I think this has to be the funniest (and sickest) comment from Republicans that I’ve seen on this whole mess. He said this on Sunday, on Chris Wallace’s show on Fox. The site has a video of The Newt saying all this.
Wallace then asked: “How would it have been gay bashing?” Gingrich replied: “Because it was a male-male relationship,” adding that “there was no proof” that Foley was a “predatory person.”
Gimme an f’n break!
And here’s a video from 2002 of Foley speaking in the House to the pages.
If Hastert knew what was going on and didn’t do anything about it, his head should be on a platter. End of subject.
That said, I can understand how it might be almost impossible to believe what could easily sound like misinterpretation or innuendo.
Keep in mind that even now, after all that has been revealed – there remains a sense of absolute incredulity by the nation. How could one of the highest politicians in the land – one instrumental in bringing forth laws to prosecute internet pedophilia – one who is gay and a republican and would need therefore to tread especially carefully – how could this person of all people be involved in such things? That’s the nation now. It would be even more difficult for Hastert back then to accept sketchy info re an “overfriendly” gay guy when “the parents themselves didn’t want to pursue the matter” as stated above.
How might you investigate a gay man without invoking the very worst untrue stereotype of gay people? How do you do that without fueling rumors and leaks and perhaps unfairly damaging a career? And invoking the wrath of a nation tired of Republican witch hunts? Especially a gay witch hunt.
The easy answer in hindsight, is of course, is you hold your nose and just do it openly without regard to the validity of the accusation or information. The Right has always been criticized for using the welfare of children as the greater concern when it comes to limiting rights of adults. To be sure there is a tricky balancing act here but that principle of “children first” should prevail.
RBG
Leo wins the prize! 60 posts before someone noticed I can’t spell! Yeah! The link to your free copy of a TWiT broadcast will be sent shortly via USPS!
59. And Hastert or anybody else is now defending Foley? There’s no censor. There’s no re-election. Actually, the only one defending Studd is you.
What an amazing and laughably self-contradictory, mis-directing “reach” of a reply your post is.
You’re saying Republicans went and raised the moral bar and this is why good old-fashioned censoring and re-electing pedophiles doesn’t happen any more.
By your logic, if the Democrats ever take control and change the landscape to prevent such things in the future – the Foley incident will be explained and excused as a product of its era.
RBG
#50. Wrong. If you like to have sex with underage girls or boys, you are a perv. Not gay, not straight, not bi – a perv.
And if you are an underage boy who dates, has steady girlfriends, waltzes with girls and then finds himself getting increasingly excited by the manipulative attentions of a crafty old homosexual – a perv. – what do you call that? In training?
RBG