Mike Luckovich

By George

October 2, 2006 07:20 AM | Link to this

Great Toon! I’m sure that the Repubs would rather have you forget that they are the party of scandal right now. Add Foley to the long list of scandal tainted politicians of the great Nixon party.

I’m sure that Andy will be here shortly with his daily drivel because he doesn’t have anything else to do.

.

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 08:03 AM | Link to this

Hey look everybody, it’s my bit-ch Georgie Girl the Hacker, here to tell us all how much I’m kicking her a-ss and getting under her skin, gee, I wonder if I’ll let up on that filthy hoe?

Cut

The anatomy of a liberal smear job:

Members of the Sept. 11 commission said today that they were alarmed that they were told nothing about a White House meeting in July 2001 at which George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, is reported to have warned Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser, about an imminent Al Qaeda attack and failed to persuade her to take action. {{{{Details of the previously undisclosed meeting on July 10, 2001, two months before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, were first reported last week in a new book by the journalist Bob Woodward.}}}}-NewYorkTreasonTimes

Some liberal reporter creates a story out of whole clothe and the pinko nation goes off running with it.

Drive by media? Off to look for the next victim to shoot at.

Woodward’s latest, the third volume in his “State of Denial” series, is so chock full of fibs, it’s a wonder the 527 Media — those that have gone beyond bias and into political activism — can even keep up. Woodward writes that Rumsfeld and Rice are so at odds that he won’t take her phone calls. Not true, quoth Condi, who adds that she told Woodward that before he wrote the contrary.-AmericanSpectator

Cut

On July 14, 1983 the House Ethics Committee concluded that {{{{Rep. Dan Crane (R-Ill.)}}}}} and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.) had {{{{engaged in sexual relationships with minors,}}}}} specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. In Crane’s case, it was a 1980 relationship with a female page and {{{{{{in Studds’s case, it was a 1973 relationship with a male page.}}}}} Both representatives immediately pleaded guilty to the charges and the committee decided to {{{{{simply reprimand}}}}}} the two.-Wikipedia

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 08:03 AM | Link to this

Hey look everybody, it’s my bit-ch Georgie Girl the Hacker, here to tell us all how much I’m kicking her a-ss and getting under her skin, gee, I wonder if I’ll let up on that filthy hoe?

Cut

The anatomy of a liberal smear job:

Members of the Sept. 11 commission said today that they were alarmed that they were told nothing about a White House meeting in July 2001 at which George J. Tenet, then the director of central intelligence, is reported to have warned Condoleezza Rice, then the national security adviser, about an imminent Al Qaeda attack and failed to persuade her to take action. {{{{Details of the previously undisclosed meeting on July 10, 2001, two months before the Sept. 11 terror attacks, were first reported last week in a new book by the journalist Bob Woodward.}}}}-NewYorkTreasonTimes

Some liberal reporter creates a story out of whole clothe and the pinko nation goes off running with it.

Drive by media? Off to look for the next victim to shoot at.

Woodward’s latest, the third volume in his “State of Denial” series, is so chock full of fibs, it’s a wonder the 527 Media — those that have gone beyond bias and into political activism — can even keep up. Woodward writes that Rumsfeld and Rice are so at odds that he won’t take her phone calls. Not true, quoth Condi, who adds that she told Woodward that before he wrote the contrary.-AmericanSpectator

Cut

On July 14, 1983 the House Ethics Committee concluded that {{{{Rep. Dan Crane (R-Ill.)}}}}} and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.) had {{{{engaged in sexual relationships with minors,}}}}} specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. In Crane’s case, it was a 1980 relationship with a female page and {{{{{{in Studds’s case, it was a 1973 relationship with a male page.}}}}} Both representatives immediately pleaded guilty to the charges and the committee decided to {{{{{simply reprimand}}}}}} the two.-Wikipedia

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 08:03 AM | Link to this

But the hypocrisy comes in because the Democrats have as their dean in the Senate an actual former Klansman, Robert Byrd of West Virginia. In my very clear memory, the whole bulk of the senior Democrats routinely called blacks “nigras” and voted against any kind of civil rights laws, right down to anti-lynching laws. And this is the party that presumes to judge a man because he owns a Civil War artifact memorializing incredible American courage? Didn’t we just recently have as President a Democrat from Georgia who was inches away from being a segregationist in his early career? And what did his state flag look like when he was governor? And George Allen is being judged by these people?-AmericanSpectator

Cut

On CBS’s “Early Show” Monday, the head of the CIA’s bin Laden unit during the Clinton administration, Michael Scheuer, said the al Qaeda leader “is alive today” because Clinton and his top lieutenants refused to kill him. “It’s just an incredible kind of situation,” said Scheuer, “for the American people over the weekend to hear their former president mislead them.”-RealClearPolitics

Cut

As CIA chief Michael Hayden, who formerly headed the NSA, said: “Had this program been in effect prior to 9/11, it is my professional judgement that we would have detected some of the 9/11 al Qaeda operatives in the United States, and we would have identified them as such.” Now, on the basis of such specious reasoning, U.S. District Judge Anna Diggs Taylor, democrat Carter appointee, is ordering that the program be shut down this week. Judge Taylor’s ruling is breathtakingly akin to Senate ideologues, most of them Democrats, who have done everything possible to prevent passage of legislation providing legal authority for such vital programs. We hope voters remember this at the polls next month.

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 08:04 AM | Link to this

The same group of people that it an impossible challenge to deliver their newspaper on time everyday, are now going to tell us all about the economy:

Some investors will celebrate when the Dow finally closes at a new record high, but the smart ones will then remind themselves the Dow is simply back where it was more than six years ago.-AtlantaUrinal

You’re absolutely right, Urinal, while Clinton was president the DOW was better right before the hollow dot com economy collapsed upon itself, leaving the Republicans with a recession.

Cut

The truth is that their insipid dismissal of Chavez’s comments belies their discomfort in having a mirror held up to their own ignorance. It seems never to cross their minds that perhaps foreign leaders and malcontented individuals feel encouraged to attack America because they see so many Americans attacking our country from within. (I say malcontented individuals because it is they who are anti-American. Everyone else in the world is trying to immigrate here — something else the left-wing doesn’t seem to notice.)-AmericanSpectator

Cut

Finally someone with some balls:

Inhofe, a Republican from Oklahoma, took to the Senate floor two days last week to expose the media’s role in the global warming hype. This is a man who more than three years ago called the global warming scare “the greatest hoax ever perpetrated on the American people” and has made a habit of tweaking the left-leaning environmental lobby.-Yahoo

Cut

Today’s cartoon that doesn’t suck!

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 08:14 AM | Link to this

Andy,

When are you going to begin defending Mark Foley and his homosexual advances towards children? It’s sooo unlike the republicans to cover something up, like a sex scandal involving juveniles, lies from the administration, etc. Ironically, Andy, Foley’s text messages were almost exactly like yours, except you always follow yours up with an actual bl0wj0b.

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 08:28 AM | Link to this

By RW-(the original) October 2, 2006 08:14 AM Andy,

Finch: Homosexuality and lying is the domain of the pinko, so you are really asking yourself that question^^.

I thought you liberals were the f-ag party?

P.S. See what I mean, finchie flipped out Friday, revealing his love for little boy legs, the natural extension of all this is name jacking.

Same as the old days.

Why don’t you skip the dramatics, threaten our family’s now and go back into rehab for 6 months, loser?

Cut

I now know why hacking into the blog is O.K. for George to do but not O.K. for any Conservatives:

George IS Mike Luckovich.

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 08:28 AM | Link to this

So the Repugnant leadership ignores Foley’s actions until they are splashed across the media. NOW they decide to investigate. So much for family values. At least Democrats pursue relationships with adults.

By cynic

October 2, 2006 08:30 AM | Link to this

Who is this a* with the endless post-too cheap and too stupid to post his own blog? nobody would read it anyway. Dipsh*t.

figures a right-wing-nut would mistake blathering stupidity as have a set-notice how they all share a common theme-not serving in Iraq!

By George

October 2, 2006 08:31 AM | Link to this

Andy, you are a legend in your own mind.

Everyone knows that if you had something better to do than blog all day then you would be doing it.

By gadem

October 2, 2006 08:39 AM | Link to this

Now that does not sound like RW….I guess he was jacked. Anyway, good toon Mike. Politicians all seem to become criminals and some point in time, kind of like preachers. Foley reminds me a lot of Andy…he (Andy) always screams about protecting the kids (like Foley), but turns out that he (Foley) has been riding around with candy and baseball cards on his front seat to pick up little boys….Andy is Foley your brother in NAMBLA?

By gadem

October 2, 2006 08:41 AM | Link to this

Andy, please enlighten us as to why some Republicans were trying to cover up for Foley….is this the kind of party that you support? Speaker of the house is a liar…I guess the saying is true, when a republican opens his mouth a lie is about to come out…

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 08:42 AM | Link to this

By George October 2, 2006 08:31 AM Andy, you are a legend in your own mind.

Georgie Girl: You get up early to hack into a political blog because of ME.

You then monitor everything I say.

Of course I’m good, who are you fooling, sucker?

By Midori

October 2, 2006 08:43 AM | Link to this

cynic,

that would be Andy, the resident idiot.

If you dare complain, he’ll shout that someone is trying to interfere with his right to free speech.

go figure.

he also hacks into the blog in order to post on weekends, then “cries” bloody murder when someone else does it.

By N-GA

October 2, 2006 08:48 AM | Link to this

The Republican party is the party of Homophobes. They oppose gay marriage, partner benefits, gay adoptions and the religious right says gays will burn in hell. The Republicans even have the “Log Cabin” Republicans (Are they trying to say that Abe Lincoln was gay?).

What a bunch of hypocrites!! That’s what they should call their party…the Party of Hypocrisy.

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 08:50 AM | Link to this

RW,

Don’t start with me about child molestation. I may spend all day blogging here, but you troll all kinds of sick sites. I happen to know you go for 13-year-old girls. At least my homosexual encounters are usually with adults. Pr-ick. Elderly bi-tch.

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 09:01 AM | Link to this

Mark Foley is my hero. Dennis Hastert is my Daddy.

By N-GA

October 2, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this

Yep….looks like Abramoff had the run of the White House. Me thinks the White House doth protest too much.

By GOP - The party of family values

October 2, 2006 09:02 AM | Link to this

By Luckovich Censors Conservatives

October 2, 2006 09:05 AM | Link to this

Republicans believe it’s more important to win an election than to weed child molestors out of their midst. Child molestors are just fine as long as they support the war, help pass pro-torture legislation, and are “good” Christians. Yes, the party of Jesus.

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 09:06 AM | Link to this

N-GA, I agree with you that the Repugnants should change the name of their party… I think an even more descriptive name is the War Party. They all seem to be a bunch of war-mongering, gun-toting, child-molesting homophobes!

By getalife

October 2, 2006 09:12 AM | Link to this

At the end of this clip, the gop actually booed Pelosi for calling for an investigation on Foley

By GOP - The party of family values

October 2, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

By getalife

October 2, 2006 09:15 AM | Link to this

Andy is a pervert appeaser.

He has no shame and blames the libs for the greedy old perverts actions.

He is one sick puppy.

