caeron Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 Ok, so I'm sure everybody has heard enough about Foley, but I can't be the only one here who thought, "Dude, there are excellent escorts in DC. Just go get your dick sucked and lay off the kids." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TotallyOz Posted October 8, 2006 Share Posted October 8, 2006 I think the answer to this is that he was sick. Not sick that he fell for the Paige but sick that he was so closeted for so long. I have always believed that if gays were more accepted in all aspects of society that men would not do stupid things like Foley did. I think the years of not being able to be openly gay led him to flirt with any cute guy he saw. I do not believe this would have been the case if he had been able to go frequently to the gay bars in DC and get laid. Just my opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lucky Posted October 8, 2006 Members Share Posted October 8, 2006 I once read a story in the newspaper about a judge who had been arrested for having sex with an underage prostitute. At his sentencing, the judge said that if he had had the courage to come out the incident would have never happened. He lost his judgeship despite having been repeatedly selected as the judge of the year. He later found success at arbitration. I actually wrote the judge and met him in person.He was one of the smartest and most interesting men I have ever met. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest StuCotts Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 Being closeted is no excuse for being an idiot. In this computerized age Foley could have accessed any number of sites with escorts of every conceivable appearance and inclination. Instead he has wrecked his own life, which I can't help thinking he deserves. Much more important, he has strengthened the hand of those who delight in screaming to the four winds that being gay is equivalent to being a predatory pedophile. That has to be bad for all of us. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted October 10, 2006 Share Posted October 10, 2006 It may get worse. Today the blogs and forums are buzzing with rumors about Hastert himself. Apparently started by Lawrence O'Donnell, who blogged it on Huffington and reportedly also said so on The McLaughlin Group. http://www.huffingtonpost.com/lawrence-odo...er_b_31171.html Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted October 10, 2006 Author Share Posted October 10, 2006 Wow. That is really beyond wierd to room with your chief of staff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Lucky Posted October 11, 2006 Members Share Posted October 11, 2006 Such a dilemma. Should I try to have sex with Dennis Hastert or Andre??? Hmmm. How to decide...On the one hand, Hastert is powerful, at least for now, on the other hand Andre is hot and Hastert is...not. But then maybe I should pick Barney Frank or Jim Kolbe. But Kolbe's retiirng and Barney isn't hot either. So what about Jordan Edmund, Foley's onlkine sex buddy? He's kind of cute if a bit of a butterball... Hmmm, once Hastert is outed, then he won't be powerful and Andre will still be hot. Okay. I've decided! Andre wins! (If you come to a different conclusion, remember, we can't always be on the same page here!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest SouthernMan Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 > >Ok, so I'm sure everybody has heard enough about Foley, but I >can't be the only one here who thought, "Dude, there are >excellent escorts in DC. Thoughts are just that, thoughts, and as such, they rarely correspond to reality. FYI, there are NO "excellent escorts in DC", just adequate ones, and NO twinks, at least in the generally perceived notion of what a "twink" is. > Just go get your dick sucked and lay >off the kids." Since when is an 18 yo man a kid? 18 yos can vote, and can "die in combat for this country", but when it comes to simple sex, they are "kids"??? Now, I expect such intolerance from web sites that are chock-full of homophobes (e.g. CraigsList), but to hear it on a gay site, especially one centered around the ILLEGAL hiring of male prostitutes, is just what what again?? "astounding"???? Especially when the "MORALIZING" comes from men who hire boys young enough to be their sons, if not their grandsons!!! :-( :-( :-( :-( :- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members marcanthony Posted October 11, 2006 Members Share Posted October 11, 2006 >Such a dilemma. Should I try to have sex with Dennis Hastert >or Andre??? . Okay. I've decided! Andre wins! > But the real question is: Would you have sex with Hastert for $200 an hour? And if not, then not only should you have sex with Andre, but you should give him the credit he deserves.... because he would! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BewareofNick Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 >> >>Ok, so I'm sure everybody has heard enough about Foley, >but I >>can't be the only one here who thought, "Dude, there >are >>excellent escorts in DC. > >Thoughts are just that, thoughts, and as such, they rarely >correspond to reality. FYI, there are NO "excellent >escorts in DC", just adequate ones, and NO twinks, at >least in the generally perceived notion of what a >"twink" is. > >> Just go get your dick sucked and lay >>off the kids." > > >Since when is an 18 yo man a kid? 18 yos can vote, and can >"die in combat for this country", but when it comes >to simple sex, they are "kids"??? These pages were under 18. What are you talking about? > >Now, I expect such intolerance from web sites that are >chock-full of homophobes (e.g. CraigsList), but to hear it on >a gay site, especially one centered around the ILLEGAL hiring >of male prostitutes, is just what what again?? >"astounding"???? > >Especially when the "MORALIZING" comes from men who >hire boys young enough to be their sons, if not their >grandsons!!! :-( :-( :-( :-( :- Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conway Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Not necessarily I'm not going to defend what representative Folet did because I believe that he celarly crossed the ethical line of responsibility in leveraging the relationships between himself and the house pages for personal sexual pleasure. In my book of ethics what Bill Clinton did with Monica lewinsky was no different. Evidence uncovered by internet bloggers, in the form of Jordan Edmund's AOL profile and MYSpace page indicate that he was 18 at the time that the IMs published by ABC News were exchanged between himself and Foley The press seems to be conveniently ignoring that fact in its coverage of the story. It is also noted that the age of consent between two adults in the District of Columbia is 16. If Foley's communications represent sexual solicitation, and if they occurred with anyone over the age of 16, they're not illegal because none of the pages were under the age of 16 at the time that these Ims were exchanged. It's a legal technicality and doesn't mitigate the fact that Foley participated inapporpriate communications with an intern and/or page. However, its hard to characterize it as a violation of the law. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BewareofNick Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 >Not necessarily I'm not going to defend what representative >Folet did because I believe that he celarly crossed the >ethical line of responsibility in leveraging the relationships >between himself and the house pages for personal sexual >pleasure. In my book of ethics what Bill Clinton did with >Monica lewinsky was no different. Agreed, but trying to minimize a Republican's actions by once again invoking Bill Clinton gets very very old after a while. Just because Clinton did something doesn't make it right for Republicans nor does it minimize what happened. >Evidence uncovered by internet bloggers, in the form of Jordan >Edmund's AOL profile and MYSpace page indicate that he was 18 >at the time that the IMs published by ABC News were exchanged >between himself and Foley The press seems to be conveniently >ignoring that fact in its coverage of the story. Are they? Do you know how many kids on MySpace lie about their age? >It is also noted that the age of consent between two adults in >the District of Columbia is 16. If Foley's communications >represent sexual solicitation, and if they occurred with >anyone over the age of 16, they're not illegal because none of >the pages were under the age of 16 at the time that these Ims >were exchanged. > >It's a legal technicality and doesn't mitigate the fact that >Foley participated inapporpriate communications with an intern >and/or page. However, its hard to characterize it as a >violation of the law. Then why did Foley resign? There's likely more going on here than anyone realizes and I believe that there is more than just one page involved. Let me guess, this was all reported on Fox "News", right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
caeron Posted October 11, 2006 Author Share Posted October 11, 2006 Talvin Demachio is DC based. As for the kids comment - I didn't say he was doing anything illegal, but at the very least it's extremely tacky, and more likely unethical to have this kind of relationship with pages. Just because I'm gay, and hire, doesn't mean I have no moral compass about using a position of authority to sate your sexual fantasies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 >and Barney isn't hot either. Not so fast. Barney's better-looking in person than on the tube. Even before he came out, Beltway insiders noted his lifting routine and how much he can bench-press. Anyway, talking LTR not ONS, you have to listen to them for a long time. On that score Barney and Andre tie -- both great conversationalists. >we can't >always be on the same page here!) LOL. Shades of Gerry Studds-era cracks about marking your reading matter by bending over a page. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Buddy2 Posted October 11, 2006 Members Share Posted October 11, 2006 I lived in Barney Frank's congressional district outside of Boston for several years. I met Barney during several campaign appearances in the district. Just me perhaps, but I didn't think Barney Frank was sexy or hot in any way. Congressman Frank would make an interesting travel companion. He's interesting and charmingl; no one would ever be bored. People may not know that Frank had a highly rated talk show before running for Congress. Again, this may be a matter of what I find sexy versus someone else's opinion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 >Just me perhaps, but I didn't think Barney Frank was sexy or >hot in any way. Granted my liking Barney this way is doubtless a minority view. But then I like trannies and even the occasional girl, when not being fucked senseless by Andre. File Frank likewise in the anomaly bin. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted October 11, 2006 Share Posted October 11, 2006 Word is that Ariana Huffington will be on Larry King tonight along with others chewing over Foleygate. Will she out Hastert? Worth sitting through King's banalities to find out. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conway Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 I hope that it doesn't appear that I have tried to minimize the severity of Foley's extremely poor choices here. Because that wasn't my intent at all. In my mind, given the fact that it appears that all of the pages who were involved in this communication with Foley were of the age of consent, I view former President Clinton's leveraging of Monica Lewinsky, Gennifer Flowers and anyone else with the same disdain that I have for the actions of former Representative Foley in leveraging his relationship with at least two pages that we know of. Both men are fools in my book. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Buddy2 Posted October 12, 2006 Members Share Posted October 12, 2006 Foley spent endless hours ' mentoring' each new class of pages. He cried during a farewell speech to one group of pages. For years, it was an open secret among the pages that Foley was someone to stay away from. Whether or not this grooming eventually led to sex, the behavior was totally inappropriate. Foley was old enough to be a grandfather to the most recent group of pages. Yes Bill Clinton is no shining beacon of behavior, but at least the women he was involved with were all older than Foley's pages. You just had to drag Clinton into this, didn't you. If you were really interested in a serious discussion, Garry Studds was the name to bring up. Given your obsession with Clinton, I could less less about your 'contempt' for him. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 A minor point that in no way excuses any of Clinton's behavior. But for the record, remember that Monicagate was by everyone's account consensual and initiated by Lewinsky. No one has yet suggested that any page flashed his jock strap or otherwise came on to Foley. OK, in deference to Site Admin's wise no-politics request, I will now shut up. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conway Posted October 12, 2006 Share Posted October 12, 2006 "Yes Bill Clinton is no shining beacon of behavior, but at least the women he was involved with were all older than Foley's pages." There was a five year age difference between Monica Lewinsky at the time she did indeed engage in a sex act with Bill Clinton and this young man who engaged in IM sex with Foley. Both were of age, and both appear to have engaged in these acts of their own volition. There was no sex act between Foley and the page though it appears that he did have sex with a former page after he had left the program. The point here is that both Clinton and Foley engaged in inappropriate relationships with young people for whom they should have been a role model versus a paramour. Gerry Studds was different than both, though in my mind equally disgusting, in that he actually engaged in sex with someone under the age of consent at the time of their sexual act. Foley and Clinton are unethical and unacceptable. Studds and Barney Frank very likely engaged in criminal acts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Members Buddy2 Posted October 13, 2006 Members Share Posted October 13, 2006 >The point here is that both Clinton and Foley engaged in >inappropriate relationships with young people for whom they >should have been a role model versus a paramour. Gerry Studds >was different than both, though in my mind equally disgusting, >in that he actually engaged in sex with someone under the age >of consent at the time of their sexual act. > >Foley and Clinton are unethical and unacceptable. Studds and >Barney Frank very likely engaged in criminal acts. The age of consent is 16 in the District of Columbia. The page whom Studds was involved with was 17. Frank was not involved with any male pages. His problem was an escort 'friend' turning tricks for money from Frank's DC apartment. To me, Studds' and Foley's behavior is far worse than Clinton's or Frank's. In fact, Frank doesn't even belong in this discussion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AdamSmith Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 OK, I lied. One more post about this. Re Frank: Right. The House censured Barney for fixing his bf's parking tickets. Lest we lose the main point, the key Foleygate question is: was there a party-interest-driven coverup? If yes, then this thing is bigger and worse than the Studds case. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Conway Posted October 13, 2006 Share Posted October 13, 2006 "was there a party-interest-driven coverup? If yes, then this thing is bigger and worse than the Studds case." Concur 100%. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
