Centerblue.org

The Washington Post reports that openly gay Republican Congressman Jim Kolbe learned about Foley’s inappropriate instant messages to a page in 2000 and confronted him about it. A Kolbe staffer suggested the former page take the material to the clerk of the House, and Kolbe’s spokeswoman is still determining what other action if any was taken.

I thought the following was particularly interesting in light of the Republicans and the Religious Right going around blaming gays for being inevitable pedophiles and for covering up Foley’s tracks:

In interviews with The Post last week, multiple pages identified Kolbe as a close friend and personal confidante who was one of the only members of Congress to take any interest in them. A former page himself, Kolbe offered to mentor pages and kept in touch with some of them after they left the program, according to the interviews.

It’s incredibly ironic that one of these so-called “likely pedophiles” was one of the only people in Congress to actually give a damn about these pages and who was enough of a friend and confidante to let a page feel comfortable showing him the Foley IM exchange directly.

Desperate to turn the harsh spotlight away from themselves on the Foley matter, Republican congressmen like Patrick McHenry from North Carolina keep making the ridiculous claim that Democrats may have known about the Foley emails and withheld them until now for maximum political damage.

He appeared today on CNN’s Late Edition to make the same assertion. Watch how Wolf Blitzer put McHenry in his place and made him speechless by demanding to see the evidence of Democratic involvement.

Hilarious!

As Republicans flounder in fear and loathing as a result of the Foley scandal, they’re looking for someone, anyone, to blame except themselves.

One group of GOP’ers “smell a rat” and think that the way the information about the scandal came out at the most damaging time possible and then dribbled out over the course of days smacked of left-wing opportunism. Politicians from Dennis Hastert to Katherine Harris have gone on the record trying to put the spotlight on Democrats (!) instead of on themselves.

In case they hadn’t noticed, Democrats are not in power on the Hill. This scandal is all about the *GOP’s* complete inaction in the wake of years’ worth of evidence of Foley’s wrongdoing. Even if the “left wing conspiracy” is true it doesn’t absolve the GOP leadership one iota of its gross incompetence.

Republicans probably also don’t appreciate the irony of claiming a left wing conspiracy after deriding Hillary Clinton for claiming a right wing conspiracy during the Lewinsky scandal. In that case, although it’s true that Bill did his thing in the Oval Office, it was blown vastly out of proportion by the Republicans–as their failure to convict him and as American’s attitudes about the scandal at the time demonstrated. Now we have a situation that was entirely brought on by the GOP leadership and that has drawn complete condemnation across the entire political spectrum from left to right, among both politicians and ordinary citizens. To claim a vast conspiracy for the GOP’s downfall in the scandal is simply laughable.

Yet another way the GOP is trying to blame Democrats, in this case indirectly, is by claiming that the culture of permissiveness towards homosexuals encouraged by Democrats discouraged the GOP leadership from acting more aggressively. As I’ve written before this argument depends on there being a relationship between homosexuality and Foley’s actions, which research has shown to be patently non-existent. But more to the point, it’s just another way of trying to blame someone, anyone–Democrats, the culture, whatever–for something that lies squarely on the shoulders of GOP leaders.

And really, who on Earth could claim that the GOP leadership is “culturally tolerant?” This party has been ruthless in advancing an anti-gay agenda for six years, from sponsoring anti-marriage amendment efforts federally and in many states to refusing to pass the gay Employment Non-Discrimination Act.

I have no doubt that had Foley been inappropriately contacting young girls instead of young boys that the whole matter would have been kept just as quiet. Why? Because this is not about cultural permissiveness, it’s about keeping power at any cost.

Time has an excellent quote in its new article about the breaking of GOP dominance that appears to be taking place: Every revolution begins with the power of an idea and ends when clinging to power is the only idea left. What a perfect way to describe a calcified party with nothing left but its burning desire to cling to power, even if it means that children are thrown under the bus in the process.

Every so often it seems that events conspire to drive a majority party from power. The most recent example was 1994, when a litany of woes joined together to kick the Democrats out of Congress–the healthcare debate, gays in the military, a federal money-laundering investigation.

