RIA

And I’m not so arrogant on this story/topic as to think I’m the only one in that camp.

Well I, by Go[lly], care, regardless of whether we’re talking about a post or comments wherever.

You know, it’s possible to have a “chips fall where they may” attitude.

Right?

I am disturbed by the glee, not by the condemnation. Big difference. I guess I could have started the post with an obligatory statement about how ill Foley’s actions make me and how disgusted I am with anyone who covered this up–but I was hoping all that went without saying.

I’m not at all trying to minimize Foley’s actions. This post really isn’t even about Foley’s actions so much as it is about the reaction to those actions. And, in that regard, you are probably right that I fit my own description as a commentor who really doesn’t care about Foley or the boys involved. I mean, I DO care a lot on a human level — but on a political level I, like everyone else, am much more interested in the power game this has become.

Nothing new here, it’s human nature. But it makes me very skeptical of incumbency. Lets face it: for most of us in the real world, if we behaved like Mark Foley, Patrick Kennedy, Ted Kennedy, Gary Condit, Speaker Wright or Speaker Hastert, we’d lose our jobs. In the fantasy world of DC, one never knows how it will play out.

Wow, and I thought *I* was cynical.

I for one am disgusted regardless of what party Foley belongs to. I do care about the people involved because they’re all human beings who need help.

If the situation happened to involve a Dem representative, you can damn well bet that the comments would be just as “gleeful” (if not more so) on the other side.

Since you didn’t bother to link to any sites, I assume you’re blowing smoke on the ‘glee’ part, though if somehow Jean Schmidt were to become a central part of this scandal …

I said, “Yet, your greatest outrage in the whole sordid affair is that democrats are too strong in condemning the behavior.” >>>

You said, “Where did I say I was outraged about the Democratic
reaction?”

You said in your original post. “many of those who oppose the Republicans have reacted to this story with a disturbing amount of glee. (I don’t need to link – just go check out the numbers of breathless stories about Foley on any left-of-center blog.)

It’s true, you didn’t use the word “outrage” I should’ve said you were “disturbed” by it.

You said, “I don’t believe anyone commenting on this story really cares about Foley or the boys with whom he had contact. They care about what’s to be politically gained (or lost). And ain’t that just the way of it?”

My comment: It seems a bit naive to complain that you’ve gone to political blogs and all their talking about are the political ramifications of this sordid tale rather than a concern for the lives of the perpetrator and victims. Matter of fact your post has little to do with Foley or the victims but rather a stream of complaints about the politics of the subject matter.

Furthermore, we have no access to the victims and it’s hard to know if Foley’s defense that he was an alcoholic and was molested by clergy is true so we are left with the politics of this unfolding event.

You said, “where did I say that thereaction bothered me more than Foley’s actions or the possible cover-up?”

The crux of your post is a complaint about the politics of this unfolding story and not about Foley’s action nor his victims.

You actually tried to minimize Foley’s behavior. Let’s take a look at what you said.

“Forget that Foley, while a sick man who acted inexcusably, isn’t technically a child predator (the boys in question were hardly children â€â€? we give a pass to men lusting after 16-year old girls all the time, although they do rightfully get in trouble for crossing the line like Foley did). But “child predatorâ€Â? is such a good word to pair with “Republican Congressman.â€Â? It all makes a nice little symbol to repeat over and over and over.”

I don’t know of any adults giving 55 year old men let alone 24 year old men a pass when it comes to 16 year old girls. Foley is a sexual predator and your right, 16 year olds are not children unless of course you’re a parent and have a 16 year old child. They are children, no?

I use to work professionally with pedophiles and Foley’s emails remind me of what many pedophiles call “grooming.” They take a young person and befriend them. The goal is to earn the child’s trust and then make their advance when the moment is ripe. The betrayal rips at the
fabric of their souls leaving them confused, feeling defiled and misrustful for life.

People in glass houses, you know.

In the real world: if I abused a teenage person (physical or mentally) and then I hid behind some pre-pubescent issue and said “alcohol made me do it”, I would not be much better than the hit run driver. The hit-run driver says alcohol made me do, I’m going to rehab, all is forgiven.

Tht is what Foley wants the citizens of the Florida (and the US) to accept but the leap of faith is too great…………..sorry big boy, not this time.

Where did I say I was outraged about the Democratic reaction? Where did I say that thereaction bothered me more than Foley’s actions or the possible cover-up?

I’m merely pointing out that this story is being used as a political weapon. Am I incorrect? Are the Democrats NOT using this story as a big ole’ stick to pummel the Republicans with?

Note I even say it would be a political mistake NOT to use this story for political gain. I’m hardly outraged. I’m not even particularly annoyed with the Democrats or anyone else on the left. I AM irritated and a little depressed that THIS is what it takes to get people to focus in on the hypocrisy and corruption of the Republicans. And I am disturbed at how gleeful many Republican opponents are about this story–it’s a little unbecoming and, frankly, a little clumsy. Politically speaking, you don’t want to fall into the trap of overplaying this story. It’s too perfect. Garnishes ruin its effect.

So, no, I’ve hardly lost my moral compass.

The Hastert-Boehner-Reynolds cover-up is a larger story - these guys have betrayed so fundamental a trust (protection of children) that they deserve the pillorying that they are getting. This isn’t worth a 24×7 frenzy either.

That we are living under one-party rule (and in some cases “unitary executive” rule), and that the leaders have just been proven irretrievably unworthy of that level of trust is a HUGE story. Bogus evidence leading to war? - no oversight. War profiteering? - no oversight. Unlawful detainment? Torture? Wiretapping? — NO OVERSIGHT ALLOWED. Either you are with us, or you’re against us. No hearings, no subpoenas.

In light of this story, is unitary rule such a good idea? If this is what it takes to get the message to the masses then fine.

“I have no problem with adult pornography. People are entitled to read
it, watch it, see it in their homes or in public accommodations. Where
I have to draw the line is using children for the excitement of those
more mature people who should know the difference and know better.” â€â€?
Mark Foley, 2002 interview with National Public Radio

I do care about Foley - I care to see him fried. I care about the republican party, I care to se them finally take some responsibility. They have lied to us for YEARS and act like nothing is wrong. Finally, we have something they can’t just simply throw a commentator on Fox News and let it roll off the table.

All Americans should be getting out their daggers and sticking it in them as far as it will go.

Rick

And all your talk about IF there was a cover up. Where have you been? It looks pretty certain to me.