Dave,

Its peculiar how your keywords are Republican and GOP. In truth, your keywords would more appropriately be: Homosexual, Pedophile, Child Molester, Hypocrite, Child Love and betrayal.

Some pro-homosexual activists make the false claim that pedophilia/child love is a completely distinct orientation from homosexuality. The real and documented evidence shows a disproportionate overlap between the two, not to mention many pro-homosexual groups who refuse to denounce pedophilia on the grounds it would be disowning their heritage throughout history.

In most child molestation cases, that are reported, the molesters are male. In over 30% of those reported cases that male identifies his sexual orientation as homosexual or bisexual. That's a big proportion, especially since homosexual men are only 3% of the population.

If you want to talk "politics," Mark Foley belongs to a long list of RINO's (Republican in name only), who should be removed from the party.

Disgraced Congressman Foley was a Moderate "Pro-Choice" and "Pro-Gay Rights" Republican.

http://72.14.209.104/search?q=cache:tjjZ--wuwPgJ:online.logcabin.org/talking_points/2006-endorsements.html+log+cabin+mark+foley&hl=en&gl=us&ct=clnk&cd=4 )

The political gay activist group Human Rights Campaign (HRC) which rated Foley in 2003-2004 at 88% on side with them and in 2002 the HRC PAC gave him a campaign contribution of $10,000.

Foley was endorsed by both the 'pro-gay' Log Cabin Republicans and the 'pro-choice' Republican Majority for Choice.

He's on the list of 'moderate' Republicans who are funded in part by Soros.

http://www.republicanmainstreet.org/members.htm

In 1983, Rep. Gerry Studds, Massachusetts Democrat, was censured by the House for sexual involvement during the previous decade with a 17-year-old male page. Studds turned his back on members of the House as the charges were read against him. Then, Studds held a press conference with the former page, acknowledging their homosexual relationship. Studds did not resign from Congress. Rather, he became the first openly homosexual pedophile member of Congress and won re-election six more times before retiring in 1996.

I guess child love only looks bad for Republicans, is that what you're saying, Dave?

It's the cover-up, stupid

Foley is a scum bag and, allegedly a criminal. Republican House leaders protected and enabled him for crass political gain.

Disgusting.

That's the end of the story.

Well, I'm pleased you decided to show your intellect, by your name-calling.

I suppose for someone of your mentality, that is the end of the story.

Fortunately, most Americans are not so limited in debate skills or strength of character.

Most Americans see pedophilia as being most disgusting. Again, fortunately, the left is the minority in this great republic.

If you condemn the organizations that endorsed Foley, you have to condemn all of the Republicans that have voted for him over all these years.

It is scurilous to attack the organizations that endorsed him unless you have documentation that they knew about his illegal behavior.

That would be like condmening you for inviting your neighbor to a party when he gets arrested as a serial killer two weeks (or two years) later.

bit it is ok to demand that the speaker of the house resign when you do not know if he had prior knowledge of the text messages which are the smoking gun. So far all they had were the emails which were nothing illegal. If every email that is even slightly suggestive is cause for all this hell you are trying to raise, then you are also in trouble as are about 99% of the public. So just chill out. It was one of your sides usual sleazy last minute grasps for the brass ring. Just for once, run a decent here are my ideas type campaign. Of course one has to have an idea before they can put it forward and your side is so devoid of ideas that it is frightening to think they might ever regan a majority anywhere.

You mean like the swift boating of John Kerry, morphing triple amputee Max Cleland into Saddam Hussein, using racist push polling to attack John McCain in the 2000 Republican primary (SC), or calling veteran Tammy Duckworth, who lost both legs in Iraq a "cut and run" coward?

The Democrats have been losing because they ran campaigns on the issues while the Republicans smeared the Democrats.

I'm glad the Democrats are getting more serious about beating the Republicans.

