« KLINE CAMPAIGN: ROWLEY ASKS KLINE FOR CAMPAIGN ASSISTANCE | Home | HATCH: SINGAPORE IS PULLING OUR PANTS DOWN »
OPEN THREAD: SOURCE THIS STATEMENT FROM WETTERLING’S AD
By Michael Brodkorb | October 5, 2006
"It shocks the conscience. Congressional leaders have admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children." Source: Patty Wetterling for Congress
I'm looking for the names of the "congressional leaders" who admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children.
Please provide a direct link to the statements of "congressional leaders" admitting they covered up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children.
UPDATE: Folks this should be easy, as the liberal blogopshere has been applauding this new ad from Wetterling. I'm sure they sourced the ad. Come on – send me the source information.
UPDATE #2: Matt Martin from MN Publius wrote this about Wetterling's new ad:
"Rather, Wetterling is addressing an issue very near and dear to her heart by publicly calling for responsibility in the handling of this matter. She has not pointed fingers, she has not overstepped, she has merely stated that anyone who knew about this should resign immediately." Source: MN Publius
Matt, since you are defending this ad from Wetterling, would you please provide a direct link to the statements of "congressional leaders" admitting they covered up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children?
Tags: Uncategorized
Topics: Uncategorized | 73 Comments »
73 Responses to “OPEN THREAD: SOURCE THIS STATEMENT FROM WETTERLING’S AD”
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
October 5th, 2006 at 11:47 AM
What will Patty say about how it was uncovered that the I’Ms were to an 18 year old!!!
So is Patty going to make comments about Bill Clinton giving a pardon to a sex offender? Probably not! She’s the lowest form of politician!!
October 5th, 2006 at 11:49 AM
Ramsey Rep: Can you find a source for her statement? I can’t.
October 5th, 2006 at 11:51 AM
Fine. Here you go: Here is a Washington Post article that talks about who knew what and when. You are correct that none have admitted that they covered up, but the guilt of plenty of people is very obvious. Their lack of action is proof in and of itself of a coverup.
The key admissions, from former Foley aide Kirk Fordham, who left Foley’s office to become chief of staff for Rep. Thomas Reynonlds, chair of the House Republican campaign committee, a position he resigned yesterday:
“I had more than one conversation with senior staff at the highest levels of the House of Representatives, asking them to intervene when I was informed of Mr. Foley’s inappropriate behavior,†Mr. Fordham said after resigning from Mr. Reynolds’s staff. “I have no congressman and no office to protect.â€
Mr. Fordham said he had informed (Hastert chief of staff) Mr. Palmer of the concerns while working for Mr. Foley, after the House clerk, Jeff Trandahl, approached him. Mr. Trandahl told him, Mr. Fordham said, that pages had come forward with accounts about Mr. Foley’s behavior. Mr. Trandahl, who resigned his position last year, did not return calls on Wednesday.
October 5th, 2006 at 11:51 AM
Oh come on, pot calling the kettle black.
Language is a little strong but these house leaders have done everything to make themselves guilty except use the exact words.
Please remember, I am saying the coverup could be one of incompetence as easily as design (we’ll eventually find out) but there have been numerous documented reports to Hastert about this problem, and Boehner and Alexander and others are pointing to him too.
So, start getting ready for 2008. Working toward this November is just going to give you ulcers.
Nothing personal, its just the cycle to clear out the fat, corrupt Republican party. You can return the favor in 8 or 12 years (hell, I’ll most likely be back to being a Republican by then).
October 5th, 2006 at 12:34 PM
I still waiting…
October 5th, 2006 at 12:36 PM
Wow…shouldn’t it be easy to source Wetterling’s ad?
“You are correct that none have admitted that they covered up, but the guilt of plenty of people is very obvious.”
and
“Language is a little strong but these house leaders have done everything to make themselves guilty except use the exact words.”
October 5th, 2006 at 12:43 PM
The stench of the cover-up is everywhere, and choosing not to smell it doesn’t change this fact.