Now it’s 2006, and it’s happening again. Absolutely nothing is breaking the GOP’s way:

• The Iraq war has been cemented in people’s minds as an absolute disaster of Bush’s incompetence, with many inputs from Bob Woodward’s book to the National Intelligence Estimate to generals testifying before Congress all honing the same message.
• The American public gets that the Iraq war has nothing to do with terrorism, except to worsen it by virtue of our own actions there.
• In the wake of 13 US soldiers being killed in 3 days, on top of thousands already killed, Bush comes out saying that the Iraq violence against our soldiers and each other will be nothing but a “comma” in the history books.
• We have been subjected to an unseemly debate on torture in which even Colin Powell has weighed in to oppose the barbaric approach of the Bush administration, a debate that most Americans understand shocks the conscience and tarnishes our values.
• Democrats are embracing the national security debate instead of avoiding it as they did in 2002 and 2004.
• The Dubai ports deal made Republicans look weak on keeping the nation’s ports safe.
• The weakness of the US position in foreign affairs as a result of the Iraq war is painfully obvious in our complete inability to limit Iran’s nuclear weapons development or prevent North Korea from testing a nuclear bomb, forcing us to resort to idle saber-rattling.
• The immigration debate pitted Bush against conservatives in Congress.
• The national debt and trade deficits are reaching stratospheric levels.
• The absolute bungling of Hurricane Katrina.
• Terry Schiavo.
• Harriet Miers.
• Opposition to life-saving stem cell research.
• Charles Schumer and Rahm Emanuel have emerged as effective generals of the Democratic rank-and-file, energizing campaigns and keeping the party on message.
• While the Dow reaches record highs on the basis of record corporate profits, people are watching their homes and real estate investments deflate like a dead balloon, job cuts are on the rise, employment figures are lukewarm, gasoline prices are volatile, and uncertainty about the future is high.
• And, of course, now there is the Foley-gate scandal that makes hypocrites out of the so-called party of family values.

This litany of trouble has the Republicans ready to concede a third of the fifteen seats Democrats need to take control of the House. The Senate was being pronounced as within reach of the Democrats even before the Foley scandal exploded (though it’s still an uphill battle). Races that were leaning Republican are now essentially tied as Democrats tie in the GOP leadership’s handling of the Foley matter to its “culture of corruption” theme. Bush’s bully pulpit has been rendered useless against the din surrounding the Foley scandal as he ineffectually tries to bring the conversation back to national security.

A new NBC/Wall Street Journal poll shows that recent events including the scandal have people less willing to see Republicans continue their control in Congress, by 41% to 18%. They favored Democratic control by 34% to 23%.

Even conservative commentators seem willing to throw in the towel and declare a Democratic victory. George Will says that the Dems should go into another line of work if they can’t win control of the House in November.

It’s too soon to count the GOP down and out, but time is ticking. Karl Rove has shown his masterful brilliance in energizing the conservative base and ensuring victory for the GOP–but his hands must be very full with this election.

Much of America and the rest of the world now wait for November with baited breath to see if we have the courage to break Republican hegemony, restore our place in the community of nations, and renounce the fascist agenda that has invaded Washington in recent years.

It’s official: Mark Foley really is gay, after years of rumor and speculation–so says his attorney while Foley is busy in rehab. Well good for him…but I sure hope he doesn’t expect much sympathy as a result of his disclosure.

Foley doesn’t deserve anyone’s sympathy. While closeted and enjoying all the perks of being a Congressman, he voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. It’s true that later, after being “outed” despite his continuing denials as a result of that DoMA vote, he became a generally pro-gay GOP congressman. He had a non-discrimination policy in his office, he voted against the Federal Marriage Amendment, he favored anti-discrimination measures, and voted for AIDS funding.

Why, then, should we not have sympathy? An editorial at thephoenix.com puts it well:

[Foley's 2003 run for Senate was] when Foley said the speculation about his sexuality was “revolting and unforgivable.” Here’s what’s revolting and unforgivable: Mark Foley’s calculated political decision to refuse to discuss his homosexuality in order to better present himself to the hateful right-wingers who dominate GOP politics. Here’s what’s revolting and unforgivable: Mark Foley’s silence about his homosexuality even as US Senator Rick Santorum, the third-ranking senator in the GOP, has compared homosexuality to incest and bestiality. Here’s what’s revolting and unforgivable: Mark Foley’s description of speculation about his sexuality as “revolting and unforgivable” in order to make himself palatable to voters from the only state in the nation that bans gay and lesbian people like Mark Foley from adopting children.

