Foley Follies

I've refrained from posting on the Congressman Mark Foley flap this long, because there are so many issues wrapped up in this story, it's hard to know which one upsets me the most.

For starters, Foley used his position as a Representative to get the contact information of congressional pages, and then he pursued a homosexual relationship with some of them, though there's no evidence a relationship ever developed. I find this behavior of his repugnant, first because he was going after underage boys rather than grown men, and second because he was using a position of authority as a way of getting access to these boys.

The first thing Foley did right (if you can call it that) was to not approach these pages until after they had completed the program. The next thing right was that he actually showed shame for what he had done, and he resigned.

And that's where things get murky. Democrats--yes, Democrats--are outraged. Now that Foley has resigned, removing himself as their target, the Democrats are calling for heads to roll (Foley's apparently wasn't enough), starting with Speaker of the House Dennis Hastert. Some conservatives are also calling for Hastert's head, but I haven't been able to figure out the guiding principle that should apply, so I'm undecided about him for now. I'm sure the MSM news cycle will dig up enough dirt to justify continuing to call for his head.

And that news cycle is the next thing that's upsetting. It's October Surprise time--with the Congressional elections just a month away--time to pull a zinger out of the hat to discredit the opposition, when they don't have enough time to recover before the public heads for the polls to vote. They'll keep hammering this as many ways as they can, declaring this as more proof of the Republicans' "Culture of Corruption" or "History of Hypocrisy" or whatever the new Democrat talking point is for this.

Malott's Blog has a post today addressing the timing of the Foley scandal. People have known about Foley for a long time. Democrats have known about Foley for a long time. The press has known about Foley for a long time. But the story stayed under wraps until now. Why? Why did they wait, if not to use the story to the best political advantage for the Democrats?

But I'm also outraged by the Democrats' outrage. Crying "foul" about homosexual behavior is the antithesis of all they believe in. I left a comment on Malott's post that illustrates the double standard:

If you look at the Democratic Party and what it stands for and the issues it promotes, there is no "scumbag" here.

Homosexuality is perfectly normal behavior, and the poor, ostracized Rep. Foley should be allowed to express himself the way he was born to do without all this hate-speech hounding him out of office.

The age of consent for homosexual behavior should long ago have been lowered to 16 or 17, so really there's no problem here. Foley didn't touch any pages during the program. He waited until after they had gone home, so no harm no foul. Let him keep his job. And celebrate his coming out, however reluctant it was.

Oh wait. That only works for Democrats. He's a Republican? Throw the scumbag out, and throw out the Republican House leadership with him, because they should have stopped him from using his position for such perverted, deviant, predatory actions against an underage child.

My head hurts from trying to make sense of this.

Foley is out of office, and that's good. Law enforcement agencies are investigating possible criminal charges, and that's good too. Why isn't that enough?