And, according to today’s Star Tribune, the latest AP-Ipsos poll, which was conducted after the Foley revelations surfaced, republicans are in trouble over this:
“About half of likely voters said recent disclosures of corruption and scandal in Congress will be very or extremely important in their vote next month, and Democrats enjoyed a nearly 2-to-1 advantage as the party better able to fight corruption.”
So feel free to keep playing the sematics game all the way to the minority. I have no intention to stop you.
October 5th, 2006 at 12:43 PM
Damn it Michael you stole my line!
October 5th, 2006 at 12:44 PM
Fuck You Asshole!
October 5th, 2006 at 12:46 PM
And there you have it. Just like every other liberal, with his last gasp of fresh air Roving Reporter resorts to name calling before drowning.
October 5th, 2006 at 12:57 PM
De facto admission that the ad is a lie — and an easily proved one.
The Lefties always amaze. Do they really think people are this dumb?
Check that — of course they do. That’s why they think thier nanny-state policies are so flippin’ essential.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:00 PM
Sorry to double-post, but this thought just occurred.
Look at the justification above.
The ad is fake — but accurate!
Cosmic justice! Even if the ad isn’t really honestly true, well, in a larger sense it really is, because, well, Republicans are just evil. So it’s OK to lie. For justice. For the children.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:11 PM
Raving Lunatic, your #9 post is exactly why you have no respect on either side of the aisle. Your mental capacity is that of a lemming. In fact, you are a lemming. Go away, you are not necessary.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:13 PM
Someone should call Corey Day or Wetterling’s campaign and get a source for the ad…it should be easy.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:19 PM
It appears that someone other then Wetterling is running her campaign. Perhaps someone from the DNC is calling the shots? They had her put out this false ad and then got her lined up for the Saturday radio broadcast.
Patty, if you can hear me, please don’t becomse a Cindy Sheehan.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:21 PM
Meredith-
The fact you dislike me made my day.
Thanks!
October 5th, 2006 at 1:34 PM
no worries lunatic, what that tells me is that all women dislike/despise you. I’m sure that is what you like that women dislike you, becuase you are a hater.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:39 PM
The Neocon/fascist wing of the republican party will never admit to being freaks of nature. Hence, the start of this thread. These guys are liars and thieves and worse. They need to be held accountable in a court, and if convicted, punished to the full extent of the law. That includes charges like illegally waging war, the murder of thousands of women and children, gross abuses of power, hell let’s even throw in the murder of a minnesota senator just to get the conversation started. These guys are fascists and whoever supports them is a fascist. If you don’t like being called a fascist, then quit acting like one. Micheal, this site is as rotten a piece of meat as I have ever seen and you should be ashamed. Try being an American again and quit being so damned unpatriotic and subversive.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:45 PM
“The Neocon/fascist wing of the republican party will never admit to being freaks of nature.”
So there Fred, you may want to sharpen up your debating skills a bit. It’s the Michael Moore school of debate that got Bush re-elected in 2004.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:56 PM
fred, thanks for posting that.
Best imitation of a foam-flecked moonbat loon I’ve seen in a long time. Well done!
Unless….you’re for real. Yikes.
October 5th, 2006 at 1:59 PM
Dave, tell me what about these guys isn’t fascism. I don’t toss the term around lightly and I don’t mean it as a perjorative but honestly, if you have a dictionary around, look it up. I’m assuming you can read something other then Archie comics so give it a try. There’s nothing inherently wrong with fascism. It’s just another school of political thought like any other. Here’s the break down:
1:) Fascist regimes tend to make constant use of patriotic mottos, slogans, symbols, songs, and other paraphernalia. Flags are seen everywhere, as are flag symbols on clothing and in public displays. Sound familiar. You ever get teary when you here that Lee Greenwood piece-0-shit tune.
