« That Growth Between Their Legs | Main | Bugger The Press »

October 02, 2006

Repubicans Approve Underage Gay Sex!

Florida Representative Mark Foley resigned late last month for sending sexually provocative e-mails to “underage” boys who happened to be Congressional pages. They were 16 – the age of consent in the District of Columbia – but I won’t quibble with the phrase underage. It certainly meets my standard, as well as that of Mr. Foley as suggested in his work in support of the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006.

Immediately, the Republican Core trumped their Clinton card, saying it is hypocritical for the anti-Right to chastise Mr. Foley for wanting to do what Bill Clinton did with a 22 year-old woman. Since these pages were 16 year-old boys, the Republican Core has now come out (pun not initially intended) ipso facto in favor of underage gay sex.

That’s quite an event, and I trust the Washington Post is now conducting an investigation into contributions from NAMBLA members to Republican candidates.

Amusingly, House of Representatives Speaker Dennis Hastert said he was told of the situation some six months previously. If one questions the seriousness of my claim – that the Republican Core has come out in favor of underage gay sex – please reconsider the previous sentence. The chief Republican in Congress was aware of Mr. Foley’s sexual harassment of underage boys who work as Congressional pages for most of 2006.

You may recall in 2000 the Republican Party campaigned on a very high moral platform. Of course, this was before we learned they stole that election as the first act in an endless series of dangerous and deadly lies. Last I checked, this sort of thing was in conflict with several of their vaunted Ten Commandments.

Keep this in mind when you vote next month. Maybe the Democrats are a bunch of lame wussies, but damn, they haven’t stooped this low.

Posted by Mike Gold at October 2, 2006 02:45 PM

Trackback Pings

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.malibulist.com/mt/mt-tb.cgi/4774

Comments

To be fair, Hastert has admitted that mistakes were made. He says it's the fault of the pages, for not notifying the FBI about the IMs.

Posted by: Martha Thomases at October 2, 2006 04:29 PM

Interesting, Martha-- and contradicted by the FBI saying that it had copies of the emails in July and they didn't start an investigation then.

http://www.theage.com.au/news/world/fbi-admits-failure-over-sex-email-scandal/2006/10/03/1159641326321.html

Posted by: Glenn Hauman at October 3, 2006 04:39 PM

Well, now Hastert says it's an evil liberal plot, claimining on Rush Limbaugh's show that the Democrats have been sitting on damning evidence since 2003, just waiting for the right moment to unleash their hellish plot. Apparently the 2006 mid-terms were far more enticing to them than the 2004 presidential cycle.

What he didn't explain was how the fiendish, amoral Democrats tricked him into failing to inform the lone Democrat on the relevant committee of Foley's inappropriate actions last year, thereby creating the appearance of a politcally motivated cover-up.

Meanwhile, Dubya came out with the equivalent of a "Heck of a job, Brownie!" in support of Denny, which is pretty much the kiss of death.

Hastert will probably lose the speakership and might even lose his seat in the election, but that's small comfort. Personally, I won't be satisfied until every member of both houses who voted in favor the the Military Commissions Act (a.k.a the torture bill) is forced to resign.

Posted by: Rick Oliver at October 3, 2006 08:29 PM

Ya know, what gets me about the whole deal: The American people, the media, and our elected and selected officials are even more offended by a guy wanting to give blow jobs to 16 year olds than they were by our legislators throwing habeas corpus intro the slavering jaws of the Great Wolves of Totalitarianism and giving the president the power to identify and torture non-uniformed combatants.

It just strikes me as ironic and quite depressing, somehow.

Posted by: Timothy Truman at October 4, 2006 01:39 AM

I don't really think the public cares more about blowjobs that snowjobs. I think they are uninformed and have not been helped by educators, the media, and their own representatives to understand how the rights of a detainee in Guantanamo is relevant to their lives. The Republican Congress makes the decisions in a vacuum, just like its leader in the White House. They've disenfranchised a large part of this nation.

Posted by: Marilyn Ferdinand at October 4, 2006 11:53 AM

The religious right cares a great deal about blowjobs, particularly when both parties are male. And a large number of voters don't care about the rights of detainees at Guantanamo because they don't think the same rules apply to them -- and no amount of education is going to dissuade them from that position.

