Child Saftey

I guess this guy was focused on the fanny instead:

A Colorado Springs man who narrates the Bible in Spanish on CDs and works in the Spanish broadcasting department of Focus on the Family appeared in court Monday in Golden on two felony counts of using the Internet to lure a 15-year-old girl for sex, The Denver Post reports.

Juan Alberto Ovalle, 42, was arrested Friday when he drove to Lakewood to meet the girl — who turned out to be an undercover officer — after discussing various sexual acts he wanted to perform with her, the Jefferson County District Attorney’s Office said.

Ovalle, a native of the Dominican Republic, is listed as the “Voice Narrator/Artist” of the Spanish Reina Valera Biblia, available on 64 CDs, and can be heard here discussing an upcoming Focus on the Family conference with directors of the evangelical empire’s outreach to the Spanish-speaking community.

People like James Dobson spend all this time worrying about those “evil gays, ruining society'”, when they have actual predators on the payroll, and religious leaders wonder why there is a “crisis of faith” in our country. Intelligence and common sense  isn’t in  any abundance with this crowd – that’s for sure.

So images should be illegal, but someone actually pursuing a minor for sex shouldn't?

Millions of commercial Web sites and personal blogs would be required to report illegal images or videos posted by their users or pay fines of up to $300,000, if a new proposal in the U.S. Senate came into law.

The legislation, drafted by Sen. John McCain and obtained by CNET News.com, would also require Web sites that offer user profiles to delete pages posted by sex offenders.

In a speech on the Senate floor Wednesday, the Arizona Republican and former presidential candidate warned that "technology has contributed to the greater distribution and availability, and, some believe, desire for child pornography." McCain scored 31 of 100 points on a News.com 2006 election guide scoring technology-related votes.

Child pornography is wrong, as the children are getting hurt. Children also get hurt when someone pursues them via the internet trying to arrange for sex, especially when other people tell them not to say anything. Sound familiar Mr. Foley?

If McCain is serious about this legislation then he must look within the halls of Congress first and come out and chastise those who KNEW Mark Foley was going after children and did nothing. He must also blast the House Ethics Committee for saying there was "no wrong" in that disgusting act.

So why doesn't McCain's legislation address things like Foley was doing? Because he really doesn't care. He thinks this is a good measure to try and woo the Christian conservatives. If he was really concerned, his legislation would include language to make sure another Mark Foley never surfaces in Congress. Of course the leaders of this country are held to much lower standards than the citizens.

I did a post last week trying to make the argument that the fact Mark Foley had to live a life of shame because he was a member of a party that would not accept his sexuality. In turn this life of shame leads down a dangerous road that can lead to the behavior that caused Foley's downfall. This is not a result of him being gay, but rather a result of the intolerance by people in our society - namely the Republican Party and Christian right.

Aravosis has found an article in today's L.A. Times by gay writer and activist Michelangelo Signorile that echoes my same thoughts:

Foley's closet wasn't just about protecting his political career. He seemed to be filled with shame. According to one gay man quoted in the Washington Post last week who challenged Foley on his voting for the Defense of Marriage Act in 1996, Foley justified marginalizing gay marriage by saying, "I could never compare any relationship I have ever had to the nature of my mother and father's relationship."

For Foley, homosexuality meant second-class status.

That kind of self-loathing is bound to play out in harmful ways. Would Foley have made online sexual advances on teenagers if he were openly gay or if he'd been reported on, truthfully, by the media as a gay man long ago, and faced the consequences? It's quite possible the answer is no.

The radical right is of course trying to say that child predators are a by product of homosexuality. Nothing could be further from the truth. Simply search for cases of child molestation/internet predators and you will quickly see that almost all cases involve a predator preying on someone of the opposite sex. Watch Nightline's "To Catch a Predator" and you will notice one thing in common amongst all the people caught - they were going after the opposite sex.

Foley was forced into leading this secret life. There are rumors that he did have a partner, but even if that is the case the fact remains he still had to live a life of secrecy. He could not openly talk about his private life in front of his own colleagues. To make matters even worse, Foley was being forced to continue this charade by people within his own party. He wanted out of Congress, yet key players in the GOP (including Karl Rove) refused to let him resign. They kept him there by threatening his future career of lobbying. In other words, Foley is a product of the system the Republicans want to create, and that product is very dangerous.

