Alcoholism? Rehab? Gimme a Break!

[Gunny]

Well if this doesn't take the cake... aren't you a mom?



You should email him your kids AIM screen name then.

You're just not very bright, are you?

 

[Stephanie]

Well if this doesn't take the cake... aren't you a mom?



You should email him your kids AIM screen name then.

Have you even seen these Im's????

If so could you post a for them...

 

[musicman]

Well if this doesn't take the cake... aren't you a mom?



You should email him your kids AIM screen name then.

You're not very bright, are you?

You should leave the personal stuff at the gate, especially when you're talking to parents about their kids.

I think you owe Kathianne an apology.

 

[musicman]

You're just not very bright, are you?

LOL - great minds...

 

[Gunny]

So far, Foley has admitted to being an alcoholic, gay, and a victim of molestation and abuse at the hands of a Catholic priest....all he needs to do now is tell people that hes actually a Muslim and a Christian woman touched his Koran while he was being tortured with Mariah Carey music at Gitmo and he will have played almost every single liberal sympathy card of late!

I am NOT defending Foley. I AM defending a US citizen's rights under the Constitution that everyone with an opinion seems to want to deny him in a rush to judgement.

As posted elsewhere on this topic, try him, convict him, THEN shoot him.

And I damned-sure ain't going with convicting anyone he talked to in the last 6 months of colusion.

 

[Redhots]

This guy is pulling out all the stops, isn't he? Playing every PC heartstring his lawyer tunes up for him, sounds like to me. He's in rehab. He was molested by a clergyman. What's next - he's been traumatized by Katrina?

Honestly, though - if this is the left's "October Surprise", it's pretty damned weak. Do they think conservatives are going to be shaken to the core because a homosexual behaved badly? This just reinforces the long-held conservative belief that homosexuality is, in and of itself, a character flaw. Do they imagine they'll be able to portray the Republicans as having played politics - these people who politicize THE WEATHER? Do they kid themselves that their propaganda organ - the MSM/DNC - possesses ONE REMAINING SHRED of credibility?

In a word, yes.

The Republicans are the ones slitting their own wrists on this with their higher ups involved in the cover-up. Dems don't need to do shit except sit back, point fingers, and decide what color drapes to put up in their new offices come November.

For all the doubters... remember what happened to this guy?

 

[Gunny]

LOL - great minds...

I'd like to take credit here, but we need to give it where it is due .... he ISN'T very bright.

 

[musicman]

In a word, yes.

The Republicans are the ones slitting their own wrists on this with their higher ups involved in the cover-up. Dems don't need to do shit except sit back, point fingers, and decide what color drapes to put up in their new offices come November.

For all the doubters... remember what happened to this guy?

Yeah - his party and their lapdogs in the mainstream media destroyed what was left of their credibility defending him.

You STILL owe Kathianne an apology.

 

[Redhots]

You're not very bright, are you?

You should leave the personal stuff at the gate, especially when you're talking to parents about their kids.

I think you owe Kathianne an apology.

For her playing this shit down in the name of political knee-jerk reactions?

Or did I read it wrong?

 

[Gunny]

In a word, yes.

The Republicans are the ones slitting their own wrists on this with their higher ups involved in the cover-up. Dems don't need to do shit except sit back, point fingers, and decide what color drapes to put up in their new offices come November.

For all the doubters... remember what happened to this guy?

Bullshit. WHAT coverup? Link please. Evidence please.

You just keep hoping. I do. I almost wish the Dems would win expect that it'd destroy what they haven't already of this Nation. I keep weighing that against being able to get on this board and just start slinging shit against the wall to see if it'll stick?

Think I won't? Just consider the behavior of the lefties the past 6 years. Payback's a BITCH.

 

[musicman]

For her playing this shit down in the name of political knee-jerk reactions?

Or did I read it wrong?

You're talking out your ass. Kathianne has smoked Republicans plenty on this board, but she's fair-minded about it.

And you, sir, insulted her on a deep, personal level. Are you going to do the right thing?

 

[Gunny]

For her playing this shit down in the name of political knee-jerk reactions?

Or did I read it wrong?

I think what you missed is there are no charges, much less a trial or conviction. And that's just Foley.

Then there's those of you trying to claim just about anybody who is anybody in the GOP side of the House is involved in some coverup.

I actually find it appalling the Americans are so quick to crucify without a shred of evidence.