For better or worse, a large portion of this nation felt disenfranchised long before the current administration took office. If the Democrats score a major victory in November it will only be because the true believers stay away from the polls for the same reasons they flocked to the polls in 2004.

The best upside to this entire debacle and the way the Republicans have chosen to handle it is that the tenuous union between the religious right and the true conservative wing of the Republican party will be irrevocably broken.

Posted by: Rick Oliver at October 5, 2006 07:44 PM

I agree about the religious right and the conservative Republican base. I disagree about Guantanamo. I think we are seeing by the large demonstrations for immigrant rights that a critical mass is forming to blow the lid off power abuses.

Posted by: Marilyn at October 6, 2006 10:34 AM

Marilyn:

You lost me. What's the connection between "the large demonstrations for immigration rights" and power abuses? AFAIK, those large demonstrations are made up primarily of latinos, protesting for "rights" that don't actually exist in the constitution. The question of the rights of illegal immigrants and/or our general immigration policy has little or no bearing on the current administration's full frontal assault on the constitution -- and I don't think the citizens (and non-citizens) on either side of the immigration debate see much of a connection between the two.

Posted by: Rick Oliver at October 6, 2006 12:35 PM

You seemed to make the point that non-American prisoners at Guantanamo don't matter to most of the nation. I say that abuses of these people and demonstrations of illegal immigrants can be linked. They are guaranteed certain rights under treaties the U.S. has signed. The U.S. further guarantees a free public education to every child in, whether they are illegals or not. I see minority populations standing up to fight for each other for their rights. It's not always about the Constitution, which is not the only law in the land.

Posted by: Marilyn at October 6, 2006 02:49 PM

Ah, but I didn't say "non-American". Although I understand that inferring that wouldn't be unreasonable, that wasn't my intent. I have a fairly low opinion of my fellow citizens as a whole. I think they generally dismiss the plight of anyone (even their fellow citizens) who they deem "not like us" -- and they consistently assume that what happens to "them" couldn't possibly happen to "us". So if some U.S. citizen who happens also to be of mideastern descent gets hauled off to a secret prison, that's not our problem because...you know...it's not like we're Arabs or anything; so we don't have to worry, right? As Frank Zappa said: "It can't happen here..."

Posted by: Rick Oliver at October 6, 2006 05:35 PM

'For better or worse, a large portion of this nation felt disenfranchised long before the current administration took office. If the Democrats score a major victory in November it will only be because the true believers stay away from the polls for the same reasons they flocked to the polls in 2004.'

Just keep talking. Expressing your opinions the way you do is just going to make the true Conservatives come out in droves to vote, if only to make you eat your words.

Posted by: Ben Bradley at October 6, 2006 06:52 PM

Well, Ben, I guess that depends on how you define "true conservative" -- and I'm guessing your definition and mine aren't very similar. When I think "true conservative" I think Barry Goldwater, not Bill Frist. Blindly hating all things perceived as "liberal" does not make you a conservative. It may, however, make you a Republican -- and there may indeed be enough of those left to keep your party in power, even if the Evangelicals abandon you.

Posted by: Rick Oliver at October 6, 2006 10:03 PM

Pop trio Atomic Kitten will reform to play a concert in support of jailed Liverpool football fan Michael Shields...

Posted by: Daniel Stowers at November 12, 2006 12:51 PM

Pop trio Atomic Kitten will reform to play a concert in support of jailed Liverpool football fan Michael Shields...

Posted by: Daniel Stowers at November 12, 2006 12:51 PM

The first stage of a 150m investment in regional museums is praised for boosting visitor numbers...

Posted by: Jeffery Decker at November 12, 2006 06:37 PM

The first stage of a 150m investment in regional museums is praised for boosting visitor numbers...

Posted by: Jeffery Decker at November 12, 2006 06:37 PM

Twistys Presents: Erica Campbell

Posted by: erica campbell at November 22, 2006 06:03 AM

Twistys Presents: Devon

Posted by: devon at November 22, 2006 08:07 AM

Post a comment




Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)