By GOP - The party of family values

October 2, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 09:26 AM | Link to this

I see that the name jackers are out today, I bet if we complain Lea will threaten to ban US for complaining.

Authorities could save time on this one by looking to the luckovich blog. Sex gossip, Athens, Ga, and a Yahoo account

getalife,

The GOP called for a justice department investigation instead of a dog and pony show in Congress. Again the Republicans want a substantive solution while the Democrats want a witch hunt.

By GOP - The party of family values

October 2, 2006 09:27 AM | Link to this

It’s amazing that it took 4 posts to cover this list. Had enough of the Republicans yet?

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 09:32 AM | Link to this

RW, Can you explain why the Republican leadership knew about Foley as far back as 2001 yet did nothing?

By N-GA

October 2, 2006 09:33 AM | Link to this

Goldie,

ML should run a contest to select an alternative name for the Republican Party. Another obvious candidate would be “The Party of Corruption”. Or perhaps, “Deviate’s Party”. Then again it could be “The Texas Oilman’s Club”. Or….”The Tax-the-Poor Party”. Maybe “The We Take Responsibility For Global Warming Party”. My personal favorite is the “We Can Re-write The Constitution Better Than The Founding Fathers Party”.

By Midori

October 2, 2006 09:43 AM | Link to this

Where did Andy run off too?

Probably somewhere sending IM’s to 13 year olds, asking them to measure their johnsons.

By gop are pervert appeasers

October 2, 2006 09:47 AM | Link to this

“Republicans trusted a pedophile to protect your children from predators. Can you trust them to protect you from terrorism?”

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 09:51 AM | Link to this

IC,

From everything we know so far the “Republican leadership” knew about the overly friendly emails and told Foley to stop. There is nothing yet that indicates that they knew anything about the explicit instant messages.

Would you like to throw out due process and have anyone you think might be a little creepy hanged in the town square at the first hint of impropriety?

Isn’t it funny how Democrats want U,S. citizens emails to be monitored, but will fight tooth and nail to keep the government from listening in on terrorists?

By Randy

October 2, 2006 09:52 AM | Link to this

Looks like somebody here is taking this Foley thing a little personally. What’s wrong buddy, did your family counselor forget to tell you that it wasn’t your fault? Are you fighting your own war on terror?

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 09:54 AM | Link to this

At least Andy, that notorious boy-licker is consistent. The drunk seeks to justify his fellow pedophile Foley by arguing that “Democrats” did it too.

20 years ago.

A logical extention of the “Clinton did it toooooo!” argument.

Keep up the good work, Andy-boy-licker! You’re doing more to sink the Grand Old Pedophile party here than the Michael Moores or Cindy Sheehans of the world could EVER hope to accomplish!

Can I buy you a drink??

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 10:01 AM | Link to this

Does anyone want to bet how long the 9:54 from from flaming gay schizophrenic Sybil bon finchie would stay posted if a conservative said it?

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

RW, They knew it was more than a few “over-friendly” emails. That’s why GOP House staff warned the page class of 2001-2002 to stay away from ex-Rep. Mark Foley. Now why would they do that over a few “over friendly” emails?

Link:It’s all here

By One of the Majority's Voices of Dissent

October 2, 2006 10:03 AM | Link to this

Midori,

It’s good to see that you’re still here kicking republitard asses.

RW,

How do you feel about being on the governor’s Sonny-do list? He said he’s going to crack down on creepy guys like you on the internet. Of course when I saw that commercial I had to laugh thinking about you and Andy, the two middle aged men with nothing better to do with your lives than to spend 95% of every day blogging away, cursing at people and making sexual references. Creep.

By Midori

October 2, 2006 10:06 AM | Link to this

LOL

I read that a part of the in-briefing these pages got, was a “warning” to stay away from Foley, and to keep him at arms length.

If the pages knew the deal, what’s Hastert’s excuse?

By Bad

October 2, 2006 10:08 AM | Link to this

Michael Jackson is making a comeback. Not with a new song, but instead he’s running for a Rapepedlickan Senate Seat.

He’s well qualified, being a white pedophile, and all.

We should have known that Foley was trouble long ago. His campaign headquarters in the last election was the neverland ranch.

By A vote for ANY Republican......

October 2, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this

is a vote for protected perversion.

By Bad

October 2, 2006 10:10 AM | Link to this

Shame of shames: The Repudlickans covered up Foley’s statutory libido. WHY? So he could vote for Queermarked Pork Legislation.

No wonder the Rapepedlickans impeached Clinton. he was having consentual adult hetero sex…and that’s a GOP no no, apparently.

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this

I don’t know about you but if my 16 year old son received an “over-friendly” email from an adult, nevermind a member of Congress, I’d want that person investigated. If Foley had been investigated 5 years ago he wouldn’t be the liability he is now. But Republicans have always believed that holding seats in Congress is more important that the well-being of the American people.

By Bad

October 2, 2006 10:12 AM | Link to this

Michael Jackson for Majority Leader!!!!

By Midori

October 2, 2006 10:13 AM | Link to this

Majority’s Voice,

good to see you too!!!

By Randy

October 2, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH CHIMPY, Members of congress knew Foley was gay. How would you libs have responded if they told the pages to stay away from him because he was gay?

Since libs support gay rights, I’m guessing you would have screamed bloody murder. You libs scream about anything & everything. It’s just your way of dissent.

By Bad

October 2, 2006 10:14 AM | Link to this

over the weekend, it became painfully obvious who has the long lost Bush National Gaurd records proving he’s a deserter in time of war (vietnam): Rumsfeld. W is actually being blackmailed. Why else would Bush put up with such an obvious traitor like Rumsfeld who withheld support during the initial CIA attack on Osama in Afghanistan. (true, documented)

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 10:16 AM | Link to this

IC,

Your link does a lot better job of backing up what I said than it does what you said. I’ll wait for the criminal investigation to play out if you don’t mind.

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 10:18 AM | Link to this

OotMVoD,

Don’t you have some spit buckets to empty at the bathhouse/gym you hang out in?

By gop are pervert appeasers

October 2, 2006 10:19 AM | Link to this

Andy measures his in milimeters.

By gop are pervert appeasers

October 2, 2006 10:23 AM | Link to this

You know they are guilty when they check into rehab to get a lighter sentence.

By Midori

October 2, 2006 10:24 AM | Link to this

Anyone see Woodward on 60 Minutes last night?

Now THAT was an eye opener!!

By Paul

October 2, 2006 10:25 AM | Link to this

Let’s see, let me distill all the comments that will be published today:

“Oh yeah, well, Bush is STUPID and he LIED!” “Well, Clinton is a PERVERT and he LIES MORE!” “You’re a PINKO!” “You’re a LIBERAL PSYCHOPATH!” “Am NOT!” “Are SO!” “Nanny nanny boo boo!” “I know I am but what are you?”

Now we can all go back to work, or whatever, and check in tomorrow to see if any intelligent policy discussions are in the offering.

Prediction: NOT!

By Paul

October 2, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

Well, Midori, nice opening the door on a topic with many possibilities- - the administration aren’t all in lockstep? - there are opposing views expressed? - there is an effort to protect turf and power? - lessons are learned or not learned? - people engage in “if only they’d listen to me the world would be different?” - authors have a point of view

Lots of possibilities - nice job.

By Truthman

October 2, 2006 10:34 AM | Link to this

9 1/2 weeks ago, Chimpie signed a child protection law with Mark “boytoy” Foley in attendance (this after conferring with the Repugs about which members would be appropriate to invite) and called Mark and his buddies the “S.W.A.T Team protecting our children!”

Hastert and Company are so stupid and duplicitous that they recommend Foley, even after they know he’s a pedophile, attend the bill signing.

Defend him, you crazy wingnuts!! Go ahead, Try!!!

Hate, Hate, Lies and Hate!!

36 days until we take our country back!

I smell neo-con excrement in their shorts!!

P.S. Hooray for Ali G.

By gop are pervert appeasers

October 2, 2006 10:35 AM | Link to this

Sorry, your search for We here at the Christian Coalition do not give a s** about sexual predators in Congress, so long as they are Republican. Sexual Predation and the enabling and cover-up of Sexual Predation by Republicans go hand in hand with the shredding of the U.S. Constitution to legalize sexual humiliation, rape, and torture of enemy detainees, even if those detainees may be U.S. Citizens. Whether terrorizing 16 year old boys in the U.S. Congress, or terrorizing and torturing grown men in Abu Ghraib and Guantanamo, the point is that Republicans are SICK and they get off on using their power to sexually humiliate others, both personally and by proxy. We at the Christian Coalition are willing to look the other way to ensure that our Family Values are protected. yielded no results. Please try again.

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Sigh!

Anyone who defends Foley is defending the odious obsession of boy lust, which means they probably practice it, too. Or at least fantasize about it. That means you, drunken Andy.

Anyone who defends drunken Andy’s stand on Foley’s warped hedonism must share Andy’s boy lust.

That means you, RW.

You are known by the company you keep.

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 10:36 AM | Link to this

Randy, Foley being gay isn’t the issue. The fact that he’s a pedophile is an issue. Being gay isn’t against the law. As RW said, we’ll wait for the investigation to see if he acted on his pedophelia. The emails and IMs alone are enough for him to leave office. The trouble is that he should have been asked to leave 5 years ago.

By Midori

October 2, 2006 10:45 AM | Link to this

Paul,

I found the way that they constantly (read they = Bush Admin) constantly lie and lie and lie about the “progress” being made in Iraq.

I’m also wondering how Woodward got close enough to people in order for them to give him the information for this latest book.

The first two books written by him were all pro Bush and pro war.

Wonder what happened?

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 10:46 AM | Link to this

Isn’t it grand to see the GOP (Grand Old Perverts) engage in two approaches to scandal that they know best? The first is denial.

White House pimp Tony Snow said on CNN this morning that the Foley storm was about “naughty emails”.

Now THAT puts things in perspective!!

And then there’s cannibalism.

Check out his popular neocon blog.

More fun than a 3 ring circus!

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 10:47 AM | Link to this

bon scott is correct - why would anyone attempt to defend Foley’s actions? Of course an investigation should begin immediately but even the evidence we have already seen is indefensible. Can’t you Republicans EVER admit that one of your own is wrong?

By gop are pervert appeasers

October 2, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

Because they are sick pervert appeasers!

It is very obvious!

Scum!

By Midori

October 2, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

Bon Scott: I clicked on that link.

MY EYES!!! MY EYES!!

Oh, the humanity!!!!! :)

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 10:57 AM | Link to this

IC,

Nobody I’ve seen anywhere is defending Foley’s actions. Everyone has said he was wrong including himself, so it’s only in your fantasy land that the question you pose at 10:47 resides.

By Paul

October 2, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

Excellent questions, Midori. I do distinguish between lie (knowing one thing, intentionally representing another to avoid consequences or seek gain) and stating a different opinion or interpretation. Governments (US included) have routinely lied/misrepresented/colored facts in wars throughout history. It may be to not provide information to the enemy (WWII example), to mislead the enemy, or to mislead the public to bolster support (classic view of Viet Nam, from Gulf of Tonkin through the conclusion). The subject of “What happened” is the subject of much speculation - and I have a feeling Mr. Woodward isn’t about to tell us his motivations (an investigation of the investigative reporter?).