I completely disagree with you about this situation. The Republican leadership protected Foley. They put themselves and the Republican Party ahead of the safety of teenagers, and betrayed all standards of human decency. You demonstrate your own depravity by defending them.

Hastert knew that this arose from a complaint made by parents whose child told them he was creeped out by the emails.

It is blatantly obvious what went on.

While I think all of this is true and that Hastert, Boehnert, Shimkus, etc. and those who continue to support them have demonstrated they have no shame and no human decency, even if it were totally made up, I'd still want it used if it would defeat the Republicans because that is what Republicans do - find any dirt they think will stick and if they can't find any, they make stuff up.

In fact, if it comes out after the Republicans have lost the House and the Senate in November that every bit of the Foley business was false, for me it will be an even sweeter victory.

You mean like this post condemns the Republican party for Foley attending?

No, this post condemns Republican leaders for making this into a partisan issue by not telling ANY Democrats and then protecting Foley for political gain.

Some Democrats knew too. But what those Democrats are saying is that it was the Republicans' responsibility to do something. In truth, anyone who knew should have acted, these are our children we are talking about, not consenting adults. Really, one should never claim any political home to remain objective.

Unfortunately, the left fights more and more for legalization of sexual deviancy and to force the acceptance and protection of the perverse and deadly sexual psychopaths. The Child Love movement, an evil fallacy, is all rolled up in the feminist/GLBT movement and fighting for and receiving the same protections as such truths as race and gender.

Mark Foley was raped by homosexuals and has probably raped children making more homosexuals who will probably rape more children. But, the feminists/GLBT activists say hey we must protect these pedophiles and sexual perverts and write into law anti-discrimmination legislation to pretect and encourage any and all of the 24+ variations of "sexual orientation," because they are being oppressed just like women and minorites and they state all children should be sexually liberated...just like Mark Foley was "sexually liberated" by the homosexual clergy who raped him. Hence, the forced indoctrination of k-12 public schoolchildren on left's agenda. They force their "agnda" on the red states by threatening them with loss of federal monies if they refuse to indoctrinate children into the homosexual lifestyle. Parents are put in jail for insisting their kindergarten children not participate in homosexual indoctrination like in Massachusetts (Google David Parker). And GLAD is indoctinating public middle and high school kids (Google fistgate). In California, 24+ variations of "sexual orientation" is now protected unde law. Is it any wonder "sexual orientation" has no real legal definition. Absolutely not. It is the GLBT activists intent to remove pedophilia from the APA's DSM disorder list just like they forced removal of homosexuality. Transgender Pediatricians in California have held conferences and have been instructed to suggest gender change operations to their clients. Really, we shouldn't attempt to paint any of this evil as Republican or Democrat. It's a sickness and knows no boundary like that of a political party. Let's get real, people, and stop exploiting our children for political gains.

I have seen no reports that ANY Democratss knew about Foley. Unlees you can document your claim I will assume that it is another Republican lie the Pedophile Party is putting out to propagandize the public.

Your "two wrongs make a right." morality is disgusting.

I will also assume you are a liar unless you can provide documentation that there is an organized GLBT effort to remove pedophilia from the APA Diagnostic and Statistical Manaul.

I claim the Democratic Party as my political home because the Goerge Bush Republican Party is craven, evil, corrupt, hateful, and protects pedophiles for political gain - name a a few of my grievances.

Since you are hiding your identity, let me see if I can guess your name. Are you Paul Cameron or Fred Phelps?

By the way, I have three adult children. I love all of them. Two of my children are heterosexual. One of them has been divorced twice and the other is in her second divorce right now. My gay son met his spouse in college. We had a party for their 20th anniversary in June.

Seek and you shall find:

Some mental health professionals attending an annual APA convention May 19 in San Francisco proposed removing several long-recognized categories of mental illness - including pedophilia, exhibitionism, fetishism, transvestism, voyeurism and sadomasochism - from the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders (DSM).

Most of the mental illnesses being considered for removal are known as "paraphilias."

