US Republican Politician Solicits Sex

**strangeirish** · 02/10/2006, 3:31 PM

Originally Posted by osarusan

I know he was.

My point is that, however hypocritical he was, and however morally wrong his actions were, he is not a 'sick b@stard' and he is not 'exploiting children'.

I have to disagree. Anyone under the age of 18 in the US is considered a minor or child, legally. A man in his position, is, in my opinion, abusing his power and using that power to exploit children.

**osarusan** · 02/10/2006, 3:33 PM

Originally Posted by dahamsta

If you want to defend the GOP, feel free; but defend their covering this up, which is the primary concern.
GOP-style politicking won't be tolerated here, it will condidered trolling and dealt with in the same way.

adam

I dont want to defend the GOP in any way, and I think the cover-up is disgraceful.

All I want to say is that I think the terms "paedophilia" and "sick b@stard" are over-reaction.

All pages are at least 16 years old.

I think that the general opinion on an age where sexual activity would be considered paedophilia would be younger than that.

Of course the fact that it is the general opinion doesnt automatically make it right, but it seems to me that many who are outraged are more outraged by their political ethics than their moral ethics.

**osarusan** · 02/10/2006, 3:38 PM

Originally Posted by strangeirish

I have to disagree. Anyone under the age of 18 in the US is considered a minor or child, legally. A man in his position, is, in my opinion, abusing his power and using that power to exploit children.

Obviously my arguement is weakened by the fact that sex with anybody under 18 is illegal.

However I think there is clearly a big difference, if not legally, then morally, with having sex with a person who is 17 years and 10 months old, as opposed to someone who is 12 years old.

If I heard of somebody who was middle-aged sleeping with a 17 year old, I would not be pleased, and I might be disgusted by the dirty old man, but I would not think 'paedophile', and I doubt many others would either.

**dahamsta** · 02/10/2006, 3:40 PM

Originally Posted by osarusan

I dont want to defend the GOP in any way, and I think the cover-up is disgraceful.

Why don't you think the FBI should be investigating then?

**strangeirish** · 02/10/2006, 3:44 PM

Originally Posted by osarusan

By your rationale, any person over 18 who intimated a desire for a sixteen year old would be termed "sick".

The guy is 52 and is basically soliciting someone who is under the legal age to have consentual sex. Do you not think there is something wrong with that?

**osarusan** · 02/10/2006, 3:45 PM

I dont think a randy old guy sending suggestive messages to a teenager who answers with similar messages is a case for the FBI.

Based on the quote from my post that you included, I guess you feel that I want the whole thing to go away, which I dont. I think he should go, and I think any cover-up attempt should be exposed, but I feel there is no need for the FBI.

**osarusan** · 02/10/2006, 3:46 PM

Originally Posted by strangeirish

The guy is 52 and is basically soliciting someone who is under the legal age to have consentual sex. Do you not think there is something wrong with that?

wrong yes, paedophiliac, no.

**BohsPartisan** · 02/10/2006, 4:26 PM

Originally Posted by osarusan

I'm not trying to defend the guy in any way, I'm happy when any Republican loses their seat for any reason, and I think the level of hypocracy is amazing, but I dont think the labels of "paedophile" and "sick b@stard" are warranted.

By your rationale, any person over 18 who intimated a desire for a sixteen year old would be termed "sick".

I dont believe this is the case.

I totally agree with you, however I think the point is that the GOP is seen a morally conservative "family values" party and like the Tories in the 80's in Britain, are shown up as hypocrites.
On age of consent and all that, I believe the laws here and elsewhere are archaic and need to be looked into. Any change in law though should not be hasty as this years absurd raising the roof to 17 years was and should take place in consultation with young people.

**osarusan** · 02/10/2006, 4:37 PM

Originally Posted by BohsPartisan

I totally agree with you, however I think the point is that the GOP is seen a morally conservative "family values" party and like the Tories in the 80's in Britain, are shown up as hypocrites.
On age of consent and all that, I believe the laws here and elsewhere are archaic and need to be looked into. Any change in law though should not be hasty as this years absurd raising the roof to 17 years was and should take place in consultation with young people.

Fully agree with you about the hypocracy of the whole thing.

Also, the GOP, as the party of family values, will want to distance themselves from any 'errant' activity by a homosexual.

Aslo, this is worth taking a look at.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ages_of..._North_America

Spain is 13!!

**strangeirish** · 02/10/2006, 5:48 PM

Originally Posted by osarusan

I dont think a randy old guy sending suggestive messages to a teenager who answers with similar messages is a case for the FBI.

The only reason the FBI are involved is to see if he violated any federal laws. As to what laws they may be looking at, I don't know.

**pete** · 02/10/2006, 6:19 PM

I would have to assume solicitating a minor for sex is a crime in the US given the age of consent there seems to be 18? I am sure its different crime than actually having sex with a 16 year old but in politics I am sure it hardly matters. I would assume the FBI involved as was cross state.

As a party of so called family values I am sure some Repubs will get crucified at the polls. The fact that they so close to the actual voting seems this will probably dominate the political campaign & lose votes for Repubs across the board. Couldn't happen to a nicer bunch of politicians, in no way would I feel sorry for them.

**strangeirish** · 02/10/2006, 6:45 PM

Originally Posted by pete

I would have to assume solicitating a minor for sex is a crime in the US given the age of consent there seems to be 18? .

It's a felony.

**CollegeTillIDie** · 03/10/2006, 5:35 AM

Ok guys interesting story. Can someone send an e-mail to therighthook@newstalk106, so George Hook can ask Michael Graham, Repulican hack and US Broadcaster who contributes to his shows on a Friday?

**strangeirish** · 04/10/2006, 3:09 AM

The spin continues. Now he claims to have been abused by a clergyman when he was a teenager. That, on top of the alcohol treatment. Funny how these guys open up about their 'problems' when they get caught with their hand in the cookie jar. I'm sure he was just being over-friendly with those e-mails and had no bad intentions and if he did, the beer made him do it.

**osarusan** · 04/10/2006, 11:02 AM

The fact that he has been whisked off to a rehab camp, presumably to be silenced until the GOP can come up with a uniform defense.

This has happened before, on both Republican and Democrat sides.

**RogerMilla** · 04/10/2006, 11:12 AM

i am pretty sure that sex with a minor in the US is an offence and known as statutory rape.
personally i dotn think he is a pedrophile ( thanks father ted!!) but he is obviously completely in the wrong and will no doubt get off lightly like all these GOP transgressors seem to do

**pete** · 04/10/2006, 12:06 PM

Watching the CBS news last night they made it look like some sort of gay conspiracy saying he was a closet homosexual & that his actions had been covered up by gay staffers. I think they were trying to deflect attention from the House Speaker who appointed him to that position & apparently knew about his online activity a year ago.

**Dodge** · 04/10/2006, 12:51 PM

Story was initially broke by the gay press.

**Noelys Guitar** · 04/10/2006, 3:36 PM

The Republicians are going to hold their next convention in Thailand.

**cheifo** · 04/10/2006, 5:29 PM

I t reported this story on ABC world news and had some worrying footage of Foley giving an emotional speech(he was crying) to some young pagers about respecting their parents etc.I have to say you would not have to be paticularly judgemental to think he is unbalanced.The fact that there were complaints made about him which were not acted on suggests a cover up.
it also reported stories of other inapropriate incidents invovling civil servants and pagers.Seems like it would be a good idea to push the age requirement to be a pager up to 18.