My concern with much of this is it’s a rehash of history - and we’re still too close to make much of an objective call - and gives more fuel to hyperpartisans (ever seen any on this forum?). But Woodward is a reporter and an author - so he will likely say he’s exempt from writing a chapter on “where we go from here.” I haven’t read the book yet - if there’s a chapter like that I’ll be pleasantly surprised.

By Bad

October 2, 2006 11:02 AM | Link to this

When the Repudlickans cover-up Foley’s statutory libido, they really, “REACH AROUND” the truth, eh? ………….ew.

By Randy

October 2, 2006 11:12 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH, I disagree. Five years ago, the only thing that was known or suspected, was that Foley was gay. Gay rights activists scream when gays are associated with pedophilia. The pages were being told to avoid Foley because he was (odd) the politically correct way of saying gay.

Political correctness has a way of restricting the truth.

The only incriminating IMs & e-mails didn’t show up until last week. Foley resigned immediately. Right thing to do. An FBI investigation is presently underway. It was called for by the Republicans.

By Bad

October 2, 2006 11:14 AM | Link to this

Suddenly we see.

Foley’s face is ‘around the world’, it’s ‘around the world’.

You can see he’s a beautiful girl, he’s a beautiful girl.

The pages that surround him are so easy to avail

He tries to reach around them but they always turn their tails

He can titillate a page with just email.

Suddenly we see, (suddenly we see) He sniffs their BVDs

Suddenly we see, (suddenly we see), Foley wears the GOP’s lace panties.

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 11:15 AM | Link to this

RW writes “Nobody I’ve seen anywhere is defending Foley’s actions. Everyone has said he was wrong including himself, so it’s only in your fantasy land that the question you pose at 10:47 resides.”

For the Republican leadership to sit on the story for 5 years equates to defending his actions or at the very least not finding them important enought to act on. You are right about one thing - “Everyone has said he was wrong including himself”. BUT they WAITED FOR 5 YEARS TO DO IT! Don’t you find that reprehensible? He had 5 more years to prey on underage pages. As for my “fantasy land”, sure didn’t take long for you to get nasty when I was being civil to you.

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 11:22 AM | Link to this

Five years ago, the only thing that was known or suspected, was that Foley was gay.

WRONG - “Overly-friendly” emails to minors surfaced 5 years ago. It’s the IMs that just surfaced recently.

Foley resigned immediately. Right thing to do.

That is “immediately” after everything was made public. Immediately after the first emails surfaced 5 years ago would have been much better.

By @@

October 2, 2006 11:25 AM | Link to this

It’s pretty obvious that ml’s cartoon today is viewed as boring and yesterday’s news. The Abramoff issue is still unfolding and there are those of us who are patient enough to wait.

Britt Hume and Juan Williams debated imprisoned terrorists last night. Juan’s take was that it portrayed us as immoral. Brit asked Juan if it was immoral during WWII? Juan responded that it was a different enemy back then.

Funny…we didn’t pick our enemies. They picked us. So, do we get to define them? I’m thinking NOT, given all of the Muslim uprisings around the globe. I’ll call it adaptive warfare.

Juan lives in a liberal utopia. Where the heck is that place? I have yet to find it anywhere. I stopped looking for it when I grew up.

By Truthman

October 2, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this

OK, let’s get this straight.

I don’t care if he’s gay. Sending sexually suggestive e-mails to a 16-YEAR-OLD is a crime.

To know about said crime and to cover it up is also A CRIME.

So, yes, Hastert and Boehner (now, that’s a funny name in this instance) are as guilty as Foley.

What is so hard to understand about that, wingnuts?

By Thomas

October 2, 2006 11:27 AM | Link to this

-=-

Hastert Hastert Hastert — !

See - Nothing Happened!

Oh - Never mind!
I was suppose to say Hastur…

Guys — Give poor Andy a break— His Sugar daddy just resigned! and he’s lonely!..

So be nice to him!

-=-

By Lord Help Us

October 2, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this

Man, What Disgusting Hypocrisy…

Anybody want to guess how long it would have taken the Republican ‘Leadership’ to take action against a Democrat that was ‘overly friendly’ with underage Pages??

By IMPEACH CHIMPY

October 2, 2006 11:34 AM | Link to this

To clarify matters:

Hastert only knew of the emails earlier this year but the those in charge of the pages knew years ago. Hence the warning about Foley. They weren’t warned that Foley was gay. They were warned that he liked to get a little too close to minors. being gay doesn’t equate to being a pedophile.

By Sh-it For Brain Hypocrite Pinkos

October 2, 2006 11:41 AM | Link to this

Florida: If an individual is under 18 years of age, but older than 16 years of age, a marriage license can be obtained with parental consent.

So now you que-ers got a problem with it, eh?

By getalife

October 2, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

Now the idiots want to go after gays, I guess they forgot about this

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

It’s pretty disgusting how some neo-con trolls today are defending Rep. Mark Foley’s predicament, either by equating being gay the same as being a pedophile, or by stating that the Repugnants just recently found out about the solacious e-mails sent to a juvenile page — seems many Repugnants in Congress knew this was going on for the past year or so:

Republicans on Capitol Hill Knew of Foley’s Behavior

The extent of the corruption and perversion of members of the Repugnant Party is just mind-boggling these days!

By Finchie Pedo Name Jacker

October 2, 2006 11:46 AM | Link to this

By pedophile bon scott freak September 29, 2006 06:58 PM Short eyes likes his boy toys!! Is that why you get juiced? Yummmmm… just watch their little legs!!

Only a sick mofo would post something like this.

This pervert needs to be locked up.

Or beaten to within an inch of it’s life.

Hey finchie: Jack this.

By Paul

October 2, 2006 11:47 AM | Link to this

@@: Didn’t see the exchange. Usual format is guests state position, Hume asks challenging questions. “Imprisoned terrorists” - what aspect? Length of internment? Apply Geneva Convention (altho that’s an agreement between signatory countries - not nongovernmental entities) so they’re imprisoned until hostilities are ended? Treatment? Differing standards for those with unknown or little intelligence value (as at Guantanamo) compared to those with known information (Khalid Sheik Mohammed, etc)?

Standards of warfare do change - terrorists actively reject conventions on warfare. So question is - how do we fight them? I think we’re staggering in the right direction - keep’em off the battlefield when captured, generally humane treatment (we are not doing enough to exploit this for propaganda value), coercive measures when it’s known the terrorist has information, do not engage in wholesale destruction of civilian areas from which terrorists are conducting operations.

By The Truth Comes "Out"

October 2, 2006 11:51 AM | Link to this

Look at all the anti homosexual liberals “outing” themselves this morning^^^.

The supposed party of diversity, showing their true sexually repressed inner bigot.

Let’s hear some more of that gold old fashioned hatred.

By Randy

October 2, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

IMPEACH, Come on now. You started out a little overly friendly didn’t you? Saying you wanted to let the investigation go forward, but you sign on as IMPEACH CHIMPY and then become indignant when you’re outed.

Foley’s a pedo. Conservatives agree, but you want to hang the GOP’s in congress, before all the evidence is in. Congress is a freakin rumor mill. What were the dems doing in Congress doing for five years?

Now I just offered you a fair and balanced assessment of the situation. Your objectivity is sorely lacking.

By George

October 2, 2006 12:04 PM | Link to this

Foley said Monday that he has checked himself into a rehabilitation facility and is undergoing treatment for alcoholism.

Say what! What does alcoholism have to do with sexually liking little boys. If he is a pedo drunk then he is a pedo sober except he is a little less obvious sober.

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 12:05 PM | Link to this

By drunken Andy - October 2, 2006 11:41 AM - If an individual is under 18 years of age, but older than 16 years of age, a marriage license can be obtained with parental consent.

So this makes Foley’s “grooming” of a sweet young thing acceptable? I know, I know. I happens around drunken Andy’s all the time.

So sad. So indefensible.

By chickenhawk Andy - October 2, 2006 11:46 AM - Only a sick mofo would post something like this. This pervert needs to be locked up.

Absolutely, Andy. I suggest that you put down your bottle, hide your meth pipe, and turn yourself in to the nearest police officer.

By gop are pervert appeasers

October 2, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

“Republicans trusted a pedophile to protect your children from predators. Can you trust them to protect you from terrorism?”

By Paul

October 2, 2006 12:09 PM | Link to this

@@: just heard Woodward will be on Bill O’Reilly’s show on Tues Oct 2. Says he has lots of tough questions for Mr. Woodward.

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

By One of Drunken Andy’s aliases - October 2, 2006 11:51 AM - Look at all the anti homosexual liberals “outing” themselves this morning^^^.

No no no, Andy. Put down the glass and the pipe and PAY ATTENTION. “Liberals” aren’t against gays. They ARE against the sexual exploitation of children.

Of course, in your drunken tweaked state, you can’t tell the difference. And I suspect you’re trying to defend your own behavior.

Aren’t you?

Buy you a drink?

By RE

October 2, 2006 12:11 PM | Link to this

Randy,

Investigations are being called for now after all this information came out. Hastert and Boehner both had information of Foley’s activities more than a year ago. The question is why they did not call for any type of action then. Calling for an investigation after you have been caught is a little weak, don’t you think. I may be incorrect, but I do not think the democrats are responsible for policing the GOP.

The situation was identified and brought up over a year ago, in that time no investigations were done. It would be the responsibility of Hastert and Boehner to take action. I do not believe they are responsible for Foley’s actions, they are responsible for thier own lack of action

By PedoFinchie

October 2, 2006 12:15 PM | Link to this

ACLU defends child-molester group Asks judge to throw out lawsuit against NAMBLA for 10-year-old’s murder

Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.) had engaged in sexual relationships with minors, specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. Studds’s case, it was a 1973 relationship with a male page. Both representatives immediately pleaded guilty to the charges and the committee decided to simply reprimand the two.

By pedophile bon scott freak September 29, 2006 06:58 PM Short eyes likes his boy toys!! Is that why you get juiced? Yummmmm… just watch their little legs!!

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

@@,

I did see it and unlike know-it-all Paul I understand that on the Sunday show Brit is one of the panelists and able to give his opinion rather than having to moderate and simply ask questions.

It seems that week in and week out Brit has to point out to Juan the inconsistencies in his position. That being said Juan is a champion of personal responsibility in the manner of Bill Cosby, so he isn’t completely lost to the ash heap of liberalism.

By Truthman

October 2, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

Bill O’Reilly is to journalism what Dick Cheney is to truth, justice and the American way: A liar and an egotistical putz!

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 12:20 PM | Link to this

George -

Foley checking into a rehab is typical for disgraced Repukes. “Duke” (I’m for sale!) Cunningham did the same thing.

Their crimes were different. What they have in common is that they didn’t seek help until AFTER they were caught.

But as you say, drunk or sober Foley was a perv. And Duke was selling favors. Booze just numbed whatever restraint and common sense they might have had.

Hence my suggestion to drunken chickenhawk Andy that he RUN (not walk) to the nearest rehab BEFORE he’s caught!

The docs there will give him meds to ease the withdrawl.

