DEFLOWER POWER

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » September 29, 2006, 9:05 pm

aaaaaaaahahahhahahahahahahhahahahahahahahhhahaah

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060929/ap_ ... an_e_mails

ABC News reported Friday that Foley also engaged in a series of sexually explicit instant messages with current and former teenage male pages. In one message, ABC said, Foley wrote to one page: "Do I make you a little horny?"

In another message, Foley wrote, "You in your boxers, too? ... Well, strip down and get naked."

Foley, as chairman of the Missing and Exploited Children's Caucus, had introduced legislation in July to protect children from exploitation by adults over the Internet. He also sponsored other legislation designed to protect minors from abuse and neglect.

"We track library books better than we do sexual predators," Foley has said.

lolololol

What the fuck is wrong with these nutjob republicans? Fucking disgusting pigs. all of em.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » September 29, 2006, 9:41 pm

I can't wait to see how many votes this guy picks up in the election. My theory is that at least a third of republicans would rather vote for a pedophile than a democrat. They are actually going to walk into a voting booth and vote for a guy they know is a pedophile. And then they're gonna turn around and call themselves "tough" on national security.

abominable, atrocious, bad, base, caitiff, contemptible, corrupt, degenerate, despicable, detestable, disgraceful, dishonorable, disreputable, egregious, evil, flagitious, foul, hateful, heinous, ignominious, ill-famed, iniquitous, loathsome, miscreant, monstrous, nefarious, notorious, odious, offensive, opprobrious, outrageous, perverse, questionable, rotten, scandalous, scurvy, shady, shameful, shocking, sorry, unhealthy, vicious, vile, villainous, wicked.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 29, 2006, 9:52 pm

Xyun wrote:I can't wait to see how many votes this guy picks up in the election.

It says in the article that he resigned and the republicans are looking for a new candidate.

Can always vote independant!

You can't blame a political party for an individuals behavior. As soon as you find out about it, you give them the boot...as Clinton should have been given the boot for getting BJs from Monica while she was employed at the White House.

Drinsic Darkwood · September 29, 2006, 10:03 pm

Dregor Thule · Post by **Dregor Thule** » September 29, 2006, 10:07 pm

Foley's name will still be the one on the ballot, but all votes for him will go to the new guy they pick. NAMBLA represent and win him the election!

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » September 29, 2006, 10:23 pm

Winnow wrote:
Xyun wrote:I can't wait to see how many votes this guy picks up in the election.
It says in the article that he resigned and the republicans are looking for a new candidate.

Can always vote independant!

You can't blame a political party for an individuals behavior. As soon as you find out about it, you give them the boot...as Clinton should have been given the boot for getting BJs from Monica while she was employed at the White House.

Wow, that is the most asinine thing you have ever said, and you say a lot of asinine shit.

First off, his name remains on the ballot regardless of who campaigns. If he wins, the party would pick a replacement. He won last time with 55% of the vote, so he would have to grab at least 90% of those votes to win. So this means that the republican voter would have to walk into the voting booth and vote for a pedophile in the hopes that enough people will feel the same way (deflower power!!) so that their party won't lose to a "dishonorable" democrat. lolol I bet you'd vote for him Winnow.

Secondly, by mentioning Clinton you proclaim, proudly I might add, that you lack the fucking IQ to distinguish between adultery and pedophilia. Proof positive that you are in fact a republican.

Nick · Post by **Nick** » September 29, 2006, 11:12 pm

Has Winnow always been this retarded or is it a new thing?

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » September 29, 2006, 11:35 pm

When he asked for the job heading up the guys Missing and Exploited children, he probably had completely the wrong idea about what it was about.

I can see him going into work the first day with a party hat on and his pants around his ankles going "Alright! Bring on the exploited children!"

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 29, 2006, 11:43 pm

Xyun wrote: Secondly, by mentioning Clinton you proclaim, proudly I might add, that you lack the fucking IQ to distinguish between adultery and pedophilia. Proof positive that you are in fact a republican.

I know the difference and my comment didn't imply otherwise. I said an "individual's behavior". Both were inappropriate. If Bush was caught getting hummers from an intern, I'd want him out just the same. Fucking hypocrites.

So if this happened to a democrat and someone like Barack Obama (example, don't sidetrack the discussion telling me he already holds office...I had to dig deep to find a decent democrat so fuck off) stepped in to be the candidate yet you had to vote for the person that resigned before him because his name had to be on the ballot, you wouldn't?

