the polls in droves. Hard to think of anything that would top that.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 5:20 PM | Report abuse

Actually the point was that the R resigned. the D s don't. a simple point but clearly beyond your comprehension.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 29, 2006 5:19 PM | Report abuse

"However, Foley's name will still appear on the ballot; if he wins, the Republican Party's chosen alternative candidate will actually serve."

A study in nose-holding: asking a conservative, "gray-collar" Republican to cast a vote 'for' a known pedophile even if they know it will actually elect someone else. Talk about motivating people to stay away from the polls in droves. Hard to think of anything that would top that.

Posted by: Anonymous | September 29, 2006 5:17 PM | Report abuse

Excuse me drlindle . . .Gerry Studds retired in 1996 and Barney Frank is still a Congressman. I could care less if they were gay. Just two COngressman caught up inprostitution and underage sex who got a pass. And I don't believe I ranted. Just stated a few facts . . .soemthing people like you constantly ignore or as ususal don't bother to find out. You're satisfied to just call people names when you are light on any sort of coherent rebuttal. I bet your mother is proud of you.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 5:16 PM | Report abuse

The same strategy for them, always. Get caught with your pants down, then start screeching like a banshee about how terrible Democrats are. They're so well-trained -- and predictable.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 5:12 PM | Report abuse

that's a terrible election law! it puts way too much power in the hands of the political party.

on hypocracy: the job demands it. how can it not, if being called a "flip-flopper" can bring down an election? we expect our elected officials to be saints. a politician *has* to be hypocrite.

if foley does indeed prey on minors, then he should not be in a position of power over minors. but, mark's comment drives me crazy. there are *a huge* number of "closet cases" who don't "boil over". some do, it's true. and, some people who fantasize about having sex outside of their marriage have affairs. but, there's a lot of "closet case" fantasizing going on of all sorts.

Posted by: Keith | September 29, 2006 5:09 PM | Report abuse

jane just can't stand it. she has to go back to like 1939 to find the two Dems who are gay, and then rant about how bad Dems are. You are one sick cultist, babee.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 5:07 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, building your entire political career on hypocrisy, slamming a group of people you secretly belong to, must not be an issue.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 5:06 PM | Report abuse

He was a smart kid, and had good instincts and self-image.

The kids that get taken in are the ones who are naive, don't know much about sex, have low self-esteem and are too anxious to please adults.

I have a friend who counsels kids with histories like that. It's very sad. Often since they have low self-imge to begin with, they blame themselves for. More often than not, the abuser is someone with authority in the community -- priest, teacher, cop, as mark said, someone who works very hard to suppress it, but it always comes out.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Republicans leave when caught with thier pants down. dems run for re-election. See Jefferson, Moolohan, clinton, etc. It looks like foley never acted on his urges while your heros still smirk at the sight of cigars.

but the party who thinks tolerance is so important seems mighty bigoted in here today. Why are you so obsessed with gayness, blackness, jewishness, etc. Still no issues to speak of? That's what I thought.

Posted by: kingofzouk | September 29, 2006 5:02 PM | Report abuse

Who cares whether Foley is gay? That's not the issue. And it doesn't matter whether Graham is gay, or the fact that Hillary Clinton is gay. It's the apparent pedophilia that matters.

Posted by: Joe | September 29, 2006 4:56 PM | Report abuse

Does anyone remember Gerry Studds, Democratic Congressman from Massachusetts, who was casught red-handed actually having sex with an under-age male Congressional page? He was merely censured by the House. Of course this was back when it was run by Democrats. (might have been before emails too) Then of course there's Barney Frank another Democratic congressman from Mass., whose live-in boyfriend was caught running a male-prostitution ring out of the good Congressman's home. I don't believe any sort of ethics thing happened to Barney. The only difference I've noticed between Republican and Democrat sex scandals is that Republicans at least have the decency to resign. Democrats blame the great right-wing conspiracy and get away with it.

Posted by: Jane | September 29, 2006 4:56 PM | Report abuse

What seems to be missing from all these comments is that this is how closet cases behave, i.e., creepy. The kid had good instincts for a 16-year-old, better in fact than the people who first responded to this story as it unfolded.