Dr. Charles Moser of San Francisco's Institute for the Advanced Study of Human Sexuality and co-author Peggy Kleinplatz of the University of Ottawa presented conferees with a paper entitled "DSM-IV-TR and the Paraphilias: An Argument for Removal."
Here's your link, because I do have morals and I do NOT lie:

http://www.cnsnews.com/ViewCulture.asp?Page=%5CCulture%5Carchive%5C200306%5CCUL20030611c.html


That's a problem with so many leftists, they assume lies...poor things. To them there are "versions" of truth. Truth is absolute.

If you want to play "politics" I can play that too, so here's a Pedophile Party too:

In 1983, Rep. Gerry Studds, Massachusetts Democrat, was censured by the House for sexual involvement during the previous decade with a 17-year-old male page. Studds turned his back on members of the House as the charges were read against him. Then, Studds held a press conference with the former page, acknowledging their homosexual relationship. Studds did not resign from Congress. Rather, he became the first openly homosexual pedophile member of Congress and won re-election six more times before retiring in 1996.

I guess, to some like you, child love only looks bad for Republicans.

I wouldn't be bragging about your three children, it appears you have no real parental bragging rights. Let me guess, you're a woman and you're divorced too? None of your children have morals - its obvious. Homosexuals are made that way by themselves or others. They are NOT born that way. What happened or didn't happen, whichever the case may be? No paternal contact? Or molestation?

I see you're on here as anonymos, but you say "I'm" hiding my identity. I am Jacknhoo. We can talk more, hypocrite. You're no better than the party you hate, apparently.

No I am not Paul Cameron (don't even know who he is), nor Fred Phelps. You can call me, Jack.

Democrats knew too, about Foley. Do you really thinks its been a secret? It'll be very public soon. Its already out there.

Thank you.

I will note that no leader of any major GLBT advocacy group is lobbying for this, the APA is clear that they oppose this.

Man, its difficult for the left to see the truth, but I do hold out hope for you yet, because sometimes you guys are right. Not the political right, mind you. ;)

The 1972 Gay Rights Platform
7. Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.

8. Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.

http://www.rslevinson.com/gaylesissues/features/collect/onetime/bl_platform1972.htm

Consider, for example, the website of PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), one of the more respected gay rights organizations in the country. It is just a click of the mouse from PFLAG's "useful links" to a site where one can read the "coming-out" stories of children aged 10, 11, and 12. Similarly, the "youth" section of GLAAD's publication list (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) simply assumes that minors are sexually autonomous-and active. One piece ("Landmark Survey Shows Gay Youth Coming Out Earlier than Ever") notes approvingly that most children now "realize" their orientation at age 12. Another piece, "Lesbian and Gay Youth Find Safe Place in Cyberspace," counsels: "Don't believe much of the hype about how cyberspace is populated with pedophiles." These citations are taken from just the first two pages of GLAAD's 15-page list of publications for and about "gay youth."

At OutProud-another site recommended and linked by leading gay organizations-visitors are routed to a comic strip called "Queer Boys." It features two boys who are said to be 16 and look younger. They set off for Manhattan ("Let's run away to New York , where it's safe to be Queer!!" "Kewl!"), where they triumph over evildoers (i.e., parents and reparative therapists) and find happiness at last thanks to the habitués of a bar in the West Village . ("A gay rock club! That's so cool! Damn! I wish we were old enough to get in!!" says one of the boys. "Damn those politicians! Damn them all to hell!!" replies the other.)

For a final example of how pedophilia is being defined down, consider XY magazine -which would doubtless have run afoul of the obscenity laws until very recently. Started just four years ago, XY is now, according to its founder and publisher Peter Ian Cummings, the "third largest gay magazine in the U.S. , selling over 60,000 copies per year and hav[ing] more than 200,000 readers." (These numbers are unaudited, but would put XY on a par with the Advocate in circulation, though lower than Out magazine's 120,000.) Cummings also reports that "you can find XY on sale in Borders, Tower Records, Virgin Megastores, B. Dalton, Barnes & Noble, Waldenbooks, and many others."

