Plenty of guilt, including some Democratic, on Mark Foley not getting reported sooner

We establish the Congressional equivalent of the Mendoza line — the Hammer line

The House Ethics Committee has wrapped up a slap-on-the-wrist report on why page-stalking former Florida Congressman Mark Foley wasn’t reported sooner.

The bottom line?

“Failure to exhaust all reasonable efforts to call attention to potential misconduct ... is not merely the exercise of poor judgment; it is a present danger to House pages and to the integrity of the institution of the House.”

But, while more Republicans, such as lame-duck Speaker of the House Denny Hastert, are more guilty, Democrats aren’t scot-free.

The panel said it found that many people on and off Capitol Hill knew about Foley's e-mails, including members of the media. It said the communications directors for the House Democratic caucus and campaign committee had copies of some of his electronic messages last year.

House Speaker-elect Nancy Pelosi said she knew nothing of this. Well, if she’s serious about ethics reform, here’s her first at-bat inside her own party. We’ll see how serious she is.

And, most ludicrous of all, the panel said it found no violation of House ethics rules. No wonder Congress’ approval rating now sits at 13 percent, and no wonder Public Citizen’s Joan Claybrook is hopping mad.

“While the committee's investigation makes clear that no one alerted either the (page) board or the ethics committee of concerns about Rep. Foley's advances to pages, the report lets all of those investigated off the hook for this utter abdication of their duty.”

Well, we’ll see if Pelosi is serious enough about ethics reform to boost the Congressional approval raiting above 20 percent, or .200 in baseball batting terms. In honor of that magic mark, in reference to baseball’s Mendoza line, and in honor of one of Texas’ most “illustrious” bug-killing Congressmen ever

Mark Foley e-mail leaker fired by gay rights group — and rightly so

Human Rights Campaign said it fired the staffer, whose name it did not disclose, for misusing the group’s resources.

Why rightfully so on the firing?

It seems apparent the employee was ginning up a gay rights/hypocritical GOP gay bashing issue under cover of claiming to address child sexual abusers.

So now, we have the issue of child sexual abuse being politicized by being wrongly linked with a political campaign about GOP hypocrisy.

I retract a bit of skepticism on Mark Foley’s claims

A Catholic priest has admitted havingsome sexually charged encounters, such as giving him a massage, but says no sex was involved.

This does allow me to correct one or two myths about child sexual abuse.

First, actual intercourse does not have to happen for an abusive event to be “sexual” in a broader sense. Inappropriate touching, such as here, would be one example. Exposure would certainly be another.

Second, although a more intense level of abuse is more likely to be traumatic, that is not necessarily so. Nor is some abuse being relatively infrequent versus frequent; again, there’s a greater likelihood of trauma with abuse, but it can come from a one-time event.

Third, what is at least as reliable, if not more so, of a predictor of adult aftereffects of childhood sexual abuse is how young the child was when the abuse started.

Now, that said, it’s still not normal for someone first coming to grips with child sexual abuse, like Foley, to go blurting it out in public. In other words, one can be a legitimate victim, but still use this for personal gain.

More Mark Foley spinning on his alleged child sexual abuse

He’s going to announce his abuser, but his attorney, Gerald Richman, says he won’t press charges because “We’re talking about issues that happened 36 to 38 years ago. This is all part of the healing process for Mark Foley.”

Wrong You’re not pressing charges — if this actually happened — because the statute of limitations expired long ago. How convenient. Between that and Foley privately naming the alleged priest to the Archdiocese of Miami, we have no idea whether he’s telling the truth or not, after doing something atypical of most child sexual abuse survivors and immediately and publicly fingering a specific abuser.

Amen to outing Foley — the MSM fails again

Michelangelo Signorile has it exactly right: the mainstream media should have outed Mark Foley long ago. Sexual hypocrisy within the GOP, especially gay sexual hypocrisy, is a legitimate news issue as well as a legitimate political campaign issue.

Although homosexuality, like heterosexuality, is not inherently dangerous, repressed sexuality — whether it's repressed homosexuality or repressed heterosexuality — certainly can be harmful when the dam bursts.

Foley lived in a glass closet in Washington, where many people, we're now being told, assumed he was gay, even as he orchestrated a lie for the voters of his district with help from the media both in Washington and at home in Florida. …

The standard (for outing) should be simple: If a public figure's homosexuality is relevant to a larger story, then the public should know. Foley voted for an anti-gay law, which should have been reason enough for the press corps to expose his hypocrisy. When aspects of a public figure’s heterosexuality are relevant — past relationships, marriages, children, divorces and the like — the media dutifully report on them, whether or not the subjects approve of such reporting.

Fortunately, the growth of blogging, and the growth of in-depth, or specially focused, work by some blogs, means that the MSM’s monopoly of silence is eroding.

Do you spell “flu” F-O-L-E-Y?

Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds, chairman of the Republican National Congressional Comitttee and under fire for not doing more about Rep. Mark Foley, was scheduled to be on ABC’s “This Week” Sunday; he confirmed his appearance last Wednesday.

But, he then cancelled.

Why?

“Flu-like symptoms.”

You know the GOP is dysfunctional when its lying is that bad.

GOP goes McCarthy, deals gay-bashing card under the deck in Foley fallout

The Nation’s David Corn shows senior Congressional GOP going Joe McCarthy, even to the point of “We have a list” of gay Congressional staffers who allegedly set Foley up.

Count one among gay ex-staffers: Kirk Fordham, former chief of staff to Rep. Tom Reynolds, chair of the Republican Congressional Campaign Committee.

Corn details the list:

I have a copy. I’m not going to publish it. For one, I don’t know for a fact that the men on the list are gay. And generally I don't fancy outing people--though I have not objected when others have outed gay Republicans, who, after all, work for a party that tries to limit the rights of gays and lesbians and that welcomes the support of those who demonize same-sexers.

What's interesting about The List -- which includes nine chiefs of staffs, two press secretaries, and two directors of communications -- is that (if it’s acucurate) it shows that some of the religious right's favorite representatives and senators have gay staffers helping them advance their political careers and agendas. These include Representative Katherine Harris and Henry Hyde and Senators Bill Frist, George Allen, Mitch McConnell and Rick Santorum. Should we salute these legislators for being open-minded enough to have such tolerant hiring practices? After all, Santorum in a 2003 AP interview compared homosexuality to bestiality, incest and polygamy. It would be rather big of Santorum to employ a fellow who engages in activity akin to such horrors. That is, if Santorum knows about his orientation.

Corn then goes on to say this is “not about homosexuality.”

But it IS, David. True, it’s ultimately about GOP hypocrisy, but the cause of this hypocrisy in these cases is homosexuality. Maybe you won’t out gay GOP staffers, but, even with being conservative on being sure who’s gay, I hope somebody else will.

Hypocrisy at this level is bullshit, and not to lay the bullshit out on a hot, steaming platter is enabling it to continue.

I hope someone from The Advocate or Out has a copy, has the appropriate information or contacts to do some confirmation, and then starts writing.

Remember, Hastert, Reynolds and others could be guilty of criminal charges

Speaker of the House Denny Hastert, along with Republican Congressional Campaign Committee Chairman Tom Reynolds, could face criminal charges over ex-Congressman Mark Foley’s sexually explicit discussions with underage Congressional pages.

It’s a crime — whether formally found to be obstruction of justice, or some other type of criminal behavior — to knowingly fail to report criminal behavior, after all.

So, if Foley is convicted, or pleas out — even to deferred adjudication — lawyering up for Hastert, Reynolds, et al, won’t just be for failure of ethics reason.

The offensiveness of Denny Hastert

On Rush Limbaugh’s show, Hastert claimed Democrats were ramping up the Foley affair because
they were soft on terrorism. I hope a USA Today poll is right that Hastert has just 24-48 hours left to save his job, and he fails, and drags a lot of people down with him.

But, Democrats and Republicans need to combine to do more to reform the page system.

Foley claims to have been abused by a clergyman - beyond politics, let me talk truth and myth here

First, let me qualify myself. As a survivor of child sexual abuse myself, I know whereof I speak.

Now, as to Foley’s apparent self-justification that he was abused by a clergyman and this somehow caused him to be an abuser.

First of all, the great majority of abused children never go on to be abusers themselves. Now, although exact statistics are not available, looking from the other direction, it is likely true that a majority of abusers were themselves abused in some way.

Second, despite his words to the contrary, Foley is NOT accepting full responsibility.

Foley said through his lawyer Tuesday that he was sexually abused by a clergyman as a teenager, but accepts full responsibility for sending salacious computer messages to teenage male pages.

If he really accepted full responsibility, he wouldn’t have mentioned his childhood until some time later. It looks clear to me he’s trying to have it both ways.

Before you object, it would be something entirely different if he had said something like this in private, to a counselor, immediately.

Third, contrary to the Rush Limbaughs of the world who must be giving themselves double hernias from trying not to gay-bashingly crush Foley, adult male child sexual abuse of young boys does NOT cause homosexuality. Period.

Fourth, while Foley’s lawyer is right that “shame” keeps many adult victims of child sexual abuse quiet, it usually doesn’t keep them quiet that long. From my experience, the age of realization is more likely to be in one’s 30s.

Fifth, child sexual abuse is indeed a major cause of alcoholism, as well as drug abuse, abusive self-mutilation such as cutting and more. But, again, problems in this areas usually come out well before one’s 50s.

So, to turn this back to the world of politics, while I don’t outrightly disbelieve you, ex-Congressman Mark Foley, I’m pretty skeptical.