Fucking short sighted fools. Christ, this dude is done. Move on and focus on who steps forward and then make a decision. I've never seen so many liberal fools grouped in one place that lack the ability to judge both parties equally.

Trek · Post by **Trek** » September 29, 2006, 11:51 pm

Right, all republicans are child molestors, you should run for office on that.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » September 30, 2006, 3:13 am

Winnow wrote:
Xyun wrote: Secondly, by mentioning Clinton you proclaim, proudly I might add, that you lack the fucking IQ to distinguish between adultery and pedophilia. Proof positive that you are in fact a republican.
I know the difference and my comment didn't imply otherwise. I said an "individual's behavior". Both were inappropriate. If Bush was caught getting hummers from an intern, I'd want him out just the same. Fucking hypocrites.

So if this happened to a democrat and someone like Barack Obama (example, don't sidetrack the discussion telling me he already holds office...I had to dig deep to find a decent democrat so fuck off) stepped in to be the candidate yet you had to vote for the person that resigned before him because his name had to be on the ballot, you wouldn't?

Fucking short sighted fools. Christ, this dude is done. Move on and focus on who steps forward and then make a decision. I've never seen so many liberal fools grouped in one place that lack the ability to judge both parties equally.

LMFAO. If bush got a hummer you want him out of office but if he breaks the very laws he's sworn to protect and lies to your face and sends your brethren to fight an illegal war, well golly jee whiz you better vote for him again!!! OH NOES, IT'S INAPPROPRIATE TO GET A BLOW JOB...IMPEACH IMPEACH IMPEACH

Thanks for confirming that you cannot discern between what is inappropriate, what is unethical, and what is blatantly illegal and quite frankly evil. Clue: fucking little boys in the ass is somewhat more abhorrent than hmmm.. everything you can do to a person short of killing them. It's pure torture, but well, we know how you people feel about that subject as well...

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 30, 2006, 4:35 am

You still seem to think I'm placing having sexual relations with a subordinate on the same level as pedophilia. I'm not. I'm saying both warrant getting the person booted from office...lying under oath about it afterwards is icing on the cake.

While Bush is protecting us from the brownies in the Middle East and making plans to nuke Iran, he probably deserves a hummer or two...just don't lie under oath about it...and get them from a legitimate whore, not an intern!

This reminds me of the commercial for the new movie where Robbin Williams plays a comedian that gets elected as president of the United States.

Journalist: Mr President. Did you have sexual relations with that women?

President: No, but I wanted to!

kyoukan · Post by **kyoukan** » September 30, 2006, 5:10 am

winnow, remind me why you even bother to post outside of comic book forum?

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » September 30, 2006, 6:27 am

to save your posts from the retards forum

Cartalas · Post by **Cartalas** » September 30, 2006, 2:01 pm

kyoukan wrote:winnow, remind me why you even bother to post outside of comic book forum?

I could ask the question Why the fuck are you still living?

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » October 1, 2006, 11:23 pm

Trek wrote:Right, all republicans are child molestors, you should run for office on that.

i made a thread about this

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 2, 2006, 12:04 am

How old was this ex-page when the emails were sent? that's one thing I haven't found yet.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » October 2, 2006, 12:28 am

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » October 2, 2006, 10:01 am

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.

Rep. Mark Foley, R-West Palm Beach On Bill Clinton - 1998.

That shit there is ironical!

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » October 2, 2006, 10:24 am

This just in, he has checked into rehab!

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 2, 2006, 11:12 am

Pherr the Dorf wrote:This just in, he has checked into rehab!

OMG that will fix it ALL!

vn_Tanc · Post by **vn_Tanc** » October 2, 2006, 11:43 am

Let's hit the showers and wash this gay off

Kaldaur · Post by **Kaldaur** » October 2, 2006, 12:03 pm

Jason Jones ftw

masteen · Post by **masteen** » October 2, 2006, 3:59 pm

I find it very ironic that every time someone in the "Moral Party" gets busted cheating on his spouse, it's in a completely perverted and usually illegal manner.

At least the Dems cheat with consenting adults.

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » October 2, 2006, 5:33 pm

masteen wrote:I find it very ironic that every time someone in the "Moral Party" gets busted cheating on his spouse, it's in a completely perverted and usually illegal manner.

