ON HANNITY, MARK FOLEY SAYS IT SHOULD BE LEGAL FOR ADULTS TO TALK DIRTY TO MINORS ONLINE !!!

[kpete]

Run time: 00:45 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pXd2t7Y2McE   Posted on YouTube: June 10, 2011 By YouTube Member: thinkprogress5 Views on YouTube: 4   Posted on DU: June 10, 2011 By DU Member: kpete Views on DU: 2404

 
ON HANNITY, MARK FOLEY SAYS IT SHOULD BE LEGAL FOR ADULTS TO TALK DIRTY TO MINORS ONLINE | In a bizarre interview last night, Fox News Sean Hannity invited disgraced former GOP Rep. Mark Foley (FL) to discuss the Anthony Weiner scandal. Foley resigned in 2006 after he sent sexually explicit emails to teenage congressional pages. Conducting Foley’s first national interview in five years, Hannity asked Foley whether people should “go to jail” for sending explicit emails and instant messages to children “like you did.” Foley flatly stated, “No.” “Should they be arrested?” Hannity followed up. Foley: “No.”
http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2011/06/10/242060/foley-hannity-kids-online/

[Scuba]

1. Well, I'm glad that's cleared up....

...Foley declares himself free of guilt.


What a perv.

[Lil Missy]

2. wut??

[fascisthunter]

3. wow

[SemperEadem]

4. all that young nubile flesh to corrupt...

and so little time.

[TlalocW]

5. I think that caught Hannity by surprise

Because when it started going bad, Hannity sure brushed him off the show creating a new word in the process - MarkFoleyThanksforbeingwithus.

Sean, you silly. You know that no matter what a republican does, he's going to excuse it, and your job is help them. You probably actually have some humanity left when it comes to exploitation of kids and were assuming that Foley would follow your lead.

TlalocW

[flakey_foont]

6. hokey smokes!!

the party of Family Values does it again!

[aquart]

7. Aww, still trying to make Weiner seem like a child molester.

They just keep trying.

[sulphurdunn]

8. Did he ever go to jail?

[alp227]

10. no, cuz he resigned before Congress could do anything

Also: "Florida officials have closed the investigation of Foley, stating they found "insufficient evidence" to file criminal charges, since the page was over the age of 18."

[eShirl]

9. is he the new spokesman for NAMBLA?

[Lionessa]

11. I hate to say it, but he has a point. Are fathers prosecuted for leaving

their hustlers and penthouses around the house? Even hidden most teen boys find them and look at them unless they are under lock and key. Many teen girls will do the same.

Just because it was "intended" to get in the teen's hands doesn't make it anymore dangerous than "accidentally" getting in teen hands.

[sulphurdunn]

13. I'm sorry, but how

exactly is junior finding dad's copy of Penthouse equivalent to a middle aged sexual predator soliciting minors on the internet?

[Lionessa]

15. Soliciting and simply "sharing" porn are two different things, I don't

see anywhere that it says anyone was solicited, nor was solicitation seemingly in the discussion.

[sulphurdunn]

17. Read this transcript.

http://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/BrianRoss/story?id=2509586&page=1

Then ask yourself if you don't think Foley was hitting on this kid.

[Lionessa]

18. Whether he was or not, isn't what the discussion presented in the OP

was discussing. Furthermore, it was determined that none of Foley's stuff was directed at a minor, pages yes, minors no.

[sulphurdunn]

19. The kid in the link

had just turned 18 and was still in high school. Technically legal, morally repugnant. Also, your initial post suggests that Foley's peccadilloes were no different from a kid this age thumbing through a copy of Hustler. That's what I responded too. You have not responded to me about that.

[Lionessa]

20. The question is whether or not children seeing adults' porn should

be illegal. How the child sees it, is ultimately the responsibility of an adult somewhere, whether it be a stranger on-line, a known entity on-line, or a parent who doesn't probably tend their own porn. All are exactly the same in my book. If I'm unwilling to prosecute a parent for their minors finding their porn, then I don't see how I can condemn someone else for presenting it on-line.

Just like the mags being found, if a child doesn't want to look, no one will likely force them. Also even if it were a stranger on-line....I'd blame the parents for not being diligent enough with their childrens' on-line, on-phone behavior.

The idea that parents are somehow allowed to blow off that responsibility is nuts imo. But, I'm one that thinks when a minor does a criminal act, the parents should also be charged with aiding and abetting for not having control of their minors.

[sulphurdunn]

23. This was never an issue

of an individual minor either seeking out or accidentally encountering pornography online or otherwise. This was about an adult initiating an inappropriate sexually suggestive liaison with a kid. They are not equivalent. Also, children are not held to adult standards of judgement or consent. That's why we try an protect them from people like Foley.

[Lionessa]

24. I'm including "dirty talk" that is in written format as "seeing porn"

And I never said that teenage are or should be held to a standard higher, I said the careless parent who allowed it to be found (ie had it in the house at all) would be equally guilty as an adult typing sex talk to the teenager, imo

Clearly we don't agree.

[sulphurdunn]

25. Clearly we don't.

Maybe next time.

[peacetalksforall]

12. It's still the same vast right wing organization with new targets.

[AsahinaKimi]

14. Of course he would say that ...

If you are a REPUBLICAN you should be free of any charges or crimes.. EVERYONE KNOWS only Democrats are supposed to take the blame and go to Jail!!! :sarcasm::sarcasm:

[colorado_ufo]

16. If he had spoken to one of my children online like that

he would have prayed to be safe in jail.

[ScottLand]

21. I agree he shouldn't go to jail...he's a Republican.

He's not like one of those radical Liberals.

[JAnthony]

22. Yes, agreed, only radical libruls are ever guilty of anything...Republicans..

are as 99 %pure as the falling snow !!!
Only one or two bad guys, and we forget about them or label them D for Dem at the bottom of the screen.

We learned this on Fox.