 

[Gunny]

You're talking out your ass. Kathianne has smoked Republicans plenty on this board, but she's fair-minded about it.

And you, sir, insulted her on a deep, personal level. Are you going to do the right thing?[/QUOTE]

Yeah, no shit.

 

[Gem]

dillo wrote:

Are you implying that he is lying?

No. Although frankly, it wouldn't surprise me if he was lying about part or all of it. What I am accusing him of is pulling out every possible misery in his life and throwing it out there in an attempt to garner any and every possible morsel of public sympathy he can. And I find that to be pathetic, sad, and indicative of our its-everyones-fault-but-mine culture that our politicians, Republican and Democrat alike, seem to revel in.

Gunny Wrote:

I am NOT defending Foley. I AM defending a US citizen's rights under the Constitution that everyone with an opinion seems to want to deny him in a rush to judgement.

As posted elsewhere on this topic, try him, convict him, THEN shoot him.

And I damned-sure ain't going with convicting anyone he talked to in the last 6 months of colusion.

Not quite sure what part of my post you were disagreeing with...I agree with you completely that we shouldn't be convicting anyone he talked to in the last 6 months of collusion...

And he has admitted to his actions and we have the IMs as proof...he voluntarily resigned not because the allegations were terrible and made it impossible to do his work, but rather because HE admitted to having embarrassed himself, his family, and his position.

I agree - we won't lock him away until we've had a trial. But as for holding off on an opinion until a trial...the guy has admitted to it...theres a paper trail proving it...I think its safe to say the guy is a sick fuck and I only hope he has been stopped before he actually got around to molesting anyone.

 

[Redhots]

I think what you missed is there are no charges, much less a trial or conviction. And that's just Foley.

Then there's those of you trying to claim just about anybody who is anybody in the GOP side of the House is involved in some coverup.

I actually find it appalling the Americans are so quick to crucify without a shred of evidence.

LMFAO.... take off the red colored glasses.

Pretty sure Foley resigned awhile ago, hes admited to it too.

Reynolds and Shimkus have already come out publicly playing Pontius Pilot saying they told Hastert about this a long time ago. Its not their fault he didn't follow through. Hastert is of course in denial about it all.

The House ethics committe wont be looking into this untill after the elections because of how long the process takes and congress not being there during election time. Far as the police go, i'm sure this is as much news to them as it is to the rest of us. So yeah... no charges yet... the writting is pretty much on the wall though.

 

[manu1959]

LMFAO.... take off the red colored glasses.

Pretty sure Foley resigned awhile ago, hes admited to it too.

Reynolds and Shimkus have already come out publicly playing Pontius Pilot saying they told Hastert about this a long time ago. Its not their fault he didn't follow through. Hastert is of course in denial about it all.

The House ethics committe wont be looking into this untill after the elections because of how long the process takes and congress not being there during election time. Far as the police go, i'm sure this is as much news to them as it is to the rest of us. So yeah... no charges yet... the writting is pretty much on the wall though.

can you explain what crime he will be charged with and in which state?

 

[Redhots]

You're talking out your ass. Kathianne has smoked Republicans plenty on this board, but she's fair-minded about it.

And you, sir, insulted her on a deep, personal level. Are you going to do the right thing?

How does it read to you then? You both still keep avoiding that question.

Funny thing about the Foley pedophilia thing, seems so far that he wasn't getting any? He's just an online voyeur.

Sure sounds like someone playing down the situation to me.

***edited to remove a stupid wink smiley that somehow got attached to the post title***

 

[Nuc]

A Republican is gay. A Republican is a pedophile. Several Republicans covered it up. A Republican is hiding away in rehab. A Republican is trying to blame it on being molested as a youngster. The Republicans like to bash homosexuals.

What does this have to do with the Democrats?

 

[Redhots]

can you explain what crime he will be charged with and in which state?

Washington D.C. - Age of Consent Laws
The following information was taken from the Online Source for the District of Columbia at http://dccode.westgroup.com/home/dccodes/default.wl


§ 22-3008. First degree child sexual abuse.


Whoever, being at least 4 years older than a child, engages in a sexual act with that child or causes that child to engage in a sexual act shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life and, in addition, may be fined an amount not to exceed $250,000. However, the court may impose a prison sentence in excess of 30 years only in accordance with § 22-3020 or § 24-403.01(b-2). For purposes of imprisonment following revocation of release authorized by § 24-403.01(b)(7), the offense defined by this section is a Class A felony.