2:) Because of fear of enemies and the need for security, the people in fascist regimes are persuaded that human rights can be ignored in certain cases because of “need.” The people tend to look the other way or even approve of torture, summary executions, assassinations, long incarcerations of prisoners, etc. Wow, that’s getting close to the nub. Maybe even suspended the right of habeous corpus which is only the foundation of jurisprudence since the signing of the Magna Carta in 1215. Sorry Dave, but that’s in a book to. There’s more but that should be enough to keep your beetle brow furrowed for a week or more.
October 5th, 2006 at 2:01 PM
Folks: Source the ad…please try and source the ad.
October 5th, 2006 at 2:16 PM
Fred, you just described Franklin Deleno Roosevelt (who never served by the way).
October 5th, 2006 at 2:20 PM
JonM – I’m curious, do you pretend that all the things you’ve said about liberals in this thread don’t apply to the current Administration, or are you really that gullible?
If it’s the latter, I think Ted Stevens has a bridge he’d like to sell you.
October 5th, 2006 at 2:24 PM
And now we learn that all of this was a prank.
http://www.drudgereport.com/page.htm
No laws were broken, not one person is claiming they were harmed.
I wonder if Wetterling will issue a retration???
October 5th, 2006 at 2:34 PM
Ok Dave, let’s keep going down the list
3.) The people are rallied into a unifying patriotic frenzy over the need to eliminate a perceived common threat or foe: racial, ethnic or religious minorities; liberals; communists; socialists, terrorists, etc. Every time you hear the phrase Islamo-fascist, go back in time to 1936 and substitute the aforemention phrase for Jew. By the way, you’re in Berlin.
4.) Even when there are widespread domestic problems, the military is given a disproportionate amount of government funding, and the domestic agenda is neglected. Soldiers and military service are glamorized. Thus the need for an ongoing war that can never be won militarily against a ill defined enemy. No need for an exit strategy because there will never be an exit.
5.) The governments of fascist nations tend to be almost exclusively male-dominated. Under fascist regimes, traditional gender roles are made more rigid. Opposition to abortion is high, as is homophobia and anti-gay legislation and national policy. This is the niche for the Minnesota nightmare we know as Michele Bachman.
Since you brought up FDR. Should probably mention he never served because he had polio as a child as opposed to the cowardly turd in the White house now who didn’t serve because of his raging coke and Jim Beam addiction.
October 5th, 2006 at 2:34 PM
JTFM – Since when is Drudge is a source for anything other than his own ad revenue. Why not link to the Weekly World News?
October 5th, 2006 at 2:35 PM
Folks: Source the ad…please try and source the ad.
October 5th, 2006 at 2:38 PM
Hey Michael Brodkorp….
You’ve been hard at work for Makeover Mark. He runs ads teaching us that the President needs a line-item veto. I agree.
Makeover Mark has sat in the US House for 6 years as part of the majority caucus.
Why doesn’t GWB have a line item veto?
Why would we hire somebody on the promise that they’ll deliver something that hasn’t already happened after six years of chances?
October 5th, 2006 at 2:45 PM
“Folks: Source the ad…please try and source the ad. ”
Move along, nothing to see here.
October 5th, 2006 at 2:47 PM
Hastert did not dispute the claims of Rep. Thomas M. Reynolds (R-N.Y.), and his office confirmed that some of Hastert’s top aides knew last year that Foley had been ordered to cease contact with the boy and to treat all pages respectfully.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/09/30/AR2006093001265.html
Is that what you’re looking for Mikey?
October 5th, 2006 at 3:04 PM
fred — nice try, but even if true, which I’m skeptical about to put it mildy — aides do not equal leadership.
I hope that’s clear. Aides aren’t elected, aides don’t lead the part in the House, aides don’t speak for anyone.
October 5th, 2006 at 3:14 PM
Quite simply, Patty is the puppet and George Soros and his group (The Democrats) are pulling the strings.
More reason to elect Michele Bachman
October 5th, 2006 at 3:15 PM
Nope…let me explain again what I am looking for:
“It shocks the conscience. Congressional leaders have admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children.” Source: Patty Wetterling for Congress
I’m still waiting…
October 5th, 2006 at 3:16 PM
there have been numerous documented reports to Hastert about this problem -Alex L
If you were informed on the subject, all Hastert had was vague e-mail. So vague that even ABC dismissed them.