Closet cases can't be trusted in their personal lives. They are pressure cookers waiting to boil over. I've known several, and you can't talk to them about this, all you get is "I've got it under control", until the day of reckoning comes.

Posted by: Mark | September 29, 2006 4:52 PM | Report abuse

Where is Chris Hanson of Dateline when you need him? "Explain yourself"

Seriously, the worst thing that happens with this is a failed re-election campaign. Better that, than some minor being sexually abused. C'est la vie Foley

Posted by: kungfukoh | September 29, 2006 4:52 PM | Report abuse

well, well, well, another republican "family values" sex feind...anyone remember the name of the member of the republican leadership who was forced to resign from the house back in the late 70's for sleeping with pages?

He was also an early "family values" guy...

what fun... and yes, Clinton looks normal next to this bunch.

bye the bye, if LG is gay, any chance that the WH leaned on him over the torture issue using this? He seemed to have compromised his principles very fast at the end...

Posted by: spin | September 29, 2006 4:49 PM | Report abuse

The problem isn't their sexual orientation. It's their "family values" hypocrisy.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:46 PM | Report abuse

I don't want to trash Foley becuase he's gay -- I don't care. Pedophilia is another matter altogether.

Same as for the rest of them -- as is pointed out, there are a lot more republican gays in office than democrats. In fact, the only Dem I know of is old Barney.

What is offensive is their gay bashing. Is it even possible to be any more hypocritical?

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 4:42 PM | Report abuse

FL-16 data:

Election Results
Candidate Total Votes Percent Expenditures
2004 general Mark Foley (R) 215,563 68% $1,839,746
Jeff Fisher (D) 101,247 32%

2002 general Mark Foley (R) 176,171 79% $902,644
Jack McLain (CPF) 47,169 21% $2,587

Prior winning percentages: 2000 (60%); 1998 (100%); 1996 (64%); 1994 (58%)

2004 Presidential Vote
Bush (R) 183,339 (54%)
Kerry (D) 154,632 (46%)

2000 Presidential Vote
Bush (R) 141,029 (53%)
Gore (D) 124,752 (47%)

District Demographics (More Info)
Cook Partisan Voting Index: R + 2
District Size: 5,249 square miles
Population in 2000: 639,295; 84.5% urban; 15.5% rural
Median Household Income: $39,408; 10.0% are below the poverty line
Occupation: 21.8% blue collar; 57.5% white collar; 20.6% gray collar; 18.9% military veterans
Race/Ethnic Origin: 81.8% White, 5.8% Black, 1.0% Asian, 0.3% Amer. Indian, 0.0% Hawaiian, 1.0% Two+ races, 0.1% Other, 10.1% Hispanic origin
Ancestry: 12.3% German, 11.3% Irish, 9.7% English

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:40 PM | Report abuse

What jackass said Lindsay Graham is gay? That's disgusting to just slime people. Have some evidence, or shut up.

Posted by: John Lease | September 29, 2006 4:39 PM | Report abuse

i guess he should have come out of the closet a long time ago and avoided the sneaky side of his repub life. now maybe he run for some office with the log cabin republicans....

Posted by: bill | September 29, 2006 4:35 PM | Report abuse

This Foley/Republican revelation shouldn't surprise anyone. One of the founding fathers of the GOP has been rumored to have switch hit for years....and...he was a President....

Posted by: L.Sterlling | September 29, 2006 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Foley makes Jim McGreevey look like a saint.

Why is it the only gay people who fit right-wing stereotypes of them are Republican politicians?

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:33 PM | Report abuse

"Foley Drops Out" is the headline? The pedophiliac emails buried in the 3rd Graph? Chris, are you sick in the head?

It's simply disgusting the pass CC and The Fix gives these GOP sickos.

SICK. You should be ashamed

Posted by: F&B | September 29, 2006 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Whether or not Foley is gay is not the issue. Gay people aren't necessarily pedophiles. Whether Foley is a pedophile or not IS the question.