By Steve

October 2, 2006 12:23 PM | Link to this

Foley does his thing. Other Repubs are well aware of it, protect him behind their version of the Berlin Wall. Lies. Lies. Lies. He’ll enter a program, become a “born again” Christian, and all will be forgiven for all those involved. Republiscum “family values.” I’m not at all surprised. This is Bush World. Congratulations. Creatures are beginning to come home to roost.

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 12:26 PM | Link to this

Sybil bon finchie,

Is protecting children from sexual exploitation the reason you want to start teaching them how to go about engaging in deviant sexual practices in elementary school.

I could describe the things you want to teach them, but it would get deleted since I’m not a lib.

By Foley

October 2, 2006 12:34 PM | Link to this

OK! Let’s hear it for “Family Values,” “God,” “Bush,” “War” and thee Republican Party of thee United States of America.” Lord, it just makes me so proud! “Cum here, Son - have you ever seen one of these close up….? Praise thee Lord! Don’t forget - send me your measurements.”

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 12:37 PM | Link to this

This blog should be shut down. For two good reasons.

First, it demeans all of America with the despicable language displayed here.

Second, when unstable liberal extremists want to declare that one half of American voters are perverts, there should not be a public forum for the hatred coming from mental instability or political activism.

This blog has passed any recognition as a place for political discussion. It is overwhelming and obviously here as an outlet for insults.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 12:42 PM | Link to this

Sybil Bon Scott and IC,

These are the Foley FACTS as we know them:

a) The age of consent in Florida is 16, so don’t hold your breath waiting for criminal charges IF there even were any sexual encounters. So far the only thing we know for sure is that we have….emails.

b) Even IC admits that Hastert only knew about the emails and nothing else. The charges about pages having been “warned” about Foley in the past are hearsay, and attempts to blame Republicans for some sort of coverup are based on extremely weak evidence at this point. I also don’t buy the Page’s claim that they didn’t say anything because of those big bad “powerful” people on the Hill.

c) We don’t know how legit the instant messages claims are.

d) If this information was known for years by people other than the Republican leadership, who kept it a secret and why did they wait until now to get this out? If the charges against Foley being a stalker are true, why let pages continue to be victimized?

e) If we put Hastert et al under oath as Pelosi has requested, can we put those Pages under oath too? Or will they be treated like the Jersey Girls and be immune from an investigation into the truth?

I don’t doubt that Foley was a creep. How much of a creep is what is in question.

By Oh, Poor Little PedoFinchie

October 2, 2006 12:44 PM | Link to this

By bon scott October 2, 2006 12:11 PM By One of Drunken Andy’s aliases

Oh, how sad, he can’t jack Andy’s name so the little que-er goes on a crying jag.

What’s the matter, you run out of fresh kiddie porn, finchie?

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 12:45 PM | Link to this

We’ll see if Foley avoids prosecution for being a predator of juveniles — hey, you know, it sure helped Oxycontin Limbaugh to enter rehab for his crime of trafficking in illegal prescription drugs!

By RE

October 2, 2006 12:51 PM | Link to this

BI Danish, age of consent in florida is 18

794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.—

(1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, “sexual activity” means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

(2) The provisions of this section do not apply to a person 16 or 17 years of age who has had the disabilities of nonage removed under chapter 743.

(3) The victim’s prior sexual conduct is not a relevant issue in a prosecution under this section.

(4) If an offense under this section directly results in the victim giving birth to a child, paternity of that child shall be established as described in chapter 742. If it is determined that the offender is the father of the child, the offender must pay child support pursuant to the child support guidelines described in chapter 61. History.—RS 2598; s. 1, ch. 4965, 1901; GS 3521; s. 1, ch. 6974, 1915; s. 1, ch. 7732, 1918; RGS 5409; s. 1, ch. 8596, 1921; CGL 7552; s. 1, ch. 61-109; s. 759, ch. 71-136; s. 1, ch. 96-409.

By getalife

October 2, 2006 12:53 PM | Link to this

Ah crusty,

No, now it is getting good.

Not for the gang of perverts.

Quit your whining.

Whining wingnut.

By Beyond Disgusted

October 2, 2006 12:56 PM | Link to this

Hey, can we waterboard Foley?

By gop are pervert appeasers

October 2, 2006 12:57 PM | Link to this

Bi Insane, You are pathetic for attacking the pages.What piece of filth you are.

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 12:58 PM | Link to this

Goldie,

If it wouldn’t trouble you too much, would you please provide something credible that shows Rush being convicted of drug trafficking and being let off the hook because he went to rehab? Thanks!

How did that rehab excuse work out for Patrick Kennedy?

By getalife

October 2, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

Damn BD,

How very Christian of you.

Shees.

Pitiful creature.

By @@

October 2, 2006 12:59 PM | Link to this

RW: I like Juan for that same reason…personal responsibility. But you’re right, when it comes to accepting that within his inconsistencies, he’s typically liberal.

Paul: I’m learning to like FNC more each day. The reason being that it equally displays liberal views along with conservative views within the same panel of debate. I don’t see that on other media outlets. It’s usually one-sided, liberal perspective.

When Juan is confronted with a differing view, whether it be from Brit of another conservative, he can be very stubborn, refusing to see things from a different perspective. But that’s what liberals accuse conservatives of, so it looks kind of “Pot to Kettle” to me.

The terrorist detention issue boils down to “defining the enemy”. During WWII it was Japanese internment camps and nobody was screaming then. With terrorists, we need to be able to define them through interrogation techniques. If that takes time, I’m willing to be patient. If they were good guys when they went in, they should be good guys when they come out. People here in the U.S. have been wrongly convicted, served 15 to 20 years in prison, and came out without bitterness.

Unless you’re thinking Muslims are different and inherently evil, and inclined towards revenge.

I’m gone for awhile.

By Midori

October 2, 2006 01:01 PM | Link to this

E-mails Show Foley Sought to Rendezvous with Page

the sick scumbag

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 01:02 PM | Link to this

Dusty and some other neo-con trolls will always defend her/his “right to free speech” for posting her/his obscenities day after day here on the blog — but if anyone calls the Repugnants liars, criminals and/or perverts, then by golly it’s time to shut this blog down!

Typical hypocrites!

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

RE,

What’s Florida got to do with anything other than Foley being from there? The page program was in Washington DC and the one page we know anything about is from Louisiana. (It’s probably getalife) So this is a Federal investigation and spamming the blog with Florida statutes is pointless.

By One of the Majority's Voices of Dissent

October 2, 2006 01:04 PM | Link to this

Well, I see Granny’s back, too. How is work going? HAHAHAHA! Have you been fulfilling your life’s work- folding laundry on valium, doing dishes, vacuuming while hitting the vodka, raising a Log Cabin Republican? Important stuff. Oh, I left out defending pedophiles- really showing the Christian values today, huh?

By gop are pervert lovers

October 2, 2006 01:07 PM | Link to this

…please enter the Chat Room with MAF54, Rush27, Hannity2, and 16yrold99…

MAF54: Hey, I’m wearing boxer shorts with little American Flags on them.

Rush27: You jackin’ it??? I’m wearing the same thing too!!!

Hannity2: This room is filled with Great Americans and Patriots!!!!!!!!!!!

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

RE,

I stand corrected on the age of consent, because of the “under 24” clarification.

Getalife,

You have a problem with separating fact from fiction and allowing “due process” don’t you? Oh, unless it’s for Gitmo detainees in which case you roll out the red carpet.

Sheesh yourself.

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 01:08 PM | Link to this

By RW-(the original, original) - October 2, 2006 12:26 PM - bon, Is protecting children from sexual exploitation the reason you want to start teaching them how to go about engaging in deviant sexual practices in elementary school.

I never really took you for a substance abuser, RW… but I’m no good at long distance diagnoses, either. Unlike your good friend Bill Frist. But when you spew drivel like^^^^, it’s hard to deny the obvious. You must be in an altered state, too.

I’ll give you a quarter if you turn up any comment I made anywhere about grade school sex education.

Better yet, put down the bottle and the pipe, hide the kiddie mags, and join your friend drunken Andy for a ride to rehab.

We’ll pray for you.

Dusty, I’m not surprised to see you on the selective censorship wagon. It’s perfectly okay for Andy to unload scatological labels (which he does all the time), but let anybody else engage in, shall we say, hearsay, and the bookburner in you just comes right out, doesn’t it?

You’d make a great communist.

By getalife

October 2, 2006 01:10 PM | Link to this

RW,

Cheap shot.

You are embarrassing yourself taking sides with the perverts.

By getalife

October 2, 2006 01:13 PM | Link to this

BD,

He did not resign and enter rehab for nothing.

Can you think through that ugly wingnut mindset?

Pervert enabler.

By One of the Majority's Voices of Dissent

October 2, 2006 01:16 PM | Link to this

Granny,

Why does it not surprise me that I come back and you, RW, and the ever-spineless Andy are defending a pedophile by rationalizing how there may be certain legal loopholes that keep Foley’s actions from being an outright felony.

What we do know- Foley was a Republican congressman, a “family values” Republican. He was also co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus. He sent inappropriate, suggestive emails to boys, probably with the intention of luring them into a sexual encounter. Dennis Hastert and co. knew about it, but did nothing because they would rather keep a seat than expose criminal activity by a Republican. Seems about status quo for your side. Pond scum.

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 01:17 PM | Link to this

Goldie and other extremists,

If you like the stuff shoveled out on this blog, go for it. Have fun calling every Republican a pervert and hope to get a few votes for Democrats by doing it.

It simply isn’t true. But go ahead. Tell the world how sorry you are. And how much you value American principles that you mangle. What a travesty!

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 01:19 PM | Link to this

Sybil,

It doesn’t matter which of the voices in your head I would point out because you would just start pretending you didn’t know them. I don’t want to put you in your “I hate seeker” mode.

In any case the “you” in my comment would be more clearly written as “you moonbats,” I keep forgetting that every little thing has to be spelled out for you ignorant moonbats.<———- Better?

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

Some of you may have forgotten about the infamous drug deals going on in the Denny’s parking lot a few years back — and no, I never posted that Limbaugh was convicted for his drug trafficking… only that he avoided being prosecuted for that by entering “rehab”… the same tactic being used by Foley today.

Talk-radio titan Rush Limbaugh is being investigated for allegedly buying thousands of addictive painkillers from a black-market drug ring

Ah, but the truth hurts, huh?

By Paul

October 2, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

@@: what’s with the “know-it-all” cracks? You’re in danger of sounding like the hyperpartisans who come out of the woodwork on this forum. Wait - I see that was a crack by RW - he’s usually pretty rational. Must be a rough morning -

Williams has been promoting his book - had a good exchange on Fox with Al Sharpton - but he’s driven by ideology whereas with Sharpton I see it as ideology and race politics (but he does have the guts to regularly get quizzed by O’Reilly).

Agree with your take on Fox - what I hear from opponents is “well, so and so isn’t really a Democrat” - and that said, people like Hannity (who I find to be pretty much of an ideologue) freely admits he’s not a reporter or a journalist - so that’s more honest than a lot of journalists and reporters are.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 01:21 PM | Link to this

Getalife,

Why don’t you and finchie try getting on the same page. Finchie Bon Counselor is bi*tching that Foley and Duke entered rehab and questioning their motives.

