General: September 2006 Archives

It’s a very sad day for Florida Rep. Mark Foley. Yesterday, when I wrote of this, I had wondered afterwards if I were being fair to him. I have to resist the urge like a lot of other people to condemn someone simply because I don’t like their politics. In after thought, I felt that maybe I had been unfair to the Representative from Florida. Now, I was right about the whole thing. I feel bad for his family, and for the boy involved.

I also understand that this has absolutely nothing to do with the gender of his victim, who happens to be male. I say this because there are people out there who will immediately assume that Rep. Foley is a homosexual, which he apparently is because he approached a teenager who happened to be male. Those same people will make the huge jump in judgment that it is just further ammunition to label homosexuals as pedophiles, despite the fact that child molestation is carried out mostly by heterosexuals.

But I don’t even want to lower myself to that argument. The real truth is, child molestation has nothing what so ever to do with the sexual orientation of those involved. I know the people who dislike gays don’t want to admit that, but the facts and research will support what I am saying. What Rep. Foley did, he did out of power. He had power over the boy because of his position; as an adult and as a member of Congress. No doubt had the boy played along with this, he would have been offered something in Washington as a “reward” if you will, for helping the Representative out.

The thing that I find really distasteful in all of this the hypocrisy of this Representative. ABC News summed it up pretty well.

Florida Rep. Mark Foley’s resignation came just hours after ABC News questioned the congressman about a series of sexually explicit instant messages involving congressional pages, high school students who are under 18 years of age.

In Congress, Rep. Foley (R-FL) was part of the Republican leadership and the chairman of the House caucus on missing and exploited children.

He crusaded for tough laws against those who used the Internet for sexual exploitation of children.

“They’re sick people; they need mental health counseling,” Foley said.

But, according to several former congressional pages, the congressman used the Internet to engage in sexually explicit exchanges. [...]

Federal authorities say such messages could result in Foley’s prosecution, under some of the same laws he helped to enact.

“Adds up to soliciting underage children for sex,” said Brad Garrett, a former FBI agent and now an ABC News consultant. “And what it amounts to is serious both state and federal violations that could potentially get you a number of years.” (source) - Highlighting my own.

“They’re sick people; they need mental health counseling.” - Rep. Mark Foley

Well Mr. Foley, I guess you were talking about yourself.

If you would like to read the private exchange that he had between the teenager involved, and himself, click on the link below. Be warned, the contents are sexually explicit.

View message exchange.

A Massachusetts judge ruled Sept. 29 that same-sex couples from Rhode Island can “marry” in the Bay State, handing homosexual activists a significant victory and likely sparking a movement for a law or constitutional amendment in Rhode Island banning “gay marriage.”

In a nine-page ruling Superior Court Justice Thomas E. Connolly noted that Rhode Island has no constitutional amendment, statute or court ruling expressly banning “gay marriage.” His decision may be the biggest legal win yet for homosexual activists in their effort to spread “marriages” from Massachusetts to other states. It is not known, though, whether Rhode Island will recognize the licenses. (source)

This won’t effect Connecticut because my state defines marriage as “one man, one woman”, but it will be interesting to see how Rhode Island responds to this. They will either try to get something into their constitution, which is a very lengthy process, or the legislature may try to put something in place for civil unions. My guess would be civil unions, given that they are a more progressive state. Or they may surprise me and just let it go. I suppose they could also become the second state to allow gay couples to marry, although I really don’t see that happening.

See, I’m not investing much emotional baggage into this topic anymore (yes, I’m proud of myself for that). I just think that right now, there are more important things facing our country. But, this news was interesting.

Oh, and speaking of interesting....

WASHINGTON — Rep. Mark Foley, R-Fla., resigned from Congress on Friday, effective immediately, in the wake of questions about e-mails he wrote a former teenage male page.

“I am deeply sorry and I apologize for letting down my family and the people of Florida I have had the privilege to represent,” he said in a statement issued by his office.