There have been a slew of new polls come out in the last couple of days. Instead of going through each one and doing graphs and highlighting points (that would make a huge post), I have decided to link to them.

• CBS News Poll
• CBS/New York Times Poll
• CNN Poll
• Washington Post/ABC Poll
• USA Today/Gallup

For the highlights

• Bush's job approval rating keeps dropping and has even reached some new lows
• Every poll has people voting for Democrats over Republicans this fall, with an average of a 15% margin in favor of Democrats
• Democrats are now seen as the party best to handle EVERYTHING. This includes moral issues, economy, national security.
• An average of 2/3rds of the respondents on all polls feel that the Republican Leadership has been covering up the Foley scandal. The interesting part is all polls worded the emails as "sexually explicit".
• According to the CBS/Ny Times poll, the Republicans have a 39% favorable rating. The last time it was this low was during the end of 1998 and beginning of 1999. In other words, the last time people viewed Republicans so poorly was during the Monica Lewinsky scandal. They just can't handle sex scandals - even if it doesn't involve their party.

America is starting to look more blue, but we still have 4 weeks to go (exactly), which is a life time in politics. We still must work hard and try to get the message out on more than Foley.

From the front page of Today's Washington Post:

A Republican congressman knew of disgraced former representative Mark Foley's inappropriate Internet exchanges as far back as 2000 and personally confronted Foley about his communications.

A spokeswoman for Rep. Jim Kolbe (R-Ariz.) confirmed yesterday that a former page showed the congressman Internet messages that had made the youth feel uncomfortable with the direction Foley (R-Fla.) was taking their e-mail relationship. Last week, when the Foley matter erupted, a Kolbe staff member suggested to the former page that he take the matter to the clerk of the House, Karen Haas, said Kolbe's press secretary, Korenna Cline.

This is rather interesting. I don't know why the only openly gay Republican in Congress is now coming forward on this. Could he be trying to show that there was a wide knowledge of Foley for years? This adds one of the most interesting aspects to the whole scandal yet.

61%. That is the number of American adults who believe the Republican leadership has been covering for Foley. That is from the latest Rasmussen poll.

Other interesting numbers include:

• 61% say they are following the Foley story somewhat or very closely.
• 47% will vote for a Democrat this fall as opposed to only 34% who will vote Republican (Democrats up 5-8 points from August).
• 45% would allow their child to serve as a House page and 35% would not.

The Republicans are in big time trouble and it is no one's fault but theirs. They have tried to cover for Foley, it has now become public knowledge and Americans are interested. In turn the scandal has provided severe damage to the page program and to the Republicans chance of holding power this fall.

The news right now is that Republicans are defending Hastert and other leaders, but if this bad news continues then they will have to turn on him for their own self survival. They say these races are all local, but something as powerful as the Foley scandal will help overshadow even local politics. Already returning incumbents are facing tough questions on Foley and those are the first questions asked.

To sum it up - America wants answers - answers the Republican party does not want to give. Our government is "by the people for the people" and if the Republicans don't want to answer to the people then they will be fired. This is there mess. Democrats had absolutely nothing to do with it, no matter how hard the Republicans try to spin it that way. The American people know that, but the Republican party is once again in denial of what their constituents are thinking. There is no doubt that they are not a party meant to lead.

Eugene Robinson sums it up perfectly as always:

Let's deal with the circumstance that dares not speak its name: How much of the Mark Foley scandal's impact is due to the fact that he's a gay man who preyed on young boys?

The basic story line -- powerful man exploits children -- would be the same if Foley were straight and underage girls had been the subject of his lurid attentions. But would the intensity of the scandal be the same? Would there be all this unseemly finger-pointing and hand-washing among the House leadership? Would Dennis Hastert be fighting to keep his job; would Christian conservatives be so apoplectic; would the whole Republican Party look as if it were on the verge of a nervous breakdown?

I doubt it. There would still be a scandal, but I think Foley's now-acknowledged homosexuality was crucial in turning a crisis for the party into a potential catastrophe. In a perfect world that wouldn't be the case, but you might have noticed there's not a lot of perfection in Washington these days.

