Nice post. They have no other straws to grasp...so they dig up all the ancient history they can find to avoid confronting the real issues.

 

Foley has already resigned. Both the FBI and the Justice Department are investigating to determine if any crimes were commited. Exactly what issues are being avoided?

Why can't Democrats simply admit that Clinton, Studds et. al. were also weasels deserving of punishment for their misdeeds?

 

Well, I am not familiar with the Studds issue so I will no comment on that, but Clinton and Monica are two adults so I am not going to judge them. It is safe to assume that Hillary took care of Bill on this issue, and that is where it should stay, In the family! it's an issue of a husband and wife, regardless of who they are. I'll have to check into the Stubbs issue.

 

If anyone on this board had a family issue it's no one else's business and everyone needs to stay out of it. The only way I would see getting involved would be if there was abuse.

 

Again, not being familiar with the issue, all I see up front is Stubbs doing something with a 17 year old page, the fact he was with a male isn't a matter at all. The legal age of consent in DC is 16, not 18. But, as I said before, if there isn't a law/policy, there should be, if you are in power in DC, anyone under lets say 20, working for them or anyone else in power in DC are off limits. So yes, it does seem Stubbs is in the same boat, ill have to check up on that issue first before I make any firm comments.

Maybe the other canidate was really really bad ???????

Why did you bring GW's election in 2000 and 2004 into this discussion.

 

That one felt goooooooood.

Well, I am not familiar with the Studds issue so I will no comment on that, but Clinton and Monica are two adults so I am not going to judge them. It is safe to assume that Hillary took care of Bill on this issue, and that is where it should stay, In the family! it's an issue of a husband and wife, regardless of who they are. I'll have to check into the Stubbs issue.

 

If anyone on this board had a family issue it's no one else's business and everyone needs to stay out of it. The only way I would see getting involved would be if there was abuse.

 

Again, not being familiar with the issue, all I see up front is Stubbs doing something with a 17 year old page, the fact he was with a male isn't a matter at all. The legal age of consent in DC is 16, not 18. But, as I said before, if there isn't a law/policy, there should be, if you are in power in DC, anyone under lets say 20, working for them or anyone else in power in DC are off limits. So yes, it does seem Stubbs is in the same boat, ill have to check up on that issue first before I make any firm comments.

The point here SG is not who's better or worse.

 

The fact that Democrats have overlooked and even defended those within their own ranks for sexual immorality, equal to or greater than anything Foley is charged with at this point in time causes one to suspect that this whole issue has more to do with politics than with genuine moral outrage.

 

I'll go on record to state that if it is revealed beyond reasonable doubt that Hastert aided and abetted Foley in any way whatsoever that enabled Foley to retain a position of power which allowed him to defile pages of any age, I will be solidly for Hastert's removal and prosecution if applicable. Until then, I think Hastert is entitled to the presumption of innocence until proven guilty.

 

The fact that Democrats are so quick to jump all over this and cry foul, in light of their past actions (or inactions) in dealing with their own comes across as disingenuous at best.

Well, I am not familiar with the Studds issue so I will no comment on that, but Clinton and Monica are two adults so I am not going to judge them. It is safe to assume that Hillary took care of Bill on this issue, and that is where it should stay, In the family! it's an issue of a husband and wife, regardless of who they are.

Incorrect. If I use my position of authority to coerce my employee into rendering sex acts for me, I will be fired from my job and both myself and the company will be held liable for my actions. The same standard should apply to the most powerful man in the United States.

Incorrect. If I use my position of authority to coerce my employee into rendering sex acts for me, I will be fired from my job and both myself and the company will be held liable for my actions. The same standard should apply to the most powerful man in the United States.

The guru?????

all I see up front is Stubbs doing something with a 17 year old page, the fact he was with a male isn't a matter at all. The legal age of consent in DC is 16, not 18.

If this is your defense then Foley did nothing wrong (not my opinion by the way) because his "victim" was 16.