What gives XY its unprecedented niche is that here, for the first time, is a mass-market magazine "officially targeted toward 12-29 year old young gay men," every issue of which, as one admiring journalist puts it, "features scantily clad young men in several photo spreads and on the cover." Then there is the non-photo content. The first issue was stamped "Underage." Another issue included a sympathetic pro-and-con interview with a prominent member of NAMBLA. An article in another issue was titled "F- the Age of Consent." There is also a smattering of self-help that can only make minors easier to find-for example, advice about what kids should do if their parents install a filtering system that prevents them from reaching gay cyberspace (answer: get around it).

In sum, if one had taken on the challenge of designing a magazine for pedophiles, it would probably look a lot like XY, which is why its market niche and evident reader support invite reflection. So too, for obvious reasons, does the public (gay) reaction to all this. On the one hand, Out magazine referred to XY' s debut as a "dubious achievement" and suggested that it was equivalent to child pornography. Similarly, Philip Guichard complained in his Village Voic e piece (headlined "I Hate Older Men"): "Mainstream gay culture dresses up its kiddie porn in a pretense of serving teens. As nice as it is to believe that magazines like XY and Joey [a recent competitor] are actually consumed by gay teens, it's obvious to me that the shirtless kids in provocative poses who fill their glossy pages are there for older men." What's more, XY's publisher has complained of "pedophobia" on the part of his gay critics; and most advertisers, by Cummings's account, including those popular with the male gay market (Calvin Klein, Abercrombie & Fitch, the Gap), have demurred from buying space in its pages. Apparently, the fear of supporting child sex, or the fear of appearing to do so-or both-remain potent corporate motivators. 5

At the same time, however, to judge by the endorsements on XY's website, numerous other observers have weighed in favorably. The San Francisco Examine r says that of all magazines, XY is "the one most on the cutting edge of change." The Ft. Lauderdale Express Gay News calls it "the most courageous magazine in America ." The general-interest entertainment guide Time Out New York observes that " XY has boldly established itself as a unique publication that tackles sex, romance, and other issues facing gay teens and men." But perhaps the most accurate indication of XY's community standing comes from the business publication Advertising Age, which noted: " XY is playing a significant role in mainstream online media. . . . The magazine's site can be accessed directly via America Online, and the magazine is also providing content to the 'youth channel' on PlanetOut.com." This success is a sign of the times. Some of the largest and most respected gay organizations in the country now list XY , of all things, as a "resource" for gay youth-this, alongside a burgeoning number of websites also aimed at minors and replete with personal ads, chat rooms, "pen pals," and other forms of anonymous contact rife with the potential for subterfuge.
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/med/chic.html

The 1972 Gay Rights Platform
7. Repeal of all laws governing the age of sexual consent.

8. Repeal of all legislative provisions that restrict the sex or number of persons entering into a marriage unit; and the extension of legal benefits to all persons who cohabit regardless of sex or numbers.

http://www.rslevinson.com/gaylesissues/features/collect/onetime/bl_platform1972.htm

Consider, for example, the website of PFLAG (Parents, Families and Friends of Lesbians and Gays), one of the more respected gay rights organizations in the country. It is just a click of the mouse from PFLAG's "useful links" to a site where one can read the "coming-out" stories of children aged 10, 11, and 12. Similarly, the "youth" section of GLAAD's publication list (Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation) simply assumes that minors are sexually autonomous-and active. One piece ("Landmark Survey Shows Gay Youth Coming Out Earlier than Ever") notes approvingly that most children now "realize" their orientation at age 12. Another piece, "Lesbian and Gay Youth Find Safe Place in Cyberspace," counsels: "Don't believe much of the hype about how cyberspace is populated with pedophiles." These citations are taken from just the first two pages of GLAAD's 15-page list of publications for and about "gay youth."