The two-sentence statement did not refer to the e-mails and gave no reason for Foley’s abrupt decision to abandon a flourishing career in Congress.

Foley, 52, had been a shoo-in for a new term until the e-mail correspondence surfaced in recent days. [...]

Foley, who represents an area around Palm Beach County, e-mailed the page in August 2005. The page had worked for Rep. Rodney Alexander, R-La., and Foley asked him how he was doing after Hurricane Katrina and what he wanted for his birthday. The congressman also asked the boy to send a photo of himself, according to excerpts of the e-mails that were originally released by ABC News. [...]

“he’s such a nice guy”, Foley wrote about the other boy, “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?”

In other e-mails, Foley wrote, “I am back in Florida now...its nice here...been raining today...it sounds like you will have some fun over the next few weeks...how old are you now?” and “how are you weathering the hurricane...are you safe...send me an email pic of you as well.” (source - FOX News)

Yes, that’s right, I used FOX News as the source! I got a certain amount of satisfaction from sourcing the right-wing rag on some dirt from one of their own.

The story itself is creepy. And why would he be asking a teenage boy for his photo anyway? I suppose right now the Republicans are trying to figure out how to weave this story. I’m sure they will come up with something like trying to make it look like Foley was an in-the-closet homosexual who preyed on children, or that the otherwise upstanding straight man was seduced by the evil gay agenda. Believe me, nothing would surprise me. Who knows how they will play it. And, in all fairness, Foley is innocent until proven guilty. I just think there must be more to this story because of his abrupt resignation.

And here’s a bit of irony, right from his website:

As a founder and co-chair of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus, Mark has been instrumental in the development and passage of legislation designed to protect our children.

He authored legislation that became law -- the Volunteers for Children Act -- that gives volunteer organizations that work with children, such as scouting and sports groups, access to FBI fingerprint-based background checks to ensure that they are not inadvertently hiring child molesters.

He has also cosponsored legislation toughening the penalties levied at those who hurt children and, most recently, has joined forces with the Administration and Congress to fight child predators. His Sex Offender Registration and Notification Act, which has passed both the House and Senate, will overhaul the way we track and monitor predatory pedophiles. He has also introduced and cosponsored legislation designed to eliminate child pornography and exploitive child modeling web sites. (source)

Don’t expect that website to be online much longer.

09/30/2006 - Follow-up To Florida Rep. Mark Foley Scandal

TRENTON, New Jersey Once publicly opposed to gay marriage, former New Jersey Governor James E. McGreevey now says he spoke out against the idea as a way to keep his homosexuality hidden. “I did not want to be identified as being gay, and it was the safe place to be,” McGreevey said Tuesday in an interview with The Associated Press. “I wanted to embrace the antagonist. I wanted to be against it. That’s the absurdity.” [...]

Aside from his hiring of Cipel, McGreevey’s admission about his position on gay marriage appears to be the most glaring example of his then-covert sexual identity affecting his political decision-making.

“I was proud to be against gay marriage because that’s where I thought a majority of New Jerseyans were,” McGreevey said. “That’s successful politics.”

In the AP interview, the former governor said he now supports same-sex unions. (source)

Actually, I saw the interview with McGreevey on Oprah. He stated that he now fully supports gay marriage and nothing less, not even civil unions. I suppose that since it’s now known that he is gay, he really has nothing to lose anymore. So why not go all out for something that he now wants for himself, since he is now involved with a man he is interested in marrying?

McGreevey states, “I was proud to be against gay marriage because that’s where I thought a majority of New Jerseyans were. That’s successful politics.”

That’s a lie. McGreevey was proud to be against gay marriage because by endorsing marriage equality for gay couples, he was afraid that people would put two and two together and come up with four. He stated exactly that on Oprah.