§ 22-3009. Second degree child sexual abuse.


Whoever, being at least 4 years older than a child, engages in sexual contact with that child or causes that child to engage in sexual contact shall be imprisoned for not more than 10 years and, in addition, may be fined in an amount not to exceed $100,000.

§ 22-3010. Enticing a child.


Whoever, being at least 4 years older than a child, takes that child to any place, or entices, allures, or persuades a child to go to any place for the purpose of committing any offense set forth in §§ 22-3002 to 22-3006 and §§ 22-3008 and 22-3009 shall be imprisoned for not more than 5 years and, in addition, may be fined in an amount not to exceed $50,000.

§ 22-3011. Defenses to child sexual abuse.


(a) Neither mistake of age nor consent is a defense to a prosecution under §§ 22-3008 to 22-3010, prosecuted alone or in conjunction with charges under § 22-3018 or § 22-403.

(b) Marriage between the defendant and the child at the time of the offense is a defense, which the defendant must establish by a preponderance of the evidence, to a prosecution under §§ 22-3008 to 22-3010, prosecuted alone or in conjunction with charges under § 22-3018 or § 22-403, involving only the defendant and the child.

§ 22-3012. State of mind proof requirement.


In a prosecution under §§ 22-3008 to 22-3010, prosecuted alone or in conjunction with charges under § 22-3018 or § 22-403, the government need not prove that the defendant knew the child's age or the age difference between himself or herself and the child.

§ 22-3019. No spousal immunity from prosecution.


No actor is immune from prosecution under any section of this subchapter because of marriage or cohabitation with the victim; provided, however, that marriage of the parties may be asserted as an affirmative defense in a prosecution under this subchapter where it is expressly so provided.

§ 22-3020. Aggravating circumstances.


(a) Any person who is found guilty of an offense under this subchapter may receive a penalty up to 1 1/2 times the maximum penalty prescribed for the particular offense, and may receive a sentence of more than 30 years up to, and including life imprisonment without possibility of release for first degree sexual abuse or first degree child sexual abuse, if any of the following aggravating circumstances exists:

(1) The victim was under the age of 12 years at the time of the offense;

(2) The victim was under the age of 18 years at the time of the offense and the actor had a significant relationship to the victim;

(3) The victim sustained serious bodily injury as a result of the offense;

(4) The defendant was aided or abetted by 1 or more accomplices;

(5) The defendant is or has been found guilty of committing sex offenses against 2 or more victims, whether in the same or other proceedings by a court of the District of Columbia, any state, or the United States or its territories; or

(6) The defendant was armed with, or had readily available, a pistol or other firearm (or imitation thereof) or other dangerous or deadly weapon.

(b) It is not necessary that the accomplices have been convicted for an increased punishment (or enhanced penalty) to apply under subsection (a)(4) of this section.

(c) No person who stands convicted of an offense under this subchapter shall be sentenced to increased punishment (or enhanced penalty) by reason of the aggravating factors set forth in subsection (a) of this section, unless prior to trial or before entry of a plea of guilty, the United States Attorney or the Corporation Counsel, as the case may be, files an information with the clerk of the court, and serves a copy of such information on the person or counsel for the person, stating in writing the aggravating factors to be relied upon.

And of course i'm sure there is a lot of irony and information to be found in H.R. 4472, the Adam Walsh Child Protection and Safety Act of 2006 that Foley championed.

 

[musicman]

How does it read to you then? You both still keep avoiding that question.

You'll find that I do very little in the way of "avoiding" - particularly in regard to friends of mine being insulted. Let's examine, shall we?

Funny thing about the Foley pedophilia thing, seems so far that he wasn't getting any? He's just an online voyeur.

It sounds to me like she was saying, "Funny thing about the pedophilia thing, seems so far that he wasn't getting any? He's just an online voyeur". And that is nothing more or less than a faithful recounting of the facts as we now understand them.

Sure sounds like someone playing down the situation to me.

Sounds more to me like you are very young, and not yet a parent. It is quite possible that you don't grasp the seriousness of what you have done here. Let me give you some advice: when you're talking to a parent, and his/her kids come into the conversation, CHOOSE YOUR WORDS VERY CAREFULLY. You are dealing with primal feelings of love, fear, and ferocity that are beyond your capacity to understand.

I still think you should apologize.