Okay, Seriously, What?
Oct. 5th, 2006 12:46 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
forsythAlright, so Republican Congresscritter Mark Foley had been sexually harassing male pages working on the Capitol for years by all evidence. And it's pretty clear that at least some of the Republican leadership has been covering for him.
And the Republican's counter-spin strategy for this is..."unique", if by "unique" you understand I mean "stupid and bigoted and nearly incomprehensible." One of the talking points I've already heard was yesterday on NPR, when they were interviewing Paul M. Weyrich, from the "Free Congress Foundation". He said "Homosexuals preoccupied with sex," and was trying to use that to imply it wasn't that Foley is a pervert, but all gay people are pedophiles, I guess? The hostess called him on it, sort of, she said "Some people would disagree with your assertion" and he stammered a bit and then finally just said "Well, it's a fact", and then she sorta let it slide since I guess she figured she's a reporter, not there to argue with him (not always true).
And I've heard that bit of nonsense trotted out before when bigots are gay-bashing. The idea that gay people are "obsessed" with sex, completely unlike straight people. Right. Sure. Beer commercials, anyone? And the implication that gay people are pedophiles, I have no idea where that comes from, other than it making a handy smear. A gay gym teacher is no more likely to be checking out the male kids in gym class than a straight gym teacher is to be checking out the female kids. So where the hell did the whole thing come from?
Of course, back on the Foley thing, most of the "kids" involved were 16-17, and I don't think any actual sex was involved. 16 is the age of consent in DC, but thanks to a law that Foley helped champion, "explicit communications" over the Internet to people under 18 are a crime. The real thing, though, is that he was a) the head of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, and b) the pages, even if of legal age, were still teenagers and working for him and his friends, which is pretty clear-cut abuse of power and sexual harassment, and c) the Republican leadership seems to have helped cover this up for most likely years.
And the Republican's counter-spin strategy for this is..."unique", if by "unique" you understand I mean "stupid and bigoted and nearly incomprehensible." One of the talking points I've already heard was yesterday on NPR, when they were interviewing Paul M. Weyrich, from the "Free Congress Foundation". He said "Homosexuals preoccupied with sex," and was trying to use that to imply it wasn't that Foley is a pervert, but all gay people are pedophiles, I guess? The hostess called him on it, sort of, she said "Some people would disagree with your assertion" and he stammered a bit and then finally just said "Well, it's a fact", and then she sorta let it slide since I guess she figured she's a reporter, not there to argue with him (not always true).
And I've heard that bit of nonsense trotted out before when bigots are gay-bashing. The idea that gay people are "obsessed" with sex, completely unlike straight people. Right. Sure. Beer commercials, anyone? And the implication that gay people are pedophiles, I have no idea where that comes from, other than it making a handy smear. A gay gym teacher is no more likely to be checking out the male kids in gym class than a straight gym teacher is to be checking out the female kids. So where the hell did the whole thing come from?
Of course, back on the Foley thing, most of the "kids" involved were 16-17, and I don't think any actual sex was involved. 16 is the age of consent in DC, but thanks to a law that Foley helped champion, "explicit communications" over the Internet to people under 18 are a crime. The real thing, though, is that he was a) the head of the House Caucus on Missing and Exploited Children, and b) the pages, even if of legal age, were still teenagers and working for him and his friends, which is pretty clear-cut abuse of power and sexual harassment, and c) the Republican leadership seems to have helped cover this up for most likely years.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2006-10-05 05:33 pm (UTC)Corruption. PBS had a very good show on last night about the Jack Abramoff (sp?)/Indian casino/Tom De Lay affair and the fact that its exposure hasn't brought about any "reform"...the lobby groups and their corporate (and foreign) money are still the main forces driving national policy.
no subject
Date: 2006-10-05 05:46 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2006-10-05 06:35 pm (UTC)I thought the GOP plan was to have Foley outted as a closet Democrat on Fox"News"?