The whole thing is testing my tolerance for people who care nothing for other people other than themselves. I can forgive people for past misdeeds. But what McGreevey did actually hurt people, using the power of his office to do so. I don’t know if you can just dismiss that by saying, “...I was an oppressed homosexual... I hated myself.... I didn’t think that the life is was living was ‘Godly’ (his word)...”. He went on to say that if he hadn’t been under threat of blackmail from some fling that he hired to be on his staff, he probably never would have had the courage to come out.

These are things he said in the interview. It made me sick to watch it. I can understand what the closet can do to people. That’s why I left it when I could. But never once did I inflict harm on others to hide what I am. This is the difference between people like me and McGreevey. I’m sure I disappointed people when they found out I was gay. I certainly lost friends and I suffered physical abuse because of it. But I’m the one who has had to deal with all the issues with being gay, not them. And I did, and now I’m in a much better place for it.

Perhaps that is what McGreevey is trying to get too. But listening to him talk about how he was putting gays down for being a threat to marriage, all the while thinking to himself (he said) that he should be among the gays knowing that he was one.... well, I turned the damn TV off. It was too much for me. It only goes to show you that, gay or straight, a politician these days would sell their own mother for a few votes.

Shameless. I don’t forgive McGreevey for what he did while in office, but I do hope that he comes to a place of peace in his life. And ironically, if his state of New Jersey rules that gay couples can marry, a ruling that is expected in the near future, the governor who was so against gays being able to marry, just might be able to get married himself.

And another opinion....

Where we stand: New Jerseyans should remember that it was the former governor's terrible appointments and mountain of scandals that drove him from office, not his homosexuality.

When James E. McGreevey was elected governor of New Jersey in 2001, he promised to end "business as usual" in Trenton. He said he'd clean up state government and make it more ethical.

In that task, our former governor failed miserably and completely. His administration was so scandal-plagued and devoid of ethical standards that by the time McGreevey left office less than three years into his four-year term, he had given new meaning to the term "business as usual."

And that's something no New Jerseyan should forget as McGreevey makes the talk show rounds to promote his new book, The Confession.

Yes, it was shocking when McGreevey famously admitted during his resignation speech that he was a "gay American."

Scandals

But that surprising confession wasn't the true reason why McGreevey left office in disgrace. He quit because the scandals involving him and those close to him were at an apex and his ability to govern, even with a state Senate and Assembly controlled by his party, had been compromised and was probably beyond repair. (source)

Once Bob Ney was the Mayor of Capitol Hill, wielding his influence as chairman of the House Administration committee to assign parking spaces and order French fries to be renamed “freedom fries” in the House cafeteria. Now, he’ll be trading cigarettes for extra cans of Pringles in prison. It’s an American tragedy, don’t you think?

I don’t mean to be melodramatic, it’s just that I’m reeling from the stunning news of Ney’s guilty plea to fraud and conspiracy in the Abramoff scandal. Next thing you know, we’ll find out he wears a toupee. He’s admitting to taking about 170 thousand dollars worth of goodies from Abramoff and his associates. Who could have seen that coming? After all, for more than a year he denied any wrongdoing. “I was duped,” he said, and we believed him, didn’t we? Even when we read emails like this one:

“Just met with Ney! We’re f’ing gold! He’s going to do Tigua...”

---Jack Abramoff, March 2002

So another one bites the dust. I suppose I shouldn’t make light of Ney’s problems and issues. It’s just that I have a low tolerance for those who throw stones at glass houses (using election-year politics for the gain of their own party), when they too live in a glass house. The only way you can throw stones at others is to live in a house made of brick (no corruption). And from what I’ve seen in recent months, more and more in the Bush Administration just don’t meet that test.

It bothers me a lot when a politician is an advocate of a federal amendment to the U.S. Constitution banning gay couples from marriage to “defend marriage”, when he/she are on their third marriage.

It bothers me when a politician is against abortion, except when they get caught with their pants down (no pun intended) and find out that, for political reasons, they seek out an abortion and try like hell to keep it a secret.

So it’s hard for me not to get that evil grin when I read that yet another corrupt politician gets zapped for getting caught with his hand in the cookie jar.