Furthermore, he has chosen the worst possible time to finally come out: at a time when he and the GOP are engulfed by a pedophilia scandal. That’s what the gay rights movement needs like a shot in the head–it’s a field day for the Radical Right to gleefully make the connection between pedophilia and homosexuality when the two have absolutely nothing to do with one another.

Foley belongs in the same category as former New Jersey governor Jim McGreevey, who came out only upon his resignation and upon news of an affair he had with a man behind his wife’s back. It’s great that you’ve both come to terms, but you picked a really crappy time. Why not come out when times are good, to show people what a happy gay person looks like instead of during scandals that make gay people look perpetually miserable?

With “friends” like this, the gay rights movement sure doesn’t need enemies.

It was bound to happen in the brouhaha surrounding Foley’s resignation from Congress over inappropriate contacts with underage male pages: conservatives are using the scandal to attempt linking homosexuality with pedophilia.

The Wall Street Journal carries one of the most ignorant editorials I have read in a long time. In it, it basically makes this argument: political correctness prevented Hastert from taking action because of Foley’s homosexuality, when his orientation could have tipped Hastert off to the possibility of Foley’s interest in boys. We should blame the culture of tolerance for homosexuality for the GOP not having done anything sooner.

Relevant excerpts:

But this being five weeks from an election, the GOP House leadership is also being assailed for not having come down more strongly on a gay Congressman for showing a more than friendly interest in underage boys.

…

In [a Foley-page email] exchange, Mr. Foley had asked the teenager “how old are you now” and requested “an email pic.” In our admittedly traditional view, this was odd and suspect behavior, especially because Mr. Foley was well known as a homosexual even if he declined to publicly acknowledge it.

…

What next was Mr. Hastert supposed to do with an elected Congressman? Assume that Mr. Foley was a potential sexual predator and bar him from having any private communication with pages? Refer him to the Ethics Committee? In retrospect, barring contact with pages would have been wise.

But in today’s politically correct culture, it’s easy to understand how senior Republicans might well have decided they had no grounds to doubt Mr. Foley merely because he was gay and a little too friendly in emails. Some of those liberals now shouting the loudest for Mr. Hastert’s head are the same voices who tell us that the larger society must be tolerant of private lifestyle choices, and certainly must never leap to conclusions about gay men and young boys. Are these Democratic critics of Mr. Hastert saying that they now have more sympathy for the Boy Scouts’ decision to ban gay scoutmasters? Where’s Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi on that one?

…

[Congress's condemnation and Foley's resignation] is harsher treatment than was meted out in the past to some Members of Congress who crossed another line and actually had sexual relations with underage pages. Democrat Gerry Studds of Massachusetts was censured in 1983 for seducing a male teenage page, but remained in the House for another 13 years and retired…

…

Yes, Mr. Hastert and his staff should have done more to quarantine Mr. Foley from male pages after the first email came to light. But if that’s the standard, we should all admit we are returning to a rule of conduct that our cultural elite long ago abandoned as intolerant.

Bullshit.

I wish the editorial staff of the Wall Street Journal would do its research before spouting something so blatantly ignorant. The fact is that the vast majority, 95%, of child predators are heterosexual, not homosexual. (Holmes, W. C., M.D., MSCE, and G.B. Slap, M.S. Sexual Abuse of Boys. 280(1) Journal of the American Medical Association (1998): 1855-1862, citing numerous studies.)

Pedophilia is a mental disorder revolving around power that has nothing whatsoever to do with sexual orientation, so it is not surprising that the incidence of pedophilia among heterosexuals vs. homosexuals roughly mirrors the percentages of straights vs. gays generally.

As a side note, I couldn’t help but notice how the editorial focused on Democrat Gerry Studds’s sex-with-a-male-page scandal while completely forgetting about Republican Dan Crane, who received the same treatment as Studds around the same time over his relationship with a female underaged page. Maybe the Journal’s op-ed “overlooked” this little factoid because it didn’t square with their “homosexuality = pedophilia” nonsense.