Maybe that’s why Ted Kennedy hasn’t tried it - it might make him look guilty of something,

By RE

October 2, 2006 01:23 PM | Link to this

Just putting out the laws RW. Actually, he is in the clear if he had sex with them in Virginia or in Maryland, the age of consent is 16 there.

Louisiana

§ 14-80

§ 14. 80. 1 Felony carnal knowledge of a juvenile is sexual intercourse with consent between (1) someone age 19 or older and someone between age 12 and 17 or (2) someone age 17 or older and someone between age 12 and 15.

Misdemeanor carnal knowledge of a juvenile is sexual intercourse with consent between someone age 17 to 19 and someone age 15 to 17 when the difference in their ages is greater than two years. Up to 10 years in prison (with or without hard labor)

Up to six months in prison

By gop loves perverts

October 2, 2006 01:25 PM | Link to this

Cartoon idea. Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself?

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this

Yes, Dusty— please forgive me. I forgot that Jesus told you to come here each day and sling insults against anyone who might care to express anger and frustration about what your guy W is doing to America with his lunatic agenda!

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 01:27 PM | Link to this

getalife,

You know my position on this and you know you are lying about it. What does that say about you?

OotMVoD,

Why don’t you just go back to threatening people’s lives and quit trying to pretend you can read? You’re a fine one to talk about criminal use of the internet.

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 01:33 PM | Link to this

RE,

You seem to know a little too much about just when and where you can start hitting on minors.

Paul,

If you don’t think you come off as a know-it-all type read this and pretend it came from someone else. {{{{@@: Didn’t see the exchange. Usual format is guests state position, Hume asks challenging questions.}}}}

By Dan

October 2, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this

The Bush-Falwell-Robertson Family Values Police strike again. Under the able leadership of “Jaws” Foley, who now claims to be a professional drunk just like Bush. These smut and lie-fighters are obsessed with protecting all of us. We are winning respect, democracy, freedom everywhere. Winning the war on Evil by using the Devil’s own tactics. Let us all stand proud and remember what half of us have done. God Bless the United States of America and especially the Republican Party Values and truths. Go get em, Jaws!

By RW-(the original, original)

October 2, 2006 01:35 PM | Link to this

getalife,

You know my position on this. It’s the same as Mark Foley’s position- on my knees in front of a random man who I seduced over the internet. What does that say about me? I’m a run-of-the-mill conservative.

By getalife

October 2, 2006 01:38 PM | Link to this

Why did the gop do this?

Told ya, they do not care about the people.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 01:39 PM | Link to this

“You’d make a great communist.”

Finchie Bon Seeger,

Takes one to know one I guess.

By One of the Majority's Voices of Dissent

October 2, 2006 01:42 PM | Link to this

RW,

You must be referring to the Anonymous Legendary Wanker. You mean you and detective dipsh!t (Andy) were never able to track down the perp? Two brilliant minds such as yours’ and no conviction? Stay on the case, Sherlock. Finding the ALW is the only way you guys will get promoted from Super Secret Double NeoCon Honorary FBI agents to Patriotic Power Ranger Volunteer NSA agents.

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 01:48 PM | Link to this

Is school out today or something?

Freaking name jacking babies…

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 02:03 PM | Link to this

Goldie,

Religion hasn’t been mentioned by anyone. Why did YOU bring it up?

I am so glad we have a strong president. Too bad he and the rest of us have to put up with all the slander from extremists like you.

Try being truthful. The Democrats might look like a solid opposition party instead of a bunch of crazy kooks that would sell their own mother to get a vote.

By getalife

October 2, 2006 02:04 PM | Link to this

RW,

You are losing it.

Take a break.

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 02:05 PM | Link to this

It seems that Rush has been ranting about Foley’s lust for pubescent boys and how breaking this story now is part of a plot.

And how Woodward’s “State of Denial” (with it’s evidence that Bush and friends had no reason to invade Iraq, and no strategy for doing it successfully) is part of the same plot.

Rush says it’s all a Conspiracy By The Clintons to engineer the defeat of Repukes in 36 days and pave the way for President Hillary.

Man, he just can’t get away from that obsession, can he?

Just like his avid fans here (drunken Andy, apologist RW, racist BD, etc).

Broken Glass Republicans. Everything is the Democrats fault. And it’s all a plot by the Clinton cabal.

Lather. Rinse. Repeat endlessly.

Rush has an excuse. He’s rousing the rabble for ratings (and $$ for his happy pills).

But the lemmings who positively deify him have no such excuse. They BELIEVE!!

What. Pathetic. Losers.

By getalife

October 2, 2006 02:07 PM | Link to this

Oh, the toon.

Our country is in pitiful shape when we do not comment about the convicted lobbyist anymore.

It is beyond me how Americans can vote gop.

By getalife

October 2, 2006 02:09 PM | Link to this

Crusty,

You can’t handle the truth, you want to shut the truth down.

Pinko.

By RE

October 2, 2006 02:16 PM | Link to this

“It’s vile. It’s more sad than anything else, to see someone with such potential throw it all down the drain because of a sexual addiction.” — Mark Foley, R-West Palm Beach, September 12, 1998, referring to Bill Clinton in the St. Petersburg Times.

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 02:27 PM | Link to this

Did anyone see “Meet the Press” yesterday — when Russert asked an opinion about the Iraqi poll showing that the majority of Iraqis approve the killing of U.S. soldiers, the Repugnant Senator from Ohio stated that “we aren’t in Iraq for the benefit of the Iraqis — we’re there for our benefit and keeping America safe.”

Oh well — so much for the noble cause of “bringing democracy to the Iraqis” and all the rest of the BS that gets thrown at us by the War Party! It’s really all about building that 100-acre military base in Baghdad and damn what those Iraqis think about it!

By Midori

October 2, 2006 02:29 PM | Link to this

Maf54: I miss you lots since san diego. Teen: ya I cant wait til dc Maf54: :) Teen: did you pick a night for dinner Maf54: not yet…but likely Friday Teen: ok…ill plan for Friday then Maf54: that will be fun

By Midori

October 2, 2006 02:30 PM | Link to this

The messages also show the teen is, at times, uncomfortable with Foley’s aggressive approach.

Maf54: I want to see you Teen: Like I said not til feb…then we will go to dinner Maf54: and then what happens Teen: we eat…we drink…who knows…hang out…late into the night Maf54: and Teen: I dunno Maf54: dunno what Teen: hmmm I have the feeling that you are fishing here…im not sure what I would be comfortable with…well see

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 02:35 PM | Link to this

Sybil Bon Counselor,

RE what Rush has said, when you say “seems” is this from first hand knowledge or did a little birdie tell you secondhand?

The transcripts will be available and I’ll be happy to post them.

What Rush is questioning is what a lot of people are questioning - not whether or not Foley lusted after Pages and sent inappropriate emails - but why some people knew about IMs and other more damaging stuff and chose not to call the authorities but to call ABC News - not when they first heard of this which was a long time ago, but as an October surprise.

When you know a pervert is stalking kids do you call the news or the police?

People who care about the welfare of children call the police. Democrat operatives call ABC News.

By Goldie

October 2, 2006 02:37 PM | Link to this

“Try being truthful.”

BAWAAAAAA — just too hilarious! When has “the truth” ever mattered to the Repugnants? Maybe if they had told the truth to the American people, they wouldn’t be sweating about getting re-elected in November — the majority Americans do not believe the constant lies and propaganda being given to them anymore. You had your chance to be the leaders for America, and you blew it!

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 02:38 PM | Link to this

Midori,

Who had access to that IM message and for how long?

Why did those who knew of its existence, which was not Denny Hastert, keep it a secret?

Maybe because if they released it earlier they would have had time to put another candidates’ name on the ballot to replace Foley?

Just wondering.

By Huge

October 2, 2006 02:40 PM | Link to this

“It seems that Rush has been ranting about Foley’s lust for pubescent boys and how breaking this story now is part of a plot.”

bon, I was wondering how long it would take for the republican leadership or, in this case, one of their stooges, to bring up the suspicious timing of this scumbag Foley’s “problems”! At first I thought, naw, even they’re not that stupid. But never underestimate those morons on talk radio!

Wow, yet ANOTHER black eye for the republicans! I know that their “faithful” are some of the most blind voters in this nation’s history; even still I can’t imagine that American voters, by and large, aren’t fed up with, and going to make these frauds pay one helluva heavy price in about five weeks, for all of this sleaze and hypocrisy.

Let’s hope that even in rabid red states like this one, that voters do the right thing and throw some of these bums out…

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 02:42 PM | Link to this

RW,

Trying to reason with Getalife is a hopeless endeavor. His mind is so set I think he uses a “remote” to post.

Probably I will get called Crusty. Nothing new with Getalife. Same old stuff, day after day.

By Huhe

October 2, 2006 02:44 PM | Link to this

Oh well — so much for the noble cause of “bringing democracy to the Iraqis” and all the rest of the BS that gets thrown at us by the War Party! It’s really all about building that 100-acre military base in Baghdad and damn what those Iraqis think about it!

Goldie, hey whatdaya expect when it was reason/excuse number five? Or was it six?

Now the bush mantra is: We’re killing them over there, so we don’t have to kill them here.

Ready! Fire! Aim!

By Midori

October 2, 2006 02:46 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

it is my understanding that the FBI had access to these messages, and have had them for some time. Additionally, Hastert and Company knew about Foley for some time.

plenty of links here

By Just Like Old Times

October 2, 2006 02:54 PM | Link to this

By RW-(the original)October 2, 2006 01:48 PM Is school out today or something? Freaking name jacking babies…

Here’s your answer, just like before:

By pedophile bon scott freak September 29, 2006 06:58 PM Short eyes likes his boy toys!! Is that why you get juiced? Yummmmm… just watch their little legs!!

Threatening our families is next.

Have I ever been wrong about these kind of things?

Look at how hysterical the m f’s posts are getting.

By Thomas

October 2, 2006 02:57 PM | Link to this

LOL —

Well RE —

If that doesn’t say it all?

Hmmmm- Maybe Rush is right though — It may very well be a plot —

Lets see —

1) Abramoff (Florida) — Lobbyist in bed with casinos’ and many Republicans (and a few Democrats), exchanging favors for campaign moneys and gifts. Using his washington influence in helping his allies in the Casino industry to block other casinos through political manuevers and even conservative religeous organizations. Linked with the (hitman style) murder of (Miami Subs) Gus’ with Scanlon in the takeover of his SunCruise line of Florida Casino boats.

2) 2000 election debacle (Florida) — Hanging Chads, Katherine Harris and company doing everything in their power from their office to stop recounts doublechecking the facts in who actually won in Florida, and some obvious misconduct from voting districts. This state with it’s population was (and is) a very valuable state to win in any national election as it can turn the tide all by itself in a victory. All of this under the watchful eyes of another Bush (Yep Dubya’s Brother). If this had occurred in Venezeula where the brother of the elected official was in control of the district that decided the win, then good ol’ Dubya would have had the world courts and UN starting sanctions immediately on Chavez as a cheater and fraudulent leader.

3) Mark Foley (Florida) — Caught in sending in-appropriate messages to young congressional pages. Previous messages known by fellow republicans, but not reported most likely due to Foley’s position of importance in Florida. The need to maintain control of Florida (A very important national election state due to population) in Republican seats prior to the next Presidential election outweighed the need to report in-appropriate behavior. Foley was slapped on the hand (admonished) to stop sending messages. He didn’t — and the story continues.