At least the Dems cheat with consenting adults.

of the opposite sex

Keverian FireCry · Post by **Keverian FireCry** » October 2, 2006, 10:40 pm

This just in, he has checked into rehab!

Yup, here's the one he checked into.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » October 3, 2006, 3:36 am

House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a radio interview with conservative commentator Sean Hannity that the party's replacement candidate is all but doomed. Because of ballot procedures in Florida, "to vote for this candidate, you have to vote for Mark Foley," Boehner said. "How many people are going to hold their nose to do that?"

Zaelath · Post by **Zaelath** » October 3, 2006, 4:12 am

Do you pronounce that name "boner"?

Boogahz · Post by **Boogahz** » October 3, 2006, 9:32 am

Xyun wrote:House Majority Leader John A. Boehner (R-Ohio) said in a radio interview with conservative commentator Sean Hannity that the party's replacement candidate is all but doomed. Because of ballot procedures in Florida, "to vote for this candidate, you have to vote for Mark Foley," Boehner said. "How many people are going to hold their nose to do that?"

Yeah, it's similar here in Texas which is why Tom DeLay could not be removed from the ballots.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 3, 2006, 1:31 pm

Xyun wrote:Because of ballot procedures in Florida, "to vote for this candidate, you have to vote for Mark Foley," Boehner said. "How many people are going to hold their nose to do that?"

Only the ones smart enough to separate politics and the future from a name on the ballot that's out of the picture for non party personal issues. Judging from this forum, that's not too many.

Reverse the situation. If a democrat got into the same trouble (yes, it can/will happen), would you vote for a neocon simply because a previous democrat had non party personal issues?

I'll make it simple. Say George Bush could run for president again. The democrat candidate is sent to jail for raping his mother and then eating her ovaries. Are you going to vote for George Bush because the democrat candidate flipped out or are you going to take into consideration the democrat's replacement candidate even though you have to actually vote for the guy that raped his mother?

*~*stragi*~* · Post by ***~*stragi*~*** » October 3, 2006, 1:34 pm

i would vote for the mother raper because atleast he's not a chomo republican homosexual like most all republicans

lesser of two evils lols

Animalor · Post by **Animalor** » October 3, 2006, 2:06 pm

They should just have ballots that read DEMOCRATS, REPUBLICANS and OTHER.

Jice Virago · Post by **Jice Virago** » October 3, 2006, 2:26 pm

Actually, if a Dem got nailed for something like this and the alternative was a mother raping shit eater neocon, I would simply abstain from voting at all. Frankly, there just is not enough time to make an unbiased judgement of a replacement canidate, anyhow. Anyhow, the real story is the GOP leadership covering this up for years. Its never the scandal that gets you, its always the coverup.

Post by **Sylvus** » October 3, 2006, 2:39 pm

Winnow wrote:
Xyun wrote:Because of ballot procedures in Florida, "to vote for this candidate, you have to vote for Mark Foley," Boehner said. "How many people are going to hold their nose to do that?"
Only the ones smart enough to separate politics and the future from a name on the ballot that's out of the picture for non party personal issues. Judging from this forum, that's not too many.

Reverse the situation. If a democrat got into the same trouble (yes, it can/will happen), would you vote for a neocon simply because a previous democrat had non party personal issues?

Conversely, I think it's kind of dumb to look at the ballot and go "Well, it's either a goddamn Democrat or whoever is replacing the pedophile. I hate democrats, so the choice is obvious..."

Voting for a party is kind of stupid. Particularly when, at least as far as I'm aware of, the Republican tickets across the country are going to feature several more [Name Redacted] options than the democrats are fielding this year. I feel like that might say something about the party. Maybe that's just me, though.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 3, 2006, 2:55 pm

Sylvus wrote:
Voting for a party is kind of stupid.

I agree. I wasn't suggesting a vote based solely on party alignment. I attempted several times in this thread to suggest that the vote be based off of the replacement candidates' credentials.

Individuals flip out all the time.

It's like blaming Disney for one of their workers dressed up in a costume caught molesting children when there was a full background check and nothing was found to indicate the person would do such a thing.

All I'm saying is consider the new candiate and not the name on the ballot unless it is proven that republicans encouraged him to send sexually oriented messages to young boys or that they covered it up. Proof, not speculation.

Arborealus · Post by **Arborealus** » October 3, 2006, 6:05 pm

I didn't realize that log cabins had such capacious closets.