If I didn’t value the Wall Street Journal’s business reporting so highly I would cancel my subscription for its blatant use of the Foley scandal as anti-gay propaganda. This is the year 2006, and the Journal’s ignorant homophobia is reprehensible.

An October surprise: a sudden, stunning event late in an election season that has the potential to greatly affect the election itself.

We’re only one day from October, but it’s close enough. The blogosphere is alight with news reports that House Republican leaders Dennis Hastert and John Boehner have been aware of Foley’s pedophilic behavior for months and did nothing about it. Boehner, who initially told the Post he had told Hastert about it, later waffled and said he couldn’t remember if he had. Please. It sure wasn’t news to the pages, who were warned about Foley by people involved with the page program. The chairman of the House page board even mounted a cursory investigation and reported that fact to Hastert’s office, although Democrats were conveniently not informed.

Blogs are outraged by the hypocrisy of it all. Says Total Information Awareness:

D.C.’s age of consent is 16, but even with that, it seems like Foley could be in some serious legal trouble in addition to the political scandal. And where is the Religious Right on this issue, when apparently Bill Clinton getting his knob slobbed by a woman clearly far beyond the age of consent was equivalent to Sodom and Gomorrah?

*crickets*

…

And as for the GOP, well…cronyism, corruption, torture, and now child pandering. Behold what your modern right-wing movement has brought you.

Americablog is pounding on the Republican leadership from every angle, and is particularly outraged at Hastert:

ABC reported this evening that GOP House Speaker Denny Hastert has asked for an investigation to make sure other pages weren’t sexually harassed or abused. But the House leadership was told almost a year ago about Mark Foleys’ hanky-panky online communications with underage pages and Hastert did nothing. Why didn’t Hastert do an investigation at the time to make sure the pages were all right? Why did Hastert leave Foley in charge of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children when he knew Foley had some possible personal issues involving the exploitation of children? Why did Hastert let Foley remain in the House leadership for a good year after he knew about these accusations? Cruising underage kids isn’t a disqualifier for being in the House leadership? Why did Denny Hastert let Foley remain anywhere near underage pages at all?

Would you let your kids near someone like Foley if you had been warned a year ago? Then why did Denny Hastert? The parent of every kid who was a page in the last year should be livid at the Republicans right now.

If the Catholic Church’s pedophilia scandal is any indicator, the GOP may be in for a very hard few weeks ahead.

I had no sooner finished my previous entry on Foley and his nasty emails to a 16 year old male Congressional page, when ABCNews.com posted a chilling series of sexually charged instant message exchanges between the Congressman and another teenager.

The entire instant message exchange can be found here. The full transcript just gets worse and worse–he asks the teen about how he masturbates, comments on his ass and legs, tells the teen he is horny and has an erection, tells him he’d love to take the teen’s clothes off, asks the teen’s penis size, and so on. No wonder Foley resigned so quickly!

Not only is he a hypocrite for following the “family values” pablum of the Republican party, but he is doubly so for co-sponsoring legislation for tougher registration requirements for sex offenders and being a staunch opponent of kiddie porn when he is engaging in this totally disgusting behavior with a minor! In a sweet bit of irony, though, federal officials are saying Foley could be prosecuted under the same laws prohibiting Internet exploitation of children that Foley himself championed.

Ah, yes, isn’t it lovely to see hypocrisy in action. The party of “family values” has produced yet another winner: Republican Rep. Mark Foley, co-chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children Caucus, has suddenly resigned his Congressional seat in a developing scandal over numerous emails he sent to a 16-year-old male page. You can see the emails here.

While the emails do not prove sexual contact with the page, they are downright lecherous. They ask for the page’s photograph, ask his age, and ask what he wants for his birthday. In another email, he comments about another boy:

“I just emailed Will…He’s such a nice guy…acts much older than his age…and hes in really great shape…i am just finished riding my bike on a 25 mile journey now heading to the gym…whats school like for you this year?”

That’s nasty, to be so brazenly making observations about the “great shape” this other boy is in.

One can’t help but wonder what else might be waiting to be discovered given Foley’s sudden decision to leave Congress.

His name will remain on the ballot, and votes for him will go to his replacement..but this does give the Democrats the opportunity for another pick-up seat.