Yes I see a plot Mr Rush Limberger Cheese — But it ain’t the Democrats! its —- uhhh — It’s Florida! Lets Blame that state! (chuckles) — Point that finger!

Thomas

By Snoop Doggy Dog RE

October 2, 2006 03:00 PM | Link to this

By RE October 2, 2006 12:51 PM 794.05 Unlawful sexual activity with certain minors.— (1) A person 24 years of age or older who engages in sexual activity with a person 16 or 17 years of age commits a felony of the second degree, punishable as provided in s. 775.082, s. 775.083, or s. 775.084. As used in this section, “sexual activity” means oral, anal, or vaginal penetration by, or union with, the sexual organ of another; however, sexual activity does not include an act done for a bona fide medical purpose.

Thanks for the information, dic-k head, I didn’t know that it wasn’t against the law to exchange emails.

Thanks, man.

By It's Just About Sex

October 2, 2006 03:05 PM | Link to this

House Speaker Dennis Hastert said Monday that no Republican leaders saw lurid Internet exchanges from former Rep. Mark Foley to pages and that he would have demanded the Florida Republican’s expulsion if he had known about them. “As a parent and speaker of the House, I am disgusted,” Hastert, R- Ill., told reporters after holding a meeting at the Capitol in the wake of the disclosure of the e-mails in 2003 to a page, which led to Foley’s resignation last Friday. The page’s home state was not immediately cited.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 03:07 PM | Link to this

Midori,

WOW! Midori actually reponded civilly without squawking!

What is the date on that ABC story? It would be today, Monday, October 2nd. We didn’t have those emails yesterday now did we? Is Brian Ross meeting Deep Throat in a garage and getting this stuff drip by drip?

Moreover “your undertanding” of the FBI having been privy to this info in the past is not substantiated by any facts in the link YOU provided.

How did you come to this “understanding”? Can you substantiate it?

It was obvious that Foley was gay. Is that what Hastert knew beyond the one email we were made cognizant of yesterday? Foley was gay and….??

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 03:10 PM | Link to this

This is how Democrats handle these things.

This is a first in American politics: An ex-congressman who had sex with a subordinate won clemency from a president who had sex with a subordinate, then was hired by a clergyman who had sex with a subordinate.

As a youth counselor no less. How much you want to bet you won’t see President Bush pardoning Foley if he’s convicted of anything.

By Sh-it For Brain Liberal Hypocrisy

October 2, 2006 03:11 PM | Link to this

January 2001: Just before leaving office, {{{{{{{{{{{{{{{President Clinton}}}}}}}}}}}}}} (at the urging of Jesse Jackson, among others) {{{{{{{{{{commuted the sentence}}}}}}}}}}} of former Illinois congressman Mel Reynolds, who had spent 30 months in a state prison {{{{{{{{{{{{{{for having sex with a 16-year-old campaign volunteer}}}}}}}}}}}}} and was serving a five-year sentence in federal prison for lying to obtain loans and illegally diverting campaign money for personal use.

By Truthman

October 2, 2006 03:15 PM | Link to this

OK, I’ll make it easy for you pedo-enablers.

Come near my children with your pedophile BS and I will kill you! No trial, no sentence, just death!

I guess you wingnuts think it’s OK for your elected officials harass your kid. I really hope you have a 16 year-old girl or boy in your house and some fine, upstanding Repug starts hitting on your kid! As long as he votes the neo-con line, everything is hunky-dorie, eh!?!

I swear, I never knew Congress was a training ground for the priesthood.

P.S. Love the Foley quote about Clinton!! Ha, Ha, Ha!!! What goes ‘round comes ‘round!!

By Paul

October 2, 2006 03:18 PM | Link to this

RW - still don’t get your point. I occasionally see Brit Hume on weekdays if I’m not still working - don’t catch him on Sunday. So I said as much to @@ - referenced my take on Hume’s usual weeknight style, then asked what was said, gave several questions to give an idea of the information I was interested in.

Usually people on this forum who start the namecalling aren’t able to respond to the issue so revert to namecalling (the subject of my first post today - usually a trademark of hyperpartisans on this forum and far-left national politicians. You normally don’t get suckered into that.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 03:20 PM | Link to this

Midori,

WOW! Midori actually reponded civilly without squawking!

What is the date on that ABC story? It would be today, Monday, October 2nd. We didn’t have those emails yesterday now did we? Is Brian Ross meeting Deep Throat in a garage and getting this stuff drip by drip?

Moreover “your undertanding” of the FBI having been privy to this info in the past is not substantiated by any facts in the link you provided.

How did you come to this “understanding”? Can you give us that link?

It was obvious that Foley was gay. Is that what Hastert knew beyond the one email we were made cognizant of yesterday? Foley was gay and….??

BTW, I found this curious at the end of the ABC piece you linked:

“Foley resigned after ABC News questioned him about the internet messages”.

Is that a misstatement, or is ABC saying that didn’t report it to the police and decided to question Foley themselves? Did Foley have a lawyer? Did he have his Miranda Rights read to him? Can the courts use any statements Foley made to ABC against him or would they be inadmissable?

Just wondering.

By andylovespedophiles

October 2, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this

And his uncle “stinkfinger”, a 32-year-old truck driver who walked into an Amish schoolhouse Monday, binding and shooting three girls execution-style before killing himself.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this

Oh No!!!! Huge “Huhe” is back!

By RE

October 2, 2006 03:23 PM | Link to this

Just referring to age of consent laws, you are right it does not prohibit e-mail messages

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 03:25 PM | Link to this

Paul,

You took a shot at me the other day and I ignored it. Every post you make has a very condescending tone to it and I decided to let you know that. If you can’t see it maybe it’s your true nature. Sorry if that’s not the case.

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 03:29 PM | Link to this

Thomas,

Are you from the windy city or are you just windy? Ho hum…

Abrohoff has already been convicted. You want another trial?

Are you still counting chads from 2000? Sounds like it. That has been settled legally, thank you.

A pervert caught in Congress? Guess they can show up anywhere. This one was a Republican. Who knows about the next one? A pervert is ONE given to some form of sexual perversion. It has nothing to do with political policies or persuasions.

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

Maybe Huge Huhe is Baby Huey’s dad. I had a post right before that 3:10, maybe I’m being advance censored. AJC: It was clean. I promise!

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 03:31 PM | Link to this

Truthman,

Before you get out your shotgun, can you show us where any of us said “it was okay for your elected officials to harass your kid”?

By Truthman

October 2, 2006 03:35 PM | Link to this

What if it was Hillary hitting on female pages?

Andy and @@ and RW would be calling for a hanging!!!

Your partisanship, and your sickness, are showing through shiningly!!!

I guess you’re all OK with “Jesus Camp” where the kids pray to cardboard cutouts of the Chimp.

Talk about worshipping false idols!!

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 03:36 PM | Link to this

Sorry for the double post. I got stuck in greenland, shut down the computer and assumed it didn’t post.

Decided to add an extra paragraph the second time around. Good one too!

RW,

Love that Snopes link.

By bon scott

October 2, 2006 03:37 PM | Link to this

By Just Like Old Times - October 2, 2006 02:54 PM

This (of course) is drunken pedophile Andy again, with an obvious reference to his favorite beverage.

Threatening our families is next.

I dunno, drunken Andy. I read where you once threatened the disabled daughter of a poster here. Is that true? And you’re always mixed up in these macho fight challenges…

Have I ever been wrong about these kind of things?

Have you ever been right?

Look at how hysterical the m f’s posts are getting.

Hello drunken Andy?? The Pee Wee Herman “I know you are but what am I?” defense fits you like a glove, doesn’t it?

And in general, the “I meant to do that” Pee Wee excuse does too, for you and your enablers here.

Drunk. Tweaked out. Hysterical. And defending men who have substance abuse and/or child sex issues much like your own.

And you think other people have a problem??

Get help. We’ll pray for you.

By gop loves perverts

October 2, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this

Karma will get these pervert lovers in the end. If not, they will burn in hell. Hypocrites.

By paul

October 2, 2006 03:42 PM | Link to this

RW - if I took a shot I apologize. Don’t recall - generally try to avoid such things. I do see how my tone can come across as condescending - but I can make a case that when some people are making valid points, discussing an issue or agreeing to disagree and people jump in with comments unworthy of a 12-year old, well, I do get a bit impatient and find them worthy of mocking. My own weakness, I agree - but it brings me back to one of my greatest concerns for this country - these people vote and they reproduce.

By Nucular

October 2, 2006 03:53 PM | Link to this

Anuther grate day in the history of modern Republicunism! It’s lak a return ta the Crusades. With Jesuss, family values, and ever thang. We’ll hunt down them child abusers house by house. If we don’t find one - we’ll throw one in. From personal experience as a full-time drunk, I know whut it takes n that’s why I appointed “Jaws” Foley to be my man inCongruoss. He knows how ta turn the pages of the book. God Laura, I’m so proud! Pore me anuther lil draink outta thet flask, honey. Got ta have mah security syrup. God I luv this job. Now let’s go kill some more people in Iraqi. Cuz we r Patriuts. An mah fellow Murcans and I must “stay thee curse.” Wares Tony Snow?
Let’s tell him bout the good news of yore pregnancee. That Clinton! He’s a lil devil!

By Paul

October 2, 2006 04:01 PM | Link to this

See my point? If that’s condescending, I plead guilty.

By Dexter

October 2, 2006 04:03 PM | Link to this

Yeah, Truthman. I too am well aware of Jesus Camp. How very typically Republiscum and fitting for today. The sick infecting the sickees. I have a quick solution for those “people.” Of course they’re all good “patriots” and family folks. Yuk.

By Thomas

October 2, 2006 04:04 PM | Link to this

Dusty —

Abramoff has been convicted of 1 of his crimes. This does not mean it will be the only thing he is going to be convicted on. I suspect that the SunCruise case is probably the thing currently being held over his head and the prime suspected reason for him spilling the beans to the FBI.

I have no proof of such, but then again it seems very interesting that as soon as that murder investigation started and the connection to Abe’ and Scanlon were found that this was when the Washington influence storys were exposed by the Aberration’Mof to the FBI. Smells like an FBI backroom deal to me.

Me nah’ I’m not counting Chads. I’m just counting the greasy politicians that were in charge of making sure the election was fair and fully accounted for. We will never know if the count was actually correct as the people in office fought against a public recount. Hmmmm — now that’s strange. - So they didn’t want to confirm that the count was (ahem) accurate and above board in this new and open GOP Government.

No! Just to be blunt, the count did absolutly nothing in my opinion, but the partison actions that the elected officials of Florida took during this process were definitly not in the interest “all of the people that they serve”. I hold these charlatans responsible for their corrupt actions within that state in denying the people a fair check that their vote counted.

True - Perverts come in all shapes, sizes, colors, and political persuasions. That is very true Dusty-

Long winded post? - Well - Instead of posting mass spams every five minutes - I get mine all in one shot - I’d say my total words are still less than most anybody else on this blog per day — Cheers!