Posted by: kayaking fool | September 29, 2006 4:27 PM | Report abuse

Foley didn't have the *character* to resign, it's a matter of embarassment and being outed as both a gay man and a potential pedophile. This guy may be looking at the inside of a prison cell in the near future.

I called for Rep. Jefferson to resign 4+ months ago. I don't see any Democrats running as "family values" snots and then soliciting minors for sex.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:26 PM | Report abuse

Yes, we've all known for years that Foley is gay. Foley did not, as Chris says, drop out for "family reasons"...he knew he would be outed if he ran for the Senate. Of course, it is surprising about this kid stuff and deeply disturbing.

And yes, it's an open secret that Lindsey Graham (and David Drier, for that matter) are gay. There has also been a lot of claims that Ken Mehlman is gay. For such a homophobic party, they've got a lot in their ranks. Sounds like they've got a bad case of the Ray Cohn syndrome in the Republican party.

Posted by: Greg-G | September 29, 2006 4:26 PM | Report abuse

The president also discussed Afghanistan in an Oval Office meeting with President Nursultan Nazarbayev of Kazakhstan, a Central Asian ally and important oil supplier. The former Soviet republic borders Afghanistan.

Bush thanked Nazarbayev for supporting the war in Iraq and for helping Afghanistan become a stable democracy.
"I have watched very carefully the development of this important country from one that was in the Soviet sphere to one that now is a free nation," Bush said as the two sat side by side. Bush offered support for Kazakhstan's desire to join the World Trade Organization.

No mention was made of criticism of Kazakhstan for human rights abuses, corruption and heavily restricted political and civil freedoms.

Posted by: Peas in a Pod | September 29, 2006 4:25 PM | Report abuse

From the Almanac of American Politics profile of Rep. Foley:

"In early 2003 he was preparing to run for Bob Graham's Senate seat. In May, rumors that Foley is gay surfaced in several newspaper stories; in response, he held a news conference where he said he will not discuss his sexual orientation. But in September 2003, he abandoned the contest to spend more time with his ailing parents; he said that the reports about his sexual orientation had nothing to do with his decision, and he soon endorsed Mel Martinez in the Republican primary."

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:25 PM | Report abuse

Wow. It's a bad thing when my cynicism has reached the level where this news doesn't surprise me in the least.

Posted by: J. Crozier | September 29, 2006 4:24 PM | Report abuse

President Bush asserted Friday that critics who claim the Iraq war has made America less safe embrace "the enemy's propaganda." He acknowledged setbacks in Afghanistan against a Taliban resurgence but predicted eventual victory.'

This guy gets more fascist every day. Wonder how long before anyone who criticizes him gets disappeared? You can feel it coming, step by step.

As of yesterday, Congress gave him the power to do exactly that -- legally, and to american citizens. So it's only a matter of time.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 4:22 PM | Report abuse

I'm old fashion, I believe public officials should be held to a very high level of conduct due to the position of trust we place in them. Now if we can get Mollohan and Jefferson to resign it would be great. The word I am hearing is this seat will be lost to us republicans. So be it. I rather lose control of the House than have a sicko like Foley in their. But give him some credit at least he had enough character to resign, more than you can say about Jefferson or Mollohan.

Posted by: bhoomes | September 29, 2006 4:22 PM | Report abuse

Sorry -- make that

Posted by: mark | September 29, 2006 4:18 PM | Report abuse

aka and Tom S are right. You can also see the current codified Florida statute -- 100.111(4) -- at

Posted by: mark | September 29, 2006 4:17 PM | Report abuse

venice -- they're cultists, I tell you. They'll vote for an R no matter what he does. They just look the other way.

They also don't seem to have any problem whatsoever with innocent people getting shot by nuts.There's so many stories today about shootings in schools. Any kid, any lunatic, any terrorist can get any gun any time in any town in America. We have become the most violent country on earth [with the exception, of course, of Iraq].