But I think things are changing. After all, it doesn’t look like Bush will be able to pull off creating an exception for the United States to the Geneva Convention.

“Time is running out,” Mr Bush told a news conference at the White House. “Congress needs to act wisely and promptly.” He went on to warn that their refusal to endorse White House proposals to redefine compliance with sections of the Geneva Convention prohibiting torture would weaken America in its “war on terror”.

“I believe that it is vital that our folks on the front line have the tools that are necessary to protect the American people,” Mr Bush said. “The reason they need those tools is because the enemy wants to attack us again.”

Senator John McCain, who spent five years as a prisoner in the Vietnam War, and the other Republican rebels argue that loosening the standard on the Geneva Convention would put US soldiers at greater risk of mistreatment if captured.

Colin Powell, the former secretary of state, has added his prestige to their cause. In a letter to Mr McCain, Mr Powell said the White House proposals would create doubts about the “moral basis” of the war on terror.

But Mr Bush showed little patience for that argument.

“It is unacceptable to think that any kind of comparison (exists) between the behaviour of the United States of America and the Islamic extremists who kill innocent women and children to achieve their objective,” he said. (source)

OH REALLY?

What about our treatment of the prisoners in Abu Ghraib? What about the people who were MURDERED IN COLD BLOOD by our own troops around Baghdad and Mahmudiyah?

BAGHDAD, June 30 -- The U.S. Army is investigating allegations that American soldiers raped and killed a woman and killed three of her family members in a town south of Baghdad, then reported the incident as an insurgent attack, a military official said Friday.

The alleged crimes occurred in March in the insurgent hotbed of Mahmudiyah. The four soldiers involved, from the 502nd Infantry Regiment, attempted to burn the family’s home to the ground and blamed insurgents for the carnage, according to a military official familiar with the investigation, who spoke on condition of anonymity because he was providing details not released publicly. [...]

In June, seven Marines and a Navy corpsman were charged with murder and other crimes related to the shooting death of a crippled man in Hamdaniya, west of Baghdad. Residents there said the soldiers planted a rifle and a shovel near the victim’s body to make it look as if he had been burying roadside bombs.

Later in June, three soldiers were charged with murdering three Iraqi detainees in U.S. custody and threatening to kill another soldier who saw the incident. And last week, two Pennsylvania National Guardsmen were charged with murder in the shooting death of an unarmed man in the western city of Ramadi and with trying to cover up the crime.

At least 14 U.S. service members have been convicted of crimes related to the deaths of Iraqi civilians or detainees, according to the Associated Press. (source)

The President may feel that it is “unacceptable to think that any kind of comparison (exists) between the behaviour of the United States of America and the Islamic extremists”, but I doubt the families of the innocent Iraqi’s killed at the hands of our troops will see the subtlety.

And just so I make myself clear on this before I get a lot of hate mail for dissing our troops, I should say that I support our troops, to the extent that they are trying to do an impossible job - restore and maintain order when they have been re-deployed time and time and time again to the point of exhaustion, without an adequate number of soldiers in Iraq to achieve that task, and for trying to follow orders when there is no plan in place to accomplish anything. And for that, the blame goes right back to the President of the United States and the Congress who nodded time and time again (until now when his poll numbers are pathetic) to endorse his failed policies.

The result is a failed effort in Iraq, along with an estimated 50,000 Iraqi civilians dead (yes we do body counts, despite what General Tommy Franks of US Central Command said: “We don’t do body counts”), and this grim reality....

As the fifth anniversary of the September 11, 2001, attack on the United States approaches, another somber benchmark has just been passed.

The announcement Sunday of four more U.S. military deaths in Iraq raises the death toll to 2,974 for U.S. military service members in Iraq and in what the Bush administration calls the war on terror. The 9/11 attack killed 2,973 people, including Americans and foreign nationals but excluding the terrorists. (source)

Past Presidents have been impeached for lesser crimes than the deeds of our current President.