== Ohh and Snoop Doggy Andy — 12:51

You are correct - It is not against the law to send messages (unless your in the state of Georgia and a few other states where internet exchanges with the underaged can get you jailtime). But by your reply then I guess - in your personal view of the world that the pages should be advised the following:

Warning - As part of your duties as a page, you are responsible to accept e-mails from Senators, Congressmen, and other administration officials containing sexual innuendos and offers, and to keep all such messages secret from the “communist” news agencies, and others who would use this to harm the re

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 04:12 PM | Link to this

Truthman,

Why don’t you try sticking with the facts instead of projecting what you fantasize our response to a hypothetical situation would be.

No one is defending Foley’s creepy perv behavior. We want to know who knew what when. We are waiting for Deep Throat to finish dropping off an email-a-day to Brian Ross so we can see the whole picture.

That might help the Justice Department with their investigation too.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this

{{I agree - but it brings me back to one of my greatest concerns for this country - these people vote and they reproduce.}}

Paul,

That^^is more than “condescending”. What do you plan on doing about it?

By Scott

October 2, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this

Being gay or not has nothing to do with Foleys problem. Like an alcoholic, he has formed an addiction. And again, just like an alcoholic, lacks the guts and decency to seek treatment for it. Perhaps he can become “born again” like Bushie.

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 04:17 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

I had a comment missing in action and never seen again. Too bad they can’t cut some of these really “cute” liberal posts.

Nucular is NOT funny.

bonscott is so tiresome with that “drunk” talk when it is obvious that Andy is thinking quite clearly. The bonnie sounds like one who is imbibing.

“GOP loves perverts” is far far off line and talking about karma. Must be a hangover from hippie days.

Dems definitely need some new cliques on this blog.

By Sh-it For Brain Hypocrite Pinkos

October 2, 2006 04:19 PM | Link to this

Let’s just see what the “experts” have to say:

NAMBLA’smembershipis open to everyone sympathetic to personal freedom. Our goal is to end the oppression of men and boys who have freely chosen, mutually consensual relationships. To hear the right-wing whingers p** and moan about this decision, you’d think the Supreme Court had given every “child molestor” in prison a Get Out Of Jail Free card.

By gop loves perverts

October 2, 2006 04:22 PM | Link to this

Here is a picture of the pervert with macaca

By gop loves perverts

October 2, 2006 04:24 PM | Link to this

Ewww, Andy is a member of NAMBLA.

By gop loves perverts

October 2, 2006 04:26 PM | Link to this

Shut er down crusty.

By @@

October 2, 2006 04:31 PM | Link to this

Paul:

Juan Williams brought up the “morality” argument with Brit Hume. It’s immoral to detain prisoners for an unspecified time without charges being filed and a trial. Hume replied “Was it immoral during WWII when hundreds of thousands were held?” Juan replied it was a different enemy.

My take….you betcha. They were confined at POW camps within Europe, had participated in the annihilation of a people based solely on their religion (some were just soldiers following orders) and still, noone protested. Dang, they sound a lot like jihadists.

Anyway, the Japanese citizens within our own borders were placed in camps in our own country until the war ended. I’d be willing to bet the vast majority of the Japanese citizens weren’t guilty of anything. It was a precaution during war. Not many of them sought revenge. Maybe they wanted to display loyalty to the country in which they chose to reside. Amazing and admirable. Reparations were paid to their survivors. Better late than never.

I think we’re probably too moral to round up 17 virgins and give them to a disgrunted Muslim though.

By Paul

October 2, 2006 04:32 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: Have you a sense of humor?

re: what do I plan on doing about it? If you mean regarding a literal interpretation of my remark, there is nothing to be done. They will continue to vote and reproduce (I refer to hyperpartisans on both sides, idealogues and those whose idea of discuss and debate is to namecall). All that can be done is to continue to promulgate reason in the face of irrationality and hope it makes a difference.

Possibly some are unable to discuss issues without referring to party affiliation, Bush, Clinton, Fox, “the media” or other such distractions.

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this

Thomas,

I am sorry you have no faith in our justice system ,judicial system, our electoral system or the Republican Party. Do you think that Democrats could do better?

If you are planning to say “Anything would be better”, don’t bother. That is a cop out. The Democrats have little to offer in the way of leadership.

But thanks for the civility. It makes for easier reading.

By andylovespedophiles

October 2, 2006 04:33 PM | Link to this

And his nephew “pinky the pinko killer”, a teenager who had been spotted on a high school campus near North Las Vegas, with a gun, authorities said.

When questioned by authorities, andy said, “If Ida known that that much as$ poundin would have driven him to this, Ida stopped a long time back”.

By paul

October 2, 2006 04:47 PM | Link to this

@@: thanks. Williams seems to be of the opinion the war on jihadists should be handled as a law-enforcement issue (9-11 didn’t come close to doing away with that mindset - Ramirez recently had a good cartoon of the second aircraft heading toward the World Trade Center with an F-16 overhead - the pilot’s saying “You have the right to remain silent. Anything you say can and will…”

Jihadists take a long-term view of the war. Procedures take a while to work out. If you’re captured on a battlefield, well, not much of a question there. If you’re captured as a result of a bribe paid to some warlord, well, maybe a different set of procedures should apply. And if you’re a non-US citizen captured within the continental US, well, some other pretty strong procedures should be in place (similar to what was done with German saboteurs in WWII).

By @@

October 2, 2006 04:48 PM | Link to this

Truthman:

How little truth you actually know. The only place I’ve commented on the Foley matter was at Wooten’s over the weekend. Do you post there? Under what name?

Here, let me help you find the truth:

{{{By @@ September 30, 2006 12:08 PM}}}

{{{I like what Jeb Bush said. “I am very disappointed to hear this. My heart goes out to his family. If this is true, and it appears as though it is, with his resignation, then it should be investigated to the fullest extent of the law.”}}}

{{{By @@ October 1, 2006 09:10 AM}}}

{{{The infamous e-mails are on the web for everyone to see. I’ve seen them and found their content disgusting. Congress has called for a “criminal” investigation of Foley.}}}

{{{There’s going to be a liberal come along who will probably be driven by partisan politics to display the e-mails. I would remind that individual that you would, not only be exposing Foley, but you would be exposing a young page’s conversation, that they have chosen not to reveal in the past.}}}

{{{You’ll be harming an innocent for your own partisan purposes.}}}

{{{Think about it before you make your decision to expose yourself as lacking in compassion.}}}

After this ^^^ post, some liberal came on and told me I shouldn’t judge liberals without judging myself first.

And then……here comes a liberal posting the e-mails verbatim, which I would never do.

Another conservative came along and congratulated me for calling it right.

A liberal is always predictable as is evident in today’s posts here at ml’s. They love the “written nasty.”

At one time, there were some reasonable liberals here. When somebody spammed like the liberal did here this morning. Conservatives and the reasonable liberals agreed that it didn’t matter to the child whether the perpetrator was Republican or Democrat. What mattered most was that a child had been violated.

My opinion, child predators, once convicted, should be locked up, never to see daylight again, no matter who they are.

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 04:50 PM | Link to this

gop loves perverts,

Your karma is not kool. Go do your homework, pernicious child.

By RE

October 2, 2006 04:55 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

I know I have no faith in the house ethics panel.

By Liberals Suck

October 2, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this

Hey Danish: You made the news!

While Danish milk products were dumped in the Middle East, fervent rightwing Americans started buying Bang & Olufsen stereos and Lego. In the first quarter of this year Denmark’s exports to the US soared 17%. The British writer Christopher Hitchens organised a buy-Danish campaign. Among the thousands of emails sent to Rose was one from an American soldier serving in Iraq. “He told me he was sitting in Iraq, watching a game of football and drinking a can of Carlsberg,” Rose said.

By RE

October 2, 2006 05:01 PM | Link to this

Anyone know if Foley will recieve retirement benefits from Congress?

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 05:09 PM | Link to this

Dusty,

Your observations about Sybil bon finchie are astute. He has been reduced to a hysterical shrieking bore, and a boorish one at that.

Paul,

Sorry but my sense of humor doesn’t include jokes about exterminating people you disagree with. It’s just me I guess.

By Liberal Child Endangerment

October 2, 2006 05:10 PM | Link to this

The timing of this revelation has more to do about helping Nancy Pelosi and the House Democrats than protecting teenagers with whom Foley was communicating. What else explains the delay? I remain extremely curious about who had the instant messages, when they received them, from whom they received them, and how they became public only now. As in the Valerie Plame matter, where several news outlets helped the likes of Charles Schumer to perpetuate lies about the White House and encouraged his demand for a special counsel, some reporters (probably including Brian Ross of ABC News) know who and what are behind the timing of the Foley revelation and are protecting that aspect of the story to prevent the complete facts from becoming public until after the election – that is, after the political damage has been done.

By double standard

October 2, 2006 05:12 PM | Link to this

By @@ - October 2, 2006 04:48 PM - A liberal is always predictable as is evident in today’s posts here at ml’s. They love the “written nasty.”

A long time ago, wingnut Andy set the pattern for insults here. He helped create the atmosphere of contempt that stinks up this joint.

For you not to recognize this, and to blame “liberals” alone for the tone of this blog is hypocritical and disgusting.

By paul

October 2, 2006 05:14 PM | Link to this

@@: to clarify my prior comment, actually, various procedures have been proposed.

It’s likely bad for to cite another editorial cartoonist on this space, but you may want to check Investor’s Business Daily at investors dot com editorial cartoons. One large panel, three suits having a conversation: 1- It’s time for change! Let’s show America Democrats are for national security! person 2 - here, here person 3 - yea!

2 - We will pass tougher measures to fight terrorism! person 2 - actually, we’re against the Patriot Act person 3 - no profiling…

3 - uh… then we’ll use advanced technologies to listen in on terrorists’ planning. person 2 - we’re against the NSA program. person 3 - ditto on bank transfers.

4 - um… then we’ll capture terrorists and make them talk! person 2 - absolutely not! person 3 - terrorists have rights, too

5 - then we’ll find a special place to lock them away forever! person 2 - sorry, not Gitmo. person 3 - habeas corpus

6 - We’ll kill bin Laden! person 2- we’re against the death penalty person 3 - maybe we could dress him up like a fetus?

By paul

October 2, 2006 05:16 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: ???????

By One of the Majority's Voices of Dissent

October 2, 2006 05:30 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Buy Danish, aka Granny, is a white-supremacist, unemployed, pompous hag. She’ll tell you all the wonderful things people she knows have done, she’ll criticize your spelling, but all she does herself is sit on her a$$ all day spewing hatred at liberals. She’s essentially a conservative welfare mother. Oh, the name has to do with her belief that people should buy Danish products because their government allowed cartoonists to print pictures of Mohamed.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 05:38 PM | Link to this

Liberal suck,

Thanks for the link. I particularly enjoyed this paragraph which would make Cartman happy -

Denmark has now drifted to the right - as has neighbouring Sweden, which last week booted out its Social Democrat government. The chill hand of pragmatism has even arrived in Christiania, the Danish capital’s hippy commune, as the government announced last week it intended to charge the hairy denizens rent.

I am curious as to why only “right-wingers” participated in the boycott, and why the Independent feels compelled to describe the POS Iman as possessing a “twinkling grin” as if he were the muslim version of St. Nicholas.