It's tempting to put it all down to hypocrisy. The Republican Party has gone to such lengths to demonize homosexuality that it must pain the leadership to reveal that such a thing as a gay Republican congressman could even exist. The party has stigmatized gay people as "them," not "us" -- as a class of people whose "lifestyle" is unsavory and whose committed relationships must never be recognized, lest the republic instantly crumble to dust.

Read on

Drudge is trying to spin FoleyGate so bad that he is looking more like and idiot than people already knew. He is now saying that the pages conducted these email and IM exchanges with Foley as a "prank":

Faced with claims by the conservative political website The Drudge Report on Thursday that lurid instant message exchanges between disgraced former Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) and the former page who was outed on a conservative website yesterday were the result of an elaborate prank, insiders at ABC News say the network stands behind its story.

Even if it was a "prank" to these children, it was not a "prank" to Foley. He obviously was very much into the reality of these messages. Trying to dismiss any wrongdoing because it was a "prank" would also mean the thousands of would-be molesters, who are behind bars because the children they thought they were talking to were actually police officers, would not be in jail.

ABC is Also planning on releasing much more information on Foley, including more messages:

RAW STORY has also learned that ABC plans to release additional stories that indicate that Foley's behavior extended to other congressional pages who served on Capitol Hill during different sessions of Congress.

Stay tuned - this story is far from over.

This shows you what the Republican controlled House is really all about:

An Atlanta man told a local television station and newspaper that former U.S. Rep. Mark Foley (news, bio, voting record) sent him sexually suggestive messages after he served as a congressional page 10 years ago.

Tyson Vivyan, 26, of Buckhead told WAGA-TV in a Wednesday interview that Foley began sending him instant messages about a month or two after his nine-month stint as a page ended in June 1997

Vivyan told the station that when he was a congressional page in 1996 and 1997 he barely spoke to Foley. But after he left the program - when he was 17 years old - Vivian says they had contact via e-mail about things he says where inappropriate.

"He somehow got ahold of my online identity on AOL and began sending me sexually illicit ims," Vivyan said in the TV interview.

Vivyan said he became upset when he learned that the messages were from Foley.

I wonder how Foley got this guy's AOL screen name? Sounds almost skalerish if you ask me. Oh but Clinton getting a blow job from an adult was more important.

And it is garbage:

Former House Speaker Newt Gingrich said Wednesday that Democratic sex scandals have been far worse than the suggestive Internet messages sent to teenage congressional pages by former Rep. Mark Foley.

Gingrich said Democrats have wanted to punish their offenders less than the GOP.

"What we don't have to do is allow our friends on the left to lecture us on morality," Gingrich said at a party fundraiser in Greenville. "There's a certain stench of hypocrisy."

Which scandals are far worse? Clinton? At least Monica was over 18 and willing. She wasn't going "sick sick sick sick" about it.

Gerry Studds? It is amazing how the Republicans keep bringing up Studds and somehow suffer from Dan Crane amnesia. Remember, Crane was the Republican who was also busted during the scandal. The difference is Crane resigned and Studds didn't. Also the voters decided to return Studds to office. Isn't that democracy? They let the voters decide and not the politician's. Notice how it is Republicans calling for Hastert to resign? Sounds like the Republicans still don't trust the voters more.

How about Barney Franks? Yeah - because gay male prostitutes are so bad. Just ask Jeff Gannon who had free roam of the Bush White House, or ask Bush 41 about the late night parties involving male prostitutes, that occurred in the White House under his watch.

There's your hypocrisy Newt, but if that isn't enough there is always this.

Bill Maher brought up the clincher on Wolf Blitzer yesterday (video here). Which party is it who constantly tries to legislate "family values"? Oh yeah - it is the Republican party. It is YOUR PARTY Newt. Your party preaches to Americans about family and moral values. Well now we see that your party does not believe in that. If they did, then Mark Foley would be old news to more than just the Republican leadership.

The funniest part is that Newt also tries to say there are these old sex scandals, yet there is one big difference here. Those Democrat sex scandals were not criminal. They were not convicted of anything (even though your House, Newt, spent millions of dollars trying to pin something on Clinton). Foley - well it doesn't look so good for him. 