So Alex, you’re missing something real important. It’s called facts and proof.
October 5th, 2006 at 3:18 PM
Keep telling yourself that. No matter what reality tells you, keep telling yourself these guys are not “out of control meglomaniacla fascists”
October 5th, 2006 at 3:18 PM
BTW Mike.
You’re going to have to wait a real long time for Wetterlings puppetmasters to prove what is a filthy lie.
October 5th, 2006 at 3:20 PM
You’re right fred.
Democrats are ‘out of control meglomaniacla fascists”
October 5th, 2006 at 3:23 PM
Reamed Rep,, I refer you to point #3 of post #26.. George Soros isn’t the enemy. You are, and your mindset. Richard Mellon Sciafe contributes how much and to whom.
October 5th, 2006 at 3:24 PM
Fred, I could argue each of your points but don’t have the time, so let’s just do two.
“Since you brought up FDR. Should probably mention he never served because he had polio as a child…”
No, you obviously don’t have basic common knowledge history facts down. He got polio in 1921 at age 39.
#2) Name me one, just one, nation where the citizens have more freedoms then in the US. Just one. I’ll wait.
October 5th, 2006 at 3:32 PM
The source is probably the same of the fake Texas Air Guard memos.
Those wacky Dems.
October 5th, 2006 at 3:43 PM
Sometimes the truth can be the source.
Read any major metro newspaper today, and you will find evidence that many republicans knew about Mark Foley, and that many republicans covered it up.
I hope one seat in Flordia is worth losing the majority over.
October 5th, 2006 at 4:04 PM
As Eric Scheie said: “Is it possible to have a “pedophile sex email scandal” that didn’t involve pedophilia, or sex, or emails?”
http://www.classicalvalues.com/archives/004109.html
October 5th, 2006 at 4:38 PM
I know many republicans that do not believe in dinosaurs, no matter the evidence.
This seems to be one of them issues.
October 5th, 2006 at 4:42 PM
That’s funny Demrock because I probably know more Republican’s than you and I’ve never heard of anyone, even the most ardent creationists, claiming that Dinosaurs never existed. Maybe you’d like to source THAT for us. Or maybe both you and Patty Wetterling are full of it.
October 5th, 2006 at 4:50 PM
I like how we have provided dozens of examples of congressional leaders who knew about the crime and failed to act, and yet that does not work.
That’s fine. You all keep using semantics to defend the pedophile who resigned in shame. The fact remains, republican congressional leaders have known about this for months(years?) and refused to deal with it. Now, when the news gets out right before the election, rather than fix the problem, you are going to all stand defiantly with the disgraced former member and pretend that semantics will protect you from the growing public opinion that the republican party is criminal to its core.
October 5th, 2006 at 5:03 PM
This site is interesting, lies.
October 5th, 2006 at 5:04 PM
Here is the link:
http://www.googlefight.com/index.php?lang=en_GB&word1=Republicans+lie&word2=Democrats+lie
October 5th, 2006 at 5:06 PM
Roving Reporter: Patty Wetterling released a new ad that was embraced by the liberal blogosphere. I’ve simple asked for the names of the congressional leaders who she referenced in the ad and a link to the source where they admit covering this scandal up.
October 5th, 2006 at 5:36 PM
Roving: Michael’s challenge is a bit clever because of Wetterling’s own moronic claim. That there was a cover up to molestation of a child. You can’t find a claim to back up Wetterling because there has been no accusation of molestation nor proof of it.
And Foley resigned because of shame. It is not precisely clear what he has shame for anymore, but we know it involved inappropriate electronic communication with congressional young pages.
October 5th, 2006 at 5:48 PM
MDE, have you put a call out to George Soros’s paid blogging puppets at MinMoni?