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 05:42 PM | Link to this

@@,

Or you could click here

By @@

October 2, 2006 05:47 PM | Link to this

Paul: Sounds like your cartoon preference is showing the indecisiveness of Democrats on national security issues? If that’s the case, I agree absent the visual.

I like my information clear and concise, even if it’s not pretty.

German Saboteurs during WWII? Would that be executing them after a military tribunal and then letting the Supreme Court rule in favor of the decision made by the military after the fact? Just curious, but can’t wait for your response. I’m off again. Wooten just opened a new thread on this very issue. You may want to join in the discussion there tomorrow or now. Sometimes he leaves it open past 5:00.

I have to warn you though. There are liberals over there posting the text from Foley’s e-mails even though it has nothing to do with the topic. They just love doing it (no pun intended).

Double Standard: Oh shut-up. I’m tired of your whining. Why don’t you try getting over Andy instead of trying to get one “over on” Andy. People like you are a waste of board space IMHO.

@@ out.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 05:47 PM | Link to this

Paul,

OOTMVOD is a punk, psychotic, threat-making stalker. It is best to ignore him.

In addition to all his aberrant fantasies about my private life, he seems to object to my passionate support of free speech and my opposition to fascists who hope to silence others through violent intimidation.

Screw him.

I’m sorry if I failed to find humor in your statement about people who vote and reproduce. There are a lot of people who blog here who endorse that view, and they aren’t kidding, so my virtual antennae are sensitive to the issue.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 05:51 PM | Link to this

RW,

That is a great cartoon! Eat your heart out Luckovich.

By RE

October 2, 2006 05:57 PM | Link to this

QALAT, AFGHANISTAN — U.S. Senate Majority Leader Bill Frist said Monday that the Afghan war against Taliban guerrillas can never be won militarily and called for efforts to bring the Islamic militia and its supporters into the Afghan government.

Would this be considered the act of a terrorist appeaser?

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 06:00 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

That’s the one Paul was describing at 5:14. I decided to make it user friendly for him.

By conservatives Molest America's Children

October 2, 2006 06:01 PM | Link to this

House of Representatives Republican leaders, already facing a tough election fight to keep control of the U.S. Congress, struggled on Monday to contain a mushrooming sex scandal just five weeks before the November 7 vote I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again. I’d no more leave my child alone with a conservative Republican than I would with a Roman Priest.

By gop love perverts

October 2, 2006 06:11 PM | Link to this

Amen to that.

By Paul

October 2, 2006 06:17 PM | Link to this

@@: my preference is for clever cartoons that make the point well. Luckovich sometimes delivers, on the opposite end of the spectrum, Ramirez delivers.

Proper read of history re: WWII. That’s another issue regarding law enforcement vs. war - legislative branch given deference during law enforcement (criminal activity), executive during war. But again, we’re in uncharted waters and neither the administration nor the Congress (both parties) have enunciated the changes or proposals to deal with them on other than a piecemeal basis.

Regarding Foley - partisans will make hay regarding any issue. IF Hastert or leadership knew of this, they should feel repercussions - big IF. But, partisanship obscures some of the more serious issues, such as how this - what - criminal conduct, danger to children - is not limited to “dirty old men in trenchcoats.” Lots for parents to discuss with their children, here.

Buy Danish: you must have a very thick skin. Think of my comment in terms of “people with little grasp of the issues electing representatives based upon (what?!!?) then having children and bringing them up with the same mindset.

A difference I see between Mr. Luckovich and Mr. Ramirez: given a topic or an event involving foreign leaders or governments, Mr. Ramirez will tend to portray it unfavorably to America’s enemies, Mr. Luckovich will tend to portray it unfavorably to the administration. Notice I carefully said “tend.”

By Midori

October 2, 2006 06:17 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish,

I see it is no use trying to be civil with you.

Answer your own questions. I’m afraid I can’t help you, as I know you don’t want any “help”. You just want to huff, puff, and blow the truth down.

You know, you do plenty of squawking on your own.

you’re one pathetic kool aid drinker. and an idiot to boot.

By Edwin Williams

October 2, 2006 06:18 PM | Link to this

How soon you forget Barney Franks and Gary Studds. Also you forget the plethora of Democrat sex scandals before and during the Clinton administration. At least the Republicans forced Foley to resign. Ted Kennedy still holds his office thirty seven years after murdering a woman in cold blood.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 06:21 PM | Link to this

RW,

I realized that after I posted to you. It’s funny how cartoons are funnier when you can see them!

By Huge

October 2, 2006 06:22 PM | Link to this

One of the most troubling apects of this sleazeball Foley’s predilections, is how he so blatantly and arrogantly betrayed the public’s trust in him. I mean the guy was the co-chairman of the Congressional Missing and Exploited Children’s Caucus! How the h&ll does one get that position? Tell the big wigs in the gop how you “love” children!

Yet more of those “conservative” family values…

By Midori

October 2, 2006 06:28 PM | Link to this

you mean like these, Edwin Williams?

By Collin

October 2, 2006 06:32 PM | Link to this

Luckovich, Dragging around dead bodies? You put your liberal lead to paper and this is the best you can do?

So what’s lacking? Testosterone I’ll presume.

By paul

October 2, 2006 06:34 PM | Link to this

Huge: it really has nothing to do with one’s politics, nor with political views, nor with race, social class or economic status. There is an association, though with people in the “helping” or “service” professions. Just why that is is the subject of some speculation and research.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 06:39 PM | Link to this

Midori,

Huffing and Puffing would be reserved for you HuffPos.

Sorry that you can’t manage to be civil for more than one post. Must have been all those questions that you couldn’t answer that set you off again.

Paul,

It’s your job to write your posts in a manner that doesn’t require an interpreter or code-reader. BTW, I think you meant to say that I have “thin skin”.

If we could get our kids to listen to us as much as you presume they do! I could be wrong, but I doubt that too many young voters are looking to their parents for guidance when they vote - I think it is more likely that their friends and professors influence them far more than we do.

By One of the Majority's Voices of Dissent

October 2, 2006 06:40 PM | Link to this

Huge,

I don’t know if you were here to see it, but the rationalizing neocon regulars- RW, Bi Danish, and spineless Andy- spent all day defending pedophilic behavior. They told us how the age of the boys didn’t make it an actual felony, how sending emails wasn’t a crime, and how the other Republicans in congress knew absolutely nothing about Foley’s behavior (yeah, right). Just like how they choose to base their world views on silly mythological fables, they believe what they want to believe, regardless of evidence, reason, facts, etc. This is why I view them as the ideological equivalents of Al Queda.

By paul

October 2, 2006 06:45 PM | Link to this

Buy Danish: I tend to abbreviate my comments as I think they are sometimes too long. Actually, I did mean “thick skin” to withstand the insults I’ve read. If you had a “thin skin” you would respond in kind.

Good point about generational influence - there is hope!

By RW-(the original)

October 2, 2006 06:49 PM | Link to this

Is capital P Paul the same Ppaul as little p paul?

Dusty,

Maybe with that diversion the censors will let me talk to you. I don’t remember what about anymore, because there have been two posts that never made out the committee that oversees those things. Hi!

With that I’m out of here until Wednesday, I’m sure ml is doodling a Foley toon so the blog of today can just be moved to tomorrow and I’m going to be hanging out in Sybil’s neck of the woods all day.

By One of the Majority's Voices of Dissent

October 2, 2006 06:49 PM | Link to this

Paul,

Since Bi Danish and I are speaking only through third parties and I’ve missed arguing with her so much over the last couple months, will you give her this greeting for me?: Well, I see Granny’s back, too. How is work going? HAHAHAHA! Have you been fulfilling your life’s work- folding laundry on valium, doing dishes, vacuuming while hitting the vodka, raising a Log Cabin Republican? Important stuff. Oh, I left out defending pedophiles- really showing the Christian values today, huh?

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 06:55 PM | Link to this

Well, seems Midori is going to impress us with a derogatory headline in a 1989 newspaper. Just the latest news of what is going on in the White House—SEVENTEEN YEARS AGO. Thanks, Midori. You’re right on top of things. How long did it take you to find that one?

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 06:55 PM | Link to this

Can someone please pass this message on to Stalker Boy OOTMVOD? -

No fables. No excuses. Just trying to sort fact from fiction so we can get to the truth of the matter.

We shall soon see how much Hastert and others knew, and how much was intentionally held back in order to pounce with an October surprise.

Maybe someone could ask Brian Ross why new emails were issued today that weren’t available yesterday and why ABC questioned Foley themselves instead of handing it over to the proper authorities.

By Liberals Full Of Cra-p

October 2, 2006 06:55 PM | Link to this

By One of the Major Hypocrites of The Left October 2, 2006 06:40 PM

1)They told us how the age of the boys didn’t make it an actual felony Which is true, probably voted into law by a bunch of freaking pinkos.

2) how sending emails wasn’t a crime It isn’t.

3) and how the other Republicans in congress knew absolutely nothing about Foley’s behavior (yeah, right). Prove that they did, suc-khole.

You forgot one, that the liberals knew this abuse was happening alot longer than any Republicans did and they held the information so that they could do a drive by political hit.

Heard of the See BS “memogate” well now you have A BS “Instant Message Gate.”

Brian Ross out by the end of the month?

By Paul

October 2, 2006 06:57 PM | Link to this

RW - same one. Sometimes a bit lazy about hitting caps lock.

By Dusty

October 2, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

RW We will miss your great posts. Hurry back.

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 07:00 PM | Link to this

Will someone please tell OOTMVOD that he has been peeking in the windows of the wrong house?

By Paul

October 2, 2006 07:02 PM | Link to this

By One of the Majority’s Voices of Dissent: I must decline. I’ve learned to never serve as intermediary in lover, marital, or other spats.

By Liberals Suck

October 2, 2006 07:02 PM | Link to this

The age of consent in France is 15, as specified by Article 227-25, which reads: “The commission without violence, constraint, threat or surprise of a sexual offence by an adult on the person of a minor under fifteen years of age is punished by five years’ imprisonment and a fine of €75,000.”

By Buy Danish

October 2, 2006 07:02 PM | Link to this

Paul,

I presumed that you meant that I had “thick skin” when I reacted to your post about voters and their progeny, not about the posts of idiot peeping toms like OOTMVOD.

By Huge

October 2, 2006 07:04 PM | Link to this

Paul, Re: your 6:34.

Agreed, a sicko is a sicko is a sicko. It matters not if they’re black, white, rich, poor, gop or dem.

But pretending to champion the p[rotection of children whilest preying on them is very disturbing, indeed. And add to that, the gop “family values” agenda/hypocrisy and you have a volatile mix that many Americans are starting to see through.

One of the Majority’s Voices of Dissent, yeah, I saw some of that typical red herring and enabling crap.

And that 6:18 is more classic rocket science from the far right! I could tear that one to pieces!

My favorite may have been, “I don’t doubt that Foley was a creep. How much of a creep is what is in question.”

Should be the new mantra for the republican mid terms!

By Pedofinchie

October 2, 2006 07:06 PM | Link to this

By pedophile bon scott freak September 29, 2006 06:58 PM Short eyes likes his boy toys!! Is that why you get juiced? Yummmmm… just watch their little legs!!

By You're So Great Huge!!

October 2, 2006 07:11 PM | Link to this

If you don’t believe it just ask him.