The bedwetters who are willing to give up all of their rights and liberties over fear of terrorists just don't care about guns. It's psychotic. Any of us are a lot more likely to get killled by a rightwing nutjob like timothy mvveigh or any assorted sniper than we are by any foreigner.

But republicans can't get hysterical about that, because their skin is white.

'A school principal in western Wisconsin has been shot. John Klang, principal of Weston School, was shot by a 15-year-old student this morning.'

'The gunman who took six girls hostage in a high school classroom, killing one of them before taking his own life, sent his brother a long, rambling letter warning of his impending death, investigators said Friday. '

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Sen. Graham had to tell Jim DeMint to tone down all his anti-gay campaign rhetoric in 2004.

I'm not sure why the Post deleted my NAMBLA comment when they allow all these anonymous ones that violate their own stated rules. How is it overly explicit or prurient? Man-boy love seems to be exactly what Rep. Foley was caught doing, or seeking at least.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:15 PM | Report abuse

Guttentag Rep. Foley:

I received word from a headhunting firm that you will soon be out of work. Might we interest you in a new line of work. Contact me at

Posted by: Benedict from Rome | September 29, 2006 4:13 PM | Report abuse

Or maybe Foley can get a job at Homeland Security. He'll feel comfortable with his coworkers there who spend their workdays on government computers IMing minors for sex.

Seriously, if there's any evidence that that's what Foley has done, he must be tried in court for it.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 4:10 PM | Report abuse

Regarding Florida election law, it appears that they can replace Foley, under a change in the Florida election laws passed last year. However, Foley's name will still appear on the ballot; if he wins, the Republican Party's chosen alternative candidate will actually serve. It's on page 26 of this PDF.

Posted by: Tom S | September 29, 2006 4:04 PM | Report abuse

If what aka says is true, the GOP is screwed in that district. Who is going to cast their vote for Foley now? This story is truly beyond belief.

Posted by: Venicemenace | September 29, 2006 4:03 PM | Report abuse


Please keep comments within a reasonable range of decency. Overtly explicit, prurient, or profane comments will be removed.

-- Editors

Posted by: Editors | September 29, 2006 4:02 PM | Report abuse

There have been photos for a while with Foley and his partner in the gay rags for years by now. But I didn't know about Lindsay Graham. I guess "he wasn't asked -and- didn't tell."

Posted by: Florida Resident | September 29, 2006 4:01 PM | Report abuse

Foley's name cannot be removed from the ballot if it is close to the election (not sure on the timing). He remains on the ballot, but Republicans can name a person to receive those votes. Look at the 2004 election in south florida against Clay Shaw. Jim Stork dropped out and was replaced by Robin Rorapaugh, but not on the ballot. Therefore, a vote for Stork was a vote for robin.

Posted by: aka | September 29, 2006 3:56 PM | Report abuse could generate a credible attack ad by listing Drindl's examples (don't forget Jack Ryan) and people would look back on Bill Clinton's transgression with fondness.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 3:56 PM | Report abuse

Well, Foley's spokesman Jason Kello sure has egg on his face now.

He poo-pooed the allegations as unworthy and said Foley's office often asked for photos for people who may later want a recommendation. Um, hey Jason - maybe those photos were being used for other purposes.

Posted by: Fritz | September 29, 2006 3:55 PM | Report abuse

The party of family values is in reality the party of perverts and freaks. They're hedonistic, start wars and cast moral aspersions on other people.

Posted by: Intrepid Liberal Journal | September 29, 2006 3:54 PM | Report abuse

Michael: thanks. Maybe he went after the Internet child porn industry because they wouldn't give him a discounted rate. Did he have any dealings with Abramoff?

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 3:53 PM | Report abuse

See what I mean? It's always a case of 'Methinks thou doth protest too much' -- anybody who carries on and on about porn and whatnot is someone that I keep my children away from.

I see we have been warned, people. No explicit, please.Our editors are pretty patient but I'm sure it's possible to annoy them.