They could ask George who he wants them to say is the source for that false claim..or maybe they are free to just whip something up on the fly and have it vetted by George later.
rew? Any word from the big guy yet??
October 5th, 2006 at 5:57 PM
but we know it involved inappropriate electronic communication with congressional young pages
Eric, the young page was of the age of consent. You should be outraged that the Dims have violated the privacy rights of two consenting adults.
October 5th, 2006 at 6:51 PM
“What is a cover up?” I expected more out of you, MB.
Obviously there is a cover up. Congressional leaders have admitted to not following up on clues, not pursuing an investigation, not taking appropriate actions, not sharing information with Democrats, and not sharing information with the press.
They have admitted to pretending there was no problem, leaving the predator in place on the children’s protection committee, and turning a blind eye to the consequences, hoping it would just “blow over” or “go away”.
This Internet predator, this pedophile, wasvIM’ing pages from the floor of the US Representatives! AND HASTERT KNEW ABOUT HIM FOR THREE YEARS AND DID NOTHING.
That, m’boy, is what you call a cover up.
October 5th, 2006 at 6:56 PM
Oh, and the lame-o “age of consent” argument you hear?
High school students are children. They don’t know how to handle an authority figure “coming on” to them.
If you don’t get it, everyone else does.
If you don’t get “Republican Congressman talks dirty to high school student”…
… “Republican Congressman offers political success in exchange for being able to grab a page’s privates”…
… “Republican Congressman meets high school student for drunken sex”…
… how accepting would you be if it were a 16-year-old girl and a male Democratic Representative?
Can you even spell hypocrite?
October 5th, 2006 at 8:11 PM
With Congress serving in loco parentis to pages, the Republican predator Foley has an almost incestual relation to the pages. He used the power differential to bend them to his will. It’s disgusting.
// An AP-Ipsos poll conducted this week after the scandal broke suggested about one-half of likely voters would consider the issue very or extremely important in their vote. Democrats had nearly a two-to-one advantage as the party better able to fight corruption.
In a CNN survey released Tuesday, only 38 per cent said Republican incumbents should be re-elected, while 53 per cent said most Democrats in Congress deserve to get in. //
http://www.canada.com/topics/news/world/story.html?id=4fef977e-c81a-4456-88fe-9ef6dfd61347&k=12491&p=2
October 5th, 2006 at 8:35 PM
BH-
How are his relationships “almost incestual”? He is not their father, nor a father figure to them. None of them say they looked upto him in that way.
Are you as equally disgusted about the clinton scandal where he cheated on his wife and lied under oath about relationships with other women? how about barney frank running a whore house from his taxpayer funded appartment?
Wetterling’s ad is abviously over the top and is out of bounds… a pure lie. no page was ever mollested and no crime has been committed that anyone can prove or show evidence.
If anything, this is turning out to be a complete dud of story and I can smell libel suit in the air…
October 5th, 2006 at 8:47 PM
WCCO is checking out Wetterlings ad at 10PM.
Is she full of it or is Brian Hanna and the sex police right?
October 5th, 2006 at 9:40 PM
Eric, the young page was of the age of consent. You should be outraged that the Dims have violated the privacy rights of two consenting adults.
Was there some question that I wasn’t?
An aside, I frequently hear some progressives remark that 17-year-olds are old enough to enter military service, so why can’t they [fill in the blank]. So color me cynical when the same progressives muster up a sense of outrage over something so clearly selective. If the issue is now morphs into one where a man in authority takes advantage of his position over an young person overwhelmed by that person… well then I wonder where was their outrage with the previous president taking advantage of his position.
Isn’t the fact it was between two consenting adults what rallied people to call for Republicans to MOVE ON?
… how accepting would you be if it were a 16-year-old girl and a male Democratic Representative?
Like Rep. Studd? We know Democrats happily re-elected him again and again until he retired. Why yes, we can spell hypocrite. *ahem*
October 5th, 2006 at 10:14 PM
As a journalist, I phoned the Wetterling Campaign office, and spoke with Corey Day today.