So Newt - How is the wife?

It look like Hastert is toast now. I just posted the video on Crooks and Liars of David Shuster saying they have sources saying it is no longer a matter of if, but when and who will tell Hastert he is gone.

MSNBC is also now reporting that John Boehner and Deborah Pryce have called for an investigation into the claims that Foley was visiting page dorms while drunk, and had to be escorted away by Capital Police.

And they keep on falling:

The chief of staff for Republican Congressman Tom Reynolds, Kirk Fordham, resigned after questions were raised about his role in the handling of the congressional page scandal, according to Republican sources on Capitol Hill.

Those sources said Fordham, a former chief of staff for Congressman Mark Foley, had urged Republican leaders last spring not to raise questionable Foley e-mails with the full Congressional Page Board, made up of two Republicans and a Democrat.

Remember - it was Reynold's office that tried to cut a deal with ABC to not report the Foley story.

This is from Brian Ross' Blotter:

But according to an instant message provided to ABC News by a former page, Foley did make such an offer to a former page in April, 2003.

Maf54: then we can have a few drinks
Maf54: lol Teen: yes yes ;-)
Maf54: your not old enough to drink
Teen: shhh....
Maf54: ok
Teen: thats not what my ID says
Teen: lol
Maf54: ok
Teen: i probably shouldnt be telling you that huh
Maf54: we may need to drink at my house so we dont get busted

The obvious point made here is that Foley's lawyer did lie to reporters yesterday, and ABC has picked up on that. There is, however, a not so obvious point to be made.

Republicans have been claiming none stop that this was some Democratic plan to oust Foley. They have kept claiming that it was a Democrat who gave the information to Ross. Ross has denied that and this also proves it in one simple sentence - "But according to an instant message provided to ABC News by a former page".

Now we have a right wing blogger getting ready to oust one of the page's who came forward. What is this saying to our children? What kind of message is this? "If a Congressman makes advances to you online, accept them". That is what it sounds like to me.

If the GOP wants any glimpse of salvation this fall then they must immediately denounce these claims and actions. If not, then it will prove, without a shadow of doubt, that the GOP stands for hurting children. This attack the messenger defense they are taking is a very dangerous alley to go down. What next? If a woman gets raped should she stay silent if it is a Republican member of Congress who does it? If a Republican member of Congress molests their child, then should that child stay silent? These page's are the victims here. The GOP should have the decency to treat them as such, but instead they follow the same sick logic as Matt Drudge - that the children are at fault.

What Mark Foley did is sick, but at least he has admitted it and is probably the victim of some psychological illness that caused his horrible actions. What the Republicans are doing to defend themselves is down right deplorable. Here is something to think about Republicans - if you don't like Chavez calling Bush the Devil, then perhaps your party should not act like the Devil.

This really needs more attention then it is getting. FOX news is again falsely reporting stuff in order to try and alter an election. They will claim it was an accident, but who in this country doesn't know that Foley is a Republican? I am sure there is some violation of FCC rules going on here and we need someone to investigate that.

Brad has much more on this, including the silent scrub of this clip from the later airing of O'Reilly.

This is very sick:

A blogger is vowing to reveal the identity of one of the boys Congressman Mark Foley (R-FL) communicated with, RAW STORY has learned.

William Kerr of Passionate America has pledged to divulge the information at 4 pm Central Time today, October 4. He also plans on discussing the boy's identity on his radio show.

A press release issued by Kerr seems to quietly argue that the boy is not a private person, twice indicating that the information was discovered among publicly-available material.

RAW STORY and other news organizations have been aware of the identities of some boys involved in the scandal since first receiving the now-famous emails. Some even failed to redact one boy's email address from the messages published. None have, as of yet, deliberately identified any of the boys involved.

"There is the possibility that this story will not be well received by the [sic] some major news media," Kerr's release notes. "Mr. Kerr's evidence has been checked by many people to be accurate."

Because in their mind Foley did no wrong, it was the children Foley contacted that were at fault. That's right. The Wingnuts now want to go after children. Just the same as the insurgents and al Qaeda. They want to use children in their war. That is how sick they really are!