At OutProud-another site recommended and linked by leading gay organizations-visitors are routed to a comic strip called "Queer Boys." It features two boys who are said to be 16 and look younger. They set off for Manhattan ("Let's run away to New York , where it's safe to be Queer!!" "Kewl!"), where they triumph over evildoers (i.e., parents and reparative therapists) and find happiness at last thanks to the habitués of a bar in the West Village . ("A gay rock club! That's so cool! Damn! I wish we were old enough to get in!!" says one of the boys. "Damn those politicians! Damn them all to hell!!" replies the other.)

For a final example of how pedophilia is being defined down, consider XY magazine -which would doubtless have run afoul of the obscenity laws until very recently. Started just four years ago, XY is now, according to its founder and publisher Peter Ian Cummings, the "third largest gay magazine in the U.S. , selling over 60,000 copies per year and hav[ing] more than 200,000 readers." (These numbers are unaudited, but would put XY on a par with the Advocate in circulation, though lower than Out magazine's 120,000.) Cummings also reports that "you can find XY on sale in Borders, Tower Records, Virgin Megastores, B. Dalton, Barnes & Noble, Waldenbooks, and many others."

What gives XY its unprecedented niche is that here, for the first time, is a mass-market magazine "officially targeted toward 12-29 year old young gay men," every issue of which, as one admiring journalist puts it, "features scantily clad young men in several photo spreads and on the cover." Then there is the non-photo content. The first issue was stamped "Underage." Another issue included a sympathetic pro-and-con interview with a prominent member of NAMBLA. An article in another issue was titled "F- the Age of Consent." There is also a smattering of self-help that can only make minors easier to find-for example, advice about what kids should do if their parents install a filtering system that prevents them from reaching gay cyberspace (answer: get around it).

In sum, if one had taken on the challenge of designing a magazine for pedophiles, it would probably look a lot like XY, which is why its market niche and evident reader support invite reflection. So too, for obvious reasons, does the public (gay) reaction to all this. On the one hand, Out magazine referred to XY' s debut as a "dubious achievement" and suggested that it was equivalent to child pornography. Similarly, Philip Guichard complained in his Village Voic e piece (headlined "I Hate Older Men"): "Mainstream gay culture dresses up its kiddie porn in a pretense of serving teens. As nice as it is to believe that magazines like XY and Joey [a recent competitor] are actually consumed by gay teens, it's obvious to me that the shirtless kids in provocative poses who fill their glossy pages are there for older men." What's more, XY's publisher has complained of "pedophobia" on the part of his gay critics; and most advertisers, by Cummings's account, including those popular with the male gay market (Calvin Klein, Abercrombie & Fitch, the Gap), have demurred from buying space in its pages. Apparently, the fear of supporting child sex, or the fear of appearing to do so-or both-remain potent corporate motivators. 5

At the same time, however, to judge by the endorsements on XY's website, numerous other observers have weighed in favorably. The San Francisco Examine r says that of all magazines, XY is "the one most on the cutting edge of change." The Ft. Lauderdale Express Gay News calls it "the most courageous magazine in America ." The general-interest entertainment guide Time Out New York observes that " XY has boldly established itself as a unique publication that tackles sex, romance, and other issues facing gay teens and men." But perhaps the most accurate indication of XY's community standing comes from the business publication Advertising Age, which noted: " XY is playing a significant role in mainstream online media. . . . The magazine's site can be accessed directly via America Online, and the magazine is also providing content to the 'youth channel' on PlanetOut.com." This success is a sign of the times. Some of the largest and most respected gay organizations in the country now list XY , of all things, as a "resource" for gay youth-this, alongside a burgeoning number of websites also aimed at minors and replete with personal ads, chat rooms, "pen pals," and other forms of anonymous contact rife with the potential for subterfuge.
http://www.leadershipcouncil.org/1/med/chic.html