Posted by: dridl | September 29, 2006 3:52 PM | Report abuse

Yeah, Judge, we know the drill. I'm serious though when I say they've got some seriously kinky people in their party. There was John Bolton forcing his wife to go to Plato's Retreat, there was the Mayor of Waterbury raping two eight year olds [repeatedly] there's always hypocrite Lynn Cheney and her lesbian fantasies, there's the Scooter Libby book featuring a 10 year old girl getting raped by a bear, there were 2 homeland security appointees fired for looking at child pornography at work, there's Rick Santorum, who like a lot of them, thhinks way too often about having sex with dogs... I could go on.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 3:51 PM | Report abuse


Please keep comments within a reasonable range of decency. Overtly explicit, prurient, or profane comments will be removed.

-- Editors

Posted by: Editors | September 29, 2006 3:48 PM | Report abuse

WOW...Foley on a small scale did what Bush/Cheney are doing on a global scale...SCREWING ALL!

Posted by: Rufus Bee | September 29, 2006 3:48 PM | Report abuse

The emails with the 16-y.o. aren't the reason he resigned. According to ABC News, they questioned Foley "about sexually explicit internet messages with current and former Congressional pages under the age of 18." It seems the instant message "made repeated references to sexual organs and act." This from the chairman of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children. Now, that's disturbing.

Posted by: cas_esq | September 29, 2006 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Surely someone at the Post must know somebody who knows Florida election law? An official Post blog shouldn't have to wonder whether Foley can be replaced on the ballot.

Posted by: Steve | September 29, 2006 3:48 PM | Report abuse

We've known for years now that Foley is gay (as is Sen. Lindsay Graham), even while he took indignant umbrage at the suggestion. What we didn't know is that he's a slimeball who preys on minors. Another great "family values" Republican. Any Republicans want to apologize for this weasel or make excuses for him? Criticize his unbelievable hypocrisy in acting as a "family values" politician for all these years?? I guess it's all ok if you're a Republican.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | September 29, 2006 3:48 PM | Report abuse

Love the news articles still up on Foley's official homepage:

WASHINGTON - Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL), Co-chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus, applauded Senate passage of legislation he authored and introduced overhauling our nation's sex offender registration and notification laws.

WASHINGTON - {Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) introduced legislation last night along with Congressman Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA) that goes after the Internet child porn industry and for the first time would hold credit card companies and Internet service providers accountable if they knowingly facilitate child pornography.

Posted by: Michael | September 29, 2006 3:45 PM | Report abuse

By the way pedophile jokes are NOT funny. It is a horrible situation whenever it happens and ruins the lives of hundreds of young people in this country every year. Keep your sick jokes to yourselves please.

Posted by: Andy R | September 29, 2006 3:44 PM | Report abuse

Good one, Al.

Hey, maybe Kathryn Harris can run for both Foley's seat AND Bill Nelson's. She can beat both Nelson and Mahoney in the same election! "She is strong, she is invincible, she is Woman...." (with profuse apologies to Helen Reddy). She's also crazier than a "restroom co-located" rat.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 3:44 PM | Report abuse

And the hits just keep on coming for the GOP. Can you imagine what Karl Rove would do if it was a D that got stuck with this? Do we have any pictures of Bush and Foley in grinning/backslap mode?

My guess is that the evidence is much more concrete/accessible than the little bits of info we have right now at 3:30 EST on 10/29/06. The rest of the iceberg may yet hove into view. Can someone do a trace on what websites Foley has been visiting over the past year?

"The St. Petersburg Times caught up with the boy some time ago but waited to report on it until today." The GOP will be shouting to the rooftops about that. Cover up the truth by screeching loudly about precisely how it was revealed.

Posted by: Judge C. Crater | September 29, 2006 3:43 PM | Report abuse

My initial reaction is that he wouldn't have resigned so quickly had this been only smoke. But, according to ABC's "the blotter", there's a heck of a lot of fire behind that smoke:

"Hours earlier, ABC News had read excerpts of instant messages provided by former male pages who said the congressman, under the AOL Instant Messenger screen name Maf54, made repeated references to sexual organs and acts."

