Foley Isn't The First

Let me first say, "I'm not condoning the actions of Mark Foley". When presented with the facts. Then the accusations start. People want to know why are you defending him. So let's get where I stand, out of the way first. This story should kill two birds with one stone. First it should make you aware that Mark Foley. In spite of what Democrats would have you think. Wasn't the first representative accused of sex with a minor. Notice I didn't say charged. Which brings me to my other point. Secondly it should bring attention to a law, only I seem to know about. And obviously the perpetuators. Surely it's expulsion has never came up for a vote. Who would possibly vote against taking it off the books? Just remember this little tidbit. It is not against the law for a grown man, to have sex with a 12 yr. old consenting boy. The keyword is consenting. Mark Foley hasn't been charged or arrested, and he probably won't. It has nothing to do with the Republican party. He just hasn't broken the law. Except maybe in public opinion. To make sure you see it. I've posted the encyclopedias account below. Read it for yourself.




1983 Congressional page sex scandal
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
The 1983 Congressional page sex scandal was a political scandal in the United States involving members of the United States House of Representatives.

On July 14, 1983 the House Ethics Committee concluded that Rep. Dan Crane (R-Ill.) and Rep. Gerry Studds (D-Mass.) had engaged in sexual relationships with minors, specifically 17-year-old congressional pages. In Crane's case, it was a 1980 relationship with a female page and in Studds's case, it was a 1973 relationship with a male page. Both representatives immediately pleaded guilty to the charges and the committee decided to simply reprimand the two.

However, Rep. Newt Gingrich (R-Ga.) demanded their expulsion. On July 20, 1983, the House voted for censure, the first time that censure had been imposed for sexual misconduct. Crane, who subsequently apologized for his transgression, lost his bid for reelection in 1984.

Studds, although admitting "an error in judgment," refused to apologize for his behavior, and even turned his back and ignored the censure being read to him. He called a press conference with the former page, in which both stated that the young man, who was 17, consented. Studds claimed he did not break any U.S. laws in what he called a "private relationship. He continued to be reelected until his retirement in 1996.