Word has it that Hastert know he had a pedophile in his ranks and compromised him. Not a theoretical situation like yours, and acctual situation which guaranteed his vote on EVERY ISSUE as well as how much and to what organizations he would donate to. This is not confirmed yet, but I understand it is part of the investigation into Hastret.

First...By definition a pedophile is attracted to pre-teens not a 16 year old (which BTW is the age of consent in DC). And before you turn this on me and accuse me of supporting Foley, I think he is slime and should have resigned (just like Stubbs should have.))

 

Second...Please provide a link to these claims as I think you're just making them up as you go.

The guru?????

Now THAT is funny... :lol: :lol: :lol:

If this is your defense then Foley did nothing wrong (not my opinion by the way) because his "victim" was 16.

 

Nice, very nice of you to exclude everything else I said in that paragraph to make your point.:confused:

 

Like "Again, not being familiar with the issue".....as well as..... "But, as I said before, if there isn't a law/policy, there should be, if you are in power in DC, anyone under lets say 20, working for them or anyone else in power in DC are off limits. So yes, it does seem Stubbs is in the same boat, ill have to check up on that issue first before I make any firm comments".

 

As I clearly stated, I am not familiar with the Stubbs issue and I won't comment on it. Since Stubbs is in a position of power, and power over pages, if he did anything like Foley did then yes he is just as guilty, But as I said, I don't know about that issue and won't comment until I look that issue up.

 

As I said before, it needs to be like Ohio concerning schools (not sure if this is in KY as well), if you are a teacher in Ohio you cannot have any type of sexual contacts with ANY student in that district, even if they are over the age of 18, even though the age of consent in Ohio is 16, if you are a teacher you are in power over the student. Same thing should go for those in power in DC.

Now THAT is funny... :lol: :lol: :lol:

I was thinking the same thing, but didn't think it should be brought up in this forum/thread.

 

OK, I have thought this out, I am going to still have my opinions, but let this all work out and leave Hastert stay where he is, let the republicans fight over this, and let the FBI and such do their investigation. BUT, I just think the longer he stays, the more controversy and division it will cause, even inside the republican party. And right before the elections.

 

I commend Lewis (I think that is who it is) a republican from KY who canceled a fundraiser with Hastert until this is all sorted out. Even if Hastert is in the clear and knew nothing, Lewis sees him as being a distraction to his campaign.

We're getting awfully close to agreeing here SG... :eek:

 

I am simply tired of politics being put ahead of doing what is right, regardless of which party did wrong. Our great nation is being slowly strangled by selfish power hungry individuals more interested in securing power for a few, than in doing what is best for all.

Second...Please provide a link to these claims as I think you're just making them up as you go.

There has been reports that Hastert MAY have known about this as far back as 3 years ago. It was on the front page of the Cincy Enquirer today, I tried to find the link, Would anyone else like to try to find and add this link? Thanks.

We're getting awfully close to agreeing here SG... :eek:

 

Do I see a SG&FB ticket on the horizon? LOL.

 

With me being involved with politics now, I wouldn't want any distractions for my party right before an election. You want to wait for the final outcome, let the thing play out, and let them be investigated to see who knew/did what. But, it would be too late for all that to come out before the election.

 

If something would come out right before the election for the democrats I would be fuming, I would want the party to have an internal 24/7 investigation, along side of any official investigation such as the FBI, to help with damage control so we don't lose seats. One of the farthest things from my mind would be "did the republicans" hold this until the time was right for them. If so then they were a lot smarter than us, that if we did know about this we did nothing, it came back to bite us, and biter us hard.

There has been reports that Hastert MAY have known about this as far back as 3 years ago. It was on the front page of the Cincy Enquirer today, I tried to find the link, Would anyone else like to try to find and add this link? Thanks.

Actually I knew about that, I was referring to DD's claims that Hastert agreed to keep quiet in exchange for Foley voting as he was told by Hastert. DD is the first person I have seen making that claim.