He couldn’t have been more direct and professional. I was pleased that he emailed to me, immediately, their response page that they issue regarding her ad, to my personal email.
I am posting the section of the copy that he sent to me today that pertains to the question asked here in this blog. They did Source their words.
I would have to say that the list of folks that they are talking about in the ad is a small one. However they do use this as a basis for her calls for removal of anyone involved in FoleyGate. The NYTimes is their source, evidently. And the Guardian is also noted below in the copy.
I would also note here that I do question one line here in her ad. The ages of the pages or other young men that were emailed by Foley have yet to be established, fully.
So, here is the Source, as I know it. Thank you.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Foley used emails and internet messaging to harass children. Rep. Foley resigned from Congress “after he was confronted with evidence that he had sent sexually explicit electronic messages to former teenage House pages.†[Christian Science Monitor, 10/2/06]
Leaders in Congress knew about problem and did not take action against Foley. The New York Times reported that “Republican Thomas Reynolds admitted that he had told Dennis Hastert, the Speaker of the House, as long ago as last year that a page’s parents had complained about inappropriate messages being sent by Mr. Foley.†The Guardian said that “five senior Republican members of Congress knew for months and remained silent over an inappropriate email sent by House of Representatives member Mark Foley to a 16-year-old male.†[New York Times, 10/2/06; The Guardian, 10/2/06]
October 5th, 2006 at 11:24 PM
soooooo….liberal types. you’ve been all over the place here EXCEPT what the original post was about and what MB has asked again repeatedly. you’re BUSTED. game over.
October 6th, 2006 at 12:03 AM
So, as I read the new republican definition of sexual harassment, as long as both people are of the age of consent, there is no such thing as sexual harassment.
This is truly an interesting turn from the Paula Jones, Monica Lewinski days.
October 6th, 2006 at 12:21 AM
Dave,, sorry to take so long but I was out drinking in a bar. Your point with FDR made me look up his biography, something I haven’t had to do since high school and yes, your right, he didn’t get polio until he was 39. But, he served by entering public service in 1910, at the age of 28. Now where was Georgie boy when he was 28. My guess is the same kind of place I was earlier tonight. Big differance is, I left before I was 49 years old. W was a draft dodging coward who had a major league fondness for Peruvian marching powder and Jim Beam. There is no disputing that. Now, point 2. That’s interesting because I never thought of it in those kinds of terms. So I went to the trusty Google and searched “freedom countries most” and this is what I found.
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0930918.html
“According to the survey, 89 countries are free. Their 2.8 billion inhabitants (44% of the world’s population) enjoy a broad range of rights. Fifty-four countries representing 1.2 billion people (19%) are considered partly free. Political rights and civil liberties are more limited in these countries, in which corruption, dominant ruling parties, or, in some cases, ethnic or religious strife is often the norm. The survey finds that 49 countries are not free. The 2.4 billion inhabitants (37%) of these countries, nearly three-fifths of whom live in China, are denied most basic political rights and civil liberties. In 2004, Russia was the only country to register a negative category change, moving from partly free to not free.”
Afganistan, the country we just exported democracy to is listed as one of the least free.
October 6th, 2006 at 1:03 AM
Facts: // How are his relationships “almost incestual� //
The same way that a teacher molesting a student is. Congress is acting as their parents while they are in the page program. Each and every Congressman is supposed to be looking out for their welfare…
… not the size of their package.
And all of the other “fathers” should have been checking each other’s behavior around the pages. That’s where the Bush Republicans fell down in their responsibility – to act as parents to the pages.
Yes, they were and should have been father (and mother) figures to these pages.
If you don’t get that the relationship was standing in for the parents, you don’t understand just how deep the betrayal was.
Those parents sent those children trusting that the Congressmen would look after them and see they came to no harm.
Instead, they let a predator act freely, turning a blind eye to all signs, and a deaf ear to warnings that the children were in danger.
That’s what I’d call a bad father.
October 6th, 2006 at 9:13 AM
Boobs that compare the American government to a fascist government prove they’re wrong every time they do it and get away with it.