Ashur · Post by **Ashur** » October 3, 2006, 6:21 pm

I think more people tend to think of voting AGAINST something than for it. Say for example, Kerry in 2004. people weren't going "John Kerry, yeah he's our man", they were going "Hell ya, I'm voting Bush out!". No one I know who voted for Kerry sang his praises other than "He's not Bush"

And this is also what the whole Marriage recognition between a man and a woman was to do when that bullshit hit the polls. The RNC could give a rat's-ass whether it passed or not, they wanted to drive the folks to the polls who would vote AGAINST Democrats.

I'm dying to see what the GOP has up thier sleeves for November. Supposedly this is the election they've been planning for for a decade to keep the lame duck president's mid-term election from undercutting his party's power base.

Pherr the Dorf · Post by **Pherr the Dorf** » October 3, 2006, 11:00 pm

Lead time on any powerful story is 5-6 weeks, this did not come out when it did on accident. Brilliant play of 4 aces by the dems, grats house and senate to them in the end I bet.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 4, 2006, 12:42 am

Foley alleges clergyman abused him as teen

Former Rep. Mark Foley was molested as a teen by a clergyman, his attorney says. David Roth added the admission was made as part of Foley's recovery program at a treatment center. The growing scandal erupted Friday when Foley quit amid questions over e-mails allegedly sent to a former page.

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/10/03/ ... index.html

Now that's just pathetic...pulling out the "I was molested myself" excuse...By the time you're 50, you should have figured things out.

Xyun · Post by **Xyun** » October 4, 2006, 2:06 am

Winnow wrote:
Sylvus wrote:
Voting for a party is kind of stupid.
I agree. I wasn't suggesting a vote based solely on party alignment. I attempted several times in this thread to suggest that the vote be based off of the replacement candidates' credentials.

Individuals flip out all the time.

It's like blaming Disney for one of their workers dressed up in a costume caught molesting children when there was a full background check and nothing was found to indicate the person would do such a thing.

All I'm saying is consider the new candiate and not the name on the ballot unless it is proven that republicans encouraged him to send sexually oriented messages to young boys or that they covered it up. Proof, not speculation.

I would never go through the act of giving my vote, arguably the most prized privilege this society affords me, to the name of a pedophile regardless of the surrounding circumstances. It has to do with dignity and not being a fucking sell out, idiosyncrasies which I have frequently seen you surrender in the name of greed disguised as logic, exactly as you are doing here. So please spare me your justifications you pompous ass, I already know them. Your time would be better spent doing what you excel at, namely, pretending to be something you're not. Your bastardization of this forum has always been and will always be transparent, even to the fucking amateurs.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 4, 2006, 3:50 am

Xyun wrote: I would never go through the act of giving my vote, arguably the most prized privilege this society affords me, to the name of a pedophile regardless of the surrounding circumstances.

OK there Uncle Sam Jr. Your vote is there to do whatever you wish with. I'm not a republican and am pretty much set on voting for a democrat candidate for president next election barring a Hillary presidential or vice presidential nomination.

My points above were regardless of political party. Who fucking cares what some loser did on his own? He's out. New guy in. Move on and quit dwelling on some dude's freakshow like a tabloid addict.

The democrats obviously had this planned out and were waiting for the right moment. Why not bitch about them for not outing this guy at a less opportune time? Ah, because it's all strategy and neither party gives a shit about your dignity speeches. Either candidate would sell you for a dollar if it would win them the election.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » October 4, 2006, 3:57 am

Winnow wrote:
Xyun wrote: I would never go through the act of giving my vote, arguably the most prized privilege this society affords me, to the name of a pedophile regardless of the surrounding circumstances.
OK there Uncle Sam Jr. Your vote is there to do whatever you wish with. I'm not a republican and am pretty much set on voting for a democrat candidate for president next election barring a Hillary presidential or vice presidential nomination.

My points above were regardless of political party. Who fucking cares what some loser did on his own? He's out. New guy in. Move on and quit dwelling on some dude's freakshow like a tabloid addict.

The democrats obviously had this planned out and were waiting for the right moment. Why not bitch about them for not outing this guy at a less opportune time? Ah, because it's all strategy and neither party gives a shit about your dignity speeches. Either candidate would sell you for a dollar if it would win them the election.