Posted by: mrjauk | September 29, 2006 3:43 PM | Report abuse

It seems pretty inappropriate in the least.
Who knows what exactly went on, but Foley dropping out looks like he wants to cover something up to me.
Either way his seat will definitly be in play, and probably will flip Democrat this close to the election.

Posted by: Andy R | September 29, 2006 3:41 PM | Report abuse

It's now official; Foley has just announced his resignation.

The few details being released about these emails do not Foley look terribly bad. There is probably more going on than has been released so far.

This is definitely another nail in the coffin for the Republican House leadership.

Posted by: Zathras | September 29, 2006 3:39 PM | Report abuse

actually, read the ABC News account. apparently, they talked with Foley today and read him instant messages that he had sent various boys. they are airing a full story tonight. i think that's what forced the resignation. apparently, the IMs are explicit.

Posted by: newsreader | September 29, 2006 3:37 PM | Report abuse

There are just a couple of days left in the life of the 109th Congress, and lawmakers are getting a bit punch-drunk.

The legislature has yet to agree on a single one of its 12 annual spending bills, but the House managed to find time yesterday to consider H. Res. 748, "Recognizing the 225th anniversary of the American and French victory at Yorktown."

Congress still hasn't worked out immigration legislation or lobbying reform, but the House yesterday moved to embrace H. Res. 991, "Congratulating the Columbus Northern Little League Baseball Team from Columbus, Georgia."

There's nothing doing on port security or Social Security, but there was broad agreement yesterday on H. Res 973, honoring "the financial planning profession for their adherence and dedication to the financial planning process."

Measured by days in session or legislative output, this Congress has secured its place as one of the most lethargic of all time.

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Not smart. Congressmen are supposed to shaft the American people collectively, not individually.

Posted by: OD | September 29, 2006 3:32 PM | Report abuse

Although I generally support Democrats I cant help but agree with you. THere isnt any real evidence of misconduct, but in politics implications are all that are needed to end a career. We may never know the truth, but atleast Foley erred on the side of caution and fell on his blade for the GOP. Its nice to see someone on either side take some responsiblitly for their actions. I dislike trials taking place in the media.

Posted by: ouch | September 29, 2006 3:30 PM | Report abuse

Yockel, the emails are real, ad Foley admits it. In one Foley tells the kid he's visitng nearby and asks how old he is. The kid gets freaked out. Now, maybe it was innocent -- but maybe it wasn't and there's other stuff in the background that Foley doesn't want to get out. So he quits, pronto. If it WAS innocent, he wouldn't have done that, would he? My guess --pedophile. Seems to be a lot of that in the republican party.

"In the exchange, Foley asked the boy about weathering Hurricane Katrina and wrote, "send me an e-mail pic of you." In another e-mail, Foley told the boy he was on a break from Congress and was in Florida. He asked the boy, "how old are you now?"

The boy forwarded excerpts from the e-mails to congressional staffers and said, "Maybe it is just me being paranoid, but seriously. This freaked me out."

The boy, who is not being identified because of his age, told the St. Petersburg Times in an interview last November, when the Times first learned of the e-mails, that he cut off correspondence with Foley.

"I thought it was very inappropriate," the boy told the Times. "After the one about the picture, I decided to stop e-mailing him back."

Posted by: drindl | September 29, 2006 3:26 PM | Report abuse

"Democratic candidate Tim Mahoney...will now sees his chances immediately improve -- especially if Republicans are unable to replace Foley on the ballot."

Now we need somebody who actually knows Florida election law.

Does anybody know what the Florida Republican Party can do to replace Foley?

Posted by: Nor'Easter | September 29, 2006 3:19 PM | Report abuse

I don't understand why Foley would drop out. The e-mails may or may not be nefarious. There has to be more evidence available or it is just a rumor.

Posted by: Yockel | September 29, 2006 3:14 PM | Report abuse

and the fun continues looks like this one will be making the jump to toss up status

Posted by: Rob Millette | September 29, 2006 3:14 PM | Report abuse

WOW ... I am surprised .. I guess those emails struck a nerve with Foley!

Posted by: ssss | September 29, 2006 3:12 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company