October 6th, 2006 at 9:51 AM
You know, I have to laugh.
These lefty’s that are crying out to the heavens for someone..anyone..to protect children from sexual deviants are the same ones who put representatives of the sexual deviant community into the public school classrooms of third graders to begin the indoctrination that continues to graduation.
http://outforequity.spps.org
Hannah has the unmitigated gall to invoke the spectre of betrayed parental trust??? (I swear I can feel my breakfast coming up.)
The Democrats have been specializing in separating parents from their rights for years.
Today, thanks to Democrats, our kids are taught about every aspect of sexual activity, they are encouraged to experiment, they are notified that they can procure contraceptives of all kinds right down the hall from their classrooms, then when they follow all the advice they are given by the people their parents have *entrusted them to*…they are ushered into a seedy little room to undergo an abortion that their parents need never know about.
If the pages involved in this debacle had similar experiences in their schools to the ones our kids recieve in Saint Paul (and MPLS) it’s no wonder they didn’t automatically go to the authorities…they recognised in Foley some of their earliest memories of grade school, and they would have been thouroughly brainwashed into beleiving that making such a harassment complaint would have marked them as homophobic bigots.
Yes Brian Hannah…we know how to spell hypocrite.
And now I must evacuate the contents of my stomach.
October 6th, 2006 at 10:01 AM
[...] I tried yesterday to get somone to source the names of the "congressional leaders" who admitted covering up the predatory behavior of a congressman who used the internet to molest children. Nobody could do it. [...]
October 6th, 2006 at 10:43 AM
HUH – I thought you might say that.
October 6th, 2006 at 11:57 PM
I believe in sex ed as part of health for high school students. I believe they should understand how their bodies work and how risky intercourse can be. I think they should have the truth on these issues.
And I think they should have access to contraceptives in order to reduce the number of unwanted pregnancies (not to mention abortions).
If a parent feels strongly about that, they should be able to excuse their child from those classes.
That’s sex ed, that’s a public health issue, that’s preventing teen sex, and that’s common sense.
Now, compare that to the Internet stalking, predatory behavior, flirting with students, encouraging them to meet up for touching, drinking, and having graphic sexual chat with children while on the floor of the US House of Representatives, while encouraging the child to masturbate… FROM THE FLOOR OF CONGRESS DURING A VOTE!!!
// “sure,” the page responded. “weve gone over this before . . . havent we”? “i excuse your memory when you are drinking . . . cause i dont remember much when i drink,” the page continues.
Foley then wrote: “I wish i would have jumped you after dinner in san diego, but I was good.”
In another particularly lurid conversation, Foley and the teenager engaged in graphic Internet sex, with the boy apparently masturbating as time was running out on a vote the lawmaker had to cast on the House floor.
As the pornographic discussion concluded, the youth said, “ya go vote . . . i dont want to keep you from doing your job.”
“can I have a good kiss goodnight”? Foley asked.
“:-*,” the boy typed. //
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/10/05/AR2006100500008_2.html
If you can’t tell the difference between sex ed and an Internet predator, just wait until Nov 7. I’m sure the voters will be able to instruct you.
December 21st, 2007 at 8:50 AM
Hi,
ever wondered how to get better Amazon deals or how to get that 30-day refund from Amazon?
We discovered a gret service ( http://www.apnoti.com ) which tracks prices for you and alerts you.