So, a republican child molestor gets outted and you somehow manage to blame the Democrats? Jesus fucking christ, that's the dumbest thing I've read in a long time on this board.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 4, 2006, 4:43 am

I'm not blaming the democrats for this guy being a pedo. Jesus, you should be in politics yourself as a campaign manager if you like twisting things like that.

Things are done for political gain, otherwise this guy would have been outted earlier so another candidate could be on the ticket and Uncle Sam Jr would be happy about voting for the next person simply due to the timing.

I hope you're not that naive to think these pages all the sudden sprung up and took action two days ago. These things are orchestrated on both sides when they get a chance...same with when Clinton was fucking around.

Hoarmurath · Post by **Hoarmurath** » October 4, 2006, 12:44 pm

Oops, Fox News made a typo.

Fairweather Pure · Post by **Fairweather Pure** » October 4, 2006, 2:07 pm

Winnow wrote:Jesus, you should be in politics yourself as a campaign manager if you like twisting things like that.

Winnow wrote:The democrats obviously had this planned out and were waiting for the right moment. Why not bitch about them for not outing this guy at a less opportune time?

Your words, not mine. I'm not spinning shit. I'm pointing out your laughable reasoning for getting upset at the entire Democratic party because a Republican child molestor was outted. You really gotta have a vivid imagination and fill in all sorts of loopholes to make that whacko theory seem remotely plausible.

I think you need to upgrade to a bigger tin foil hat.

Winnow · Post by **Winnow** » October 4, 2006, 2:31 pm

Fairweather Pure wrote: I think you need to upgrade to a bigger tin foil hat.

It's not the size of the tin foil hat. It has to be the right dimensions and can't be crinkled.

Hesten · Post by **Hesten** » October 4, 2006, 2:33 pm

Hoarmurath wrote:Oops, Fox News made a typo.

The sad part is that there are STILL people out there thinking that Fox News are unpartial.

Markulas · Post by **Markulas** » October 4, 2006, 2:47 pm

We report, You decide.. wrongly.

Aabidano · Post by **Aabidano** » October 4, 2006, 4:23 pm

List I ran across, he definately needs to switch parties:

10. Sen. Daniel Inouye. The 82-year-old Hawaii Democrat was accused in the 1990s by numerous women of sexual harassment. Democrats cast doubt on the allegations and the Senate Ethics Committee dropped its investigation.

9. Former Rep. Gus Savage. The Illinois Democrat was accused of fondling a Peace Corps volunteer in 1989 while on a trip to Africa. The House Ethics Committee decided against disciplinary action in 1990.

8. Rep. Barney Frank. The outspoken Massachusetts Democrat hired a male prostitute who ran a prostitution service from Frank’s residence in the 1980s. Only two Democrats in the House of Representatives voted to censure him in 1990.

7. Former Sen. Brock Adams. The late Washington Democrat was forced to stop campaigning after numerous accusations of drugging, assault and rape, the first surfacing in 1988.

6. Former Rep. Fred Richmond. This New York Democrat was arrested in 1978 for soliciting sex from a 16-year-old. He remained in Congress and won re-election—before eventually resigning in 1982 after pleading guilty to tax evasion and drug possession.

5. Former Rep. John Young. The late Texas Democrat increased the salary of a staffer after she gave in to his sexual advances. The congressman won re-election in 1976 but lost two years later.

4. Former Rep. Wayne Hays. The late Ohio Democrat hired an unqualified secretary reportedly for sexual acts. Although he resigned from Congress, the Democratic House leadership stalled in removing him from the Administration Committee in 1976.

3. Former Rep. Gerry Studds. He was censured for sexual relationship with underage male page in 1983. Massachusetts voters returned him to office for six more terms.

2. Former Rep. Mel Reynolds. The Illinois Democrat was convicted of 12 counts of sexual assault with a 16-year-old. President Bill Clinton pardoned him before leaving office.

1. Sen. Teddy Kennedy. The liberal Massachusetts senator testified in defense of nephew accused of rape, invoking his family history to win over the jury in 1991.

Marbus · Post by **Marbus** » October 4, 2006, 5:05 pm

Hmmm... I don't think it's a party thing, look at the dates of almost all of those.

I have to agree with Begala, it's a power thing... once you get it, you don't want to give it up or let anything threaten it. I'm a Democrat but there was a lot of corruption by 1992 and change was necessary.

In the last 14 years though the Republican have shown they are no better and IMHO worse because of how divided the nation has become. They probably have had less sex scandles that we know about but I'm sure more monetary ones.

Marb