Pedophiles are attracted to children because they don’t have any secondary sexual characteristics, so the gender of the victim is generally irrelevant. However, it’s usually easier for a pedophile to get access to children of their own gender, so you tend to see more same-sex predation when it comes to non-familial abuse. However, the vast majority of pedophiles do identify as heterosexual when it comes to adult relations, assuming they have any.
Worse. . .Episcopalian.
::Shrug::
He has 3 hours to fill. He was hypothesizing. His basic stance is that this issue with Foley was something of an open secret and the timing is therefore suspect, but that Foley needs to… go down, if you’ll pardon the expression
Yeah, “the timing is suspect”. This open secret has been such for a good decade, since there were rumors about Foley’s affection for the pages as far back as 1995. You really think the Democrats wouldn’t have used that information before this? They’ve been spineless jellyfish for a good 6 years now. I doubt they’d have been so if they’d had this arrow in their quiver.
Um…yeah. A setup.
“Of course it was a setup! The Democrats knowingly put him near a young, attractive…pert…luscious…sorry, forgot where I was…oh yeah, steaming hot sixteen year old boy! Put any man near a firm, pouty…sorry, lost it again, near a boy like that, and that man is going to make his move! There’s just no resisting it!”
I think we’ve learned something about Rush today, actually.
Hey, no fair, Max. The homos got enough to deal without offloading El Rusho off on them! What’d they ever do to you?
Why don’t Republicans use bookmarks?
They don’t need to. They just bend over the pages.
It’s not my stance, it’s Limbaugh’s. I was just trying to represent his viewpoint accurately since it seems to be misconstrued here that he seriously beleives it’s a set up.
But, the obvious answer to your point isn’t that the Democrats have been spineless jellyfish, but that they’ve finally sunk to this level of sliminess… so you may wish to decide if you want to go with that line of reasoning, or not.
Before you all go tarring all Republicans with the Limbaugh brush, I’d like to point out that many conservative magazines, newspapers, and pundits are not only calling Foley despicable, but they are calling on Dennis Hastert to resign as speaker because of his unwillingness to pursue this earlier when there was evidence of what was going on.
So not everyone is a conspiratorial nutjob.
From the National Review:
That’s the official editorial position of the magazine. They’re basically calling out the Republicans, telling them that they behaved despicably, and that there should be a reckoning for that and investigations into a bunch of them. They’ve also called for Hastert’s resignation.
Washington Times editorial: Resign, Mr. Speaker
There are plenty of people with principles around, on both sides of the fence.
Golly, here I am agreeing in spirit wth a rightie such as Scylla! (and with the apprehension that righties believe that agreement in spirit is agreement in essence, to boot).
But let me sustitute the term “jellyfish” for “amorphous” for a Democratic Party which rubberly hopes to cling on to, for example, union-membership voters while accepting union-busting campaign contributionship. At least with the Republicans you get to look the devil in the eye. With the Democrats your eye must bounce between will-o-the-wisp money packages/voting-blocks/patronage-job lots. Talk about your big tent.
But still, I am left with the suspicion that it’s not the Dems but the Republicans who are making big smoke over a few cyber-buggered page-boys (who themselves would’ve graduated to Washington DC “topping,” since these relationships haven’t essentially changed since the days of the Caesars), to divert attention from a truly bad election-season issue: a bad war on our nagging borders.
Another, dreary lamentation from the days of the Caesars: “a bad war naggng on our borders.” Deliver us with pederastic diversions, please.
You’d hope not, eh?
I happened across a snippet of Limbaugh flogging this topic while flipping channels on my car radio. Maybe it’s just wishful thinking, but I thought he sounded rather desperate, as if even he didn’t think his listeners were going to suck down this particular batch of Flavor Aid.
What a maroon! The scary thing is his script stems directly from the Pub “talking points” memos… Hastert: Oh I didn’t know it was ANYTHING like this… :rolleyes:
Oh, and ETF, PLEASE, in the future, refrain from using the terms “Limbaugh”, “flogging”, “desperate” and “suck down” in the same post…
::shudders::
The graphics on Rush Limbaugh’s show have twice identified Foley as a Democrat
Sorry, I meant Bill O’Reilly, not Rush
Catch the beginning of this clip of the Bill O’Liely show. I’m sure it was just a mistake. They’ll correct themselves shortly.
Wow… :eek:
Bottom feeding, scum sucking vermin would look down on that with a sneer of contempt.
Beat me by 3 seconds-- and so early in the morning too.
O’Reilly’s show, wasn’t it? Anyway, they’re just being fair and balanced. All the other networks are identifying him as a Republicans, so they’re just providing balance by calling him a Dem.
And I missed this one. My apologies.