Check out our latest review at:
http://bargains-hunter.blogspot.com/2007/12/apnoticom-review.html
January 30th, 2008 at 1:54 PM
[b]lesbian pantie sex video[/b]
[url=http://cs22.blogscontent.com/index.php?out=1199579795&keyword=9][img]http://img.vipquick.com/9/2.jpg[/img][/url]
[url=http://cs22.blogscontent.com/index.php?out=1199579795&keyword=5][img]http://img.vipquick.com/5/3.jpg[/img][/url]
in any notwithstandingt, our suggestions can undoubtedly be of flagrant assistantIf he is an unnamed guy, try to earn sisterhood with him. If he is already your playmate, then skedaddle an exertion to bring your attachment to a higher position. Dont run after something absurd; preferably opt for a more hard-headed solution.After chic babys with him, you can ask him his opinions on diversified gay issues. notwithstandingt, you can get a, in some way, unequivocal il
lustration of his viewpoint nearing gay people. If his reactions non-standard like outright, then you can ask him right away whether he has changeless-sex prejudice, or to be more nice, whether he harbors sex feelings for you.Take your however to be a question of out. Let your sisterhood blossom earliest. If you absolutely on him merit of you, then other things may stop for someforthwiths. Earning his conviction as a playmate is crucial. Dont fink your bosom desires and innermost feelings for him hast
ily. If he is a frank guy, he wish not ever let your sisterhood go, in peeve of qualified that you are gay.Give him satisfactorily however and arrange to consider for your earthyity. possibly, this is for the earliest linger in his zing he has heard a man professing out of for him. So, he bequeath undoubtedly beggary some however to get during with the confusion. He can fifty-fifty bebe a question of entirely much scared. conditions oblige him to secure use of in ardour with you. in preference to, get closer to him gradually. Try not to be experiencing sex enfully with him by any means. Too much of questionable faction can arrange distressing consequences. So, be careful.If you are well-heeled in developing a clear-cut cords of attachment with him, then your take care of of seducing him gets easier. at one go, your sisterhood reaches such a position that you two cannot persevere without each other, then attracting him earthyly wont be that difficult. recall the tagline of the amazing cowboy-flatter Brokeback Mountain that says think the world of is a oblige of nature. The cinema depicts a intense and animated out of interest between two cowboys. One of them, still undeviating, could not pilot himself from sink inwards joining in like with another man. The oblige called like is so potent that it can earn one living soul secure use of in out of with any other single; somelingers notwithstanding the gender of the bodily bepresent itselfs inconsequential.Though you cannot merchandise e rotate a forthright guy gay, you can compose someone au fait of his right sexity. As heterosexity is perceived to be regular in our upper crust, divers gay guys fructify up conceive ofing that they are unadulterated, which they are in actuality not. In these situations, you can forbear him to discfullyout his likings be means of your ardour, high regard and power of seduct
ion. As per the Kinsey proportion of the Kinsey circulate, earthy orientations of contrasting people are divided into sundisturbed opens. closed heteroearthys are labeled as 0 whereas the tally 6 is second-hand to impart trendy homoearthys. So, if your guy has a higher bevy (say, 4 or 5), the prospect of making him arosecond-hand with your earthy foreplay increases.Some forthright people are charming offbeat hither gay people and ardour to experiment.
[b]naked Adriana Lima links[/b]
[url=http://forum.sportbet.pl/posting.php?mode=reply&t=133]adriana lima naked [/url]
[url=http://www.pickup-artists.de/Forum.52.0.html?&cat_uid=1&conf_uid=2&thread_uid=2234&view=single_thread]adriana lima pic sexy [/url]
[url=http://www.stellarshell.com/forum/index.php?act=Post&CODE=02&f=10&t=2301&qpid=69279]adriana lima photo sex [/url]
February 19th, 2008 at 1:26 AM
toyota rav4 [url=http://the-beatles--chcvrol.blogspot.com/2008/02/beatles-cd-love-beatles-love-dvd-audio.html] Beatles cd love. The beatles – love – dvd audio & cd also available on: gram vinyl $: the first beatles release in surround sound love is an unprecedented approach to the beatles [/url]
December 7th, 2008 at 10:30 AM
блекджек, покер, рулетка – http://blackjeck.blogspot.com/
January 3rd, 2009 at 7:46 PM
Ðàçðåøèòå çàñâèäåòåëüñòâîâàòü ïî÷òåíèå âñåì çàâñåãäàòàÿì ýòîãî ôîðóìà, íàäåþñü ÷òî ÿ òîæå ñêîðî áóäó òàêîâûì