Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, October 11, 2006
Brent Bozell :: Townhall.com Columnist
Democrats on sex and children
by Brent Bozell
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


After more than 100 stories on ABC, CBS and NBC about the Mark Foley Internet-messaging scandal, it wouldn't be hard for the average Joe to conclude the Democrats are now the Party of Moral Values.

Democrats are demanding that Republicans return the monies Foley gave their campaigns. Nancy Pelosi, the House minority leader who would very much like Denny Hastert's job, is predictably fanning the flames. "We want to know," she thunders, "why the Republicans chose to protect Mark Foley's political career rather than protect the children who were in our charge."

To which I want to thunder back: Is there a muzzle large enough to fit a mouth such as Nancy Pelosi's?

Unwind that soundbite. Since when have the Democrats really been the party to protect children from the sexual advances of adults? Let's get to the point: Since when have Democrats like Nancy Pelosi cared, really cared, about men seeking out boys for sex?

There's an organized lobby for this perversion: the National Man-Boy Love Association. In 1997, NAMBLA made national headlines when a 10-year-old Massachusetts boy named Jeffrey Curley was abducted by two men, choked on a gasoline-soaked rag when he wouldn't consent to sex, murdered and then sexually assaulted.

Curley's parents sued NAMBLA, since one of the killers said he was discouraged from following his fiendish desires until the organization encouraged him. The Curleys' lawyer explained how the group instructed perverts on how to lure children into sex, citing a NAMBLA publication he calls "The Rape and Escape Manual." Its actual title is "The Survival Manual: The Man's Guide to Staying Alive in Man-Boy Sexual Relationships."

What does this have to do with the Democrats and Nancy Pelosi? The ever-prescient Mark Levin connected the dots on his radio program. NAMBLA easily found lawyers to defend them against the parents of the murdered boy -- the American Civil Liberties Union. Democrats like Pelosi are demanding that every Republican return any dirty Foley contributions they received, but do you think a single one of them has ever returned a dime generated for their coffers by the ACLU?

The American Spectator reported that in a 2001 "gay pride" parade in San Francisco, Nancy Pelosi was just three spots in the parade from radical gay advocate Harry Hay, who avidly spoke in favor of sex with teens and fiercely advocated for NAMBLA's inclusion in gay-pride parades. Did Pelosi ever protest NAMBLA's presence in parades? Continued...

1 2
| Full Article & Comments | Next >
Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Founder and President of the Media Research Center, Brent Bozell runs the largest media watchdog organization in America.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Brent Bozell's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
r0_d2 Spin Stopper or Spinner

On 11/11/06 8:56 PM you addressed me as Birdman - Spin Stopper. On 11/12/06 8:00 AM you addressed me as Birdman – Spinner. Please tell me am I a spin stopper or a spinner?

On 11/11/06 8:56PM you said: “Studd's had relations with a 17-year-old congressional page, who by DC law had reach the age of CONSENT. YES 17.”

Does that mean that AT 18 y.o. the page in the Mark Foley affair was over the age of consent?

On 11/12/06 you said: “No one says what was done was moral in 1983 and I can only cite the outcome as I wasn't there.”

I did not ask you what the outcome was. I wanted to know if you point from the link in your post was which one of the 9 questions I asked.

You tell me the question you want to answer and give me your belief. No spin. Don’t dodge. Simply answer.

The speed with which you change the scenery and avoid questions implies you are the spinner.

Stupid is as stupid does
r2_d2 writes:
I said Studd's didn't break the law as it is today and always lead you to the link .

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1983_Congressional_page_sex_scandal
------------------------------------------------

R2D2 - please go to your link - the only claim that no laws were broken is made by Studds.




Since you are not smart enough to read the law and understand it. How about Foley's old buddy, John Walsh, explaining it to you.

http://movies.crooksandliars.com/H-C-Foley-Walsh.mov
-----------------------------------------------

Again - no evidence provided in your link as to what the law is or was. Perhaps you should actually review the information before mindlessly repeating it. Studds was caught in 1983, the crime occurred in 1973.


For your viewing pleasure:

Washington D.C. - Age of Consent Laws

The following information was taken from the Online Source for the District of Columbia


§ 22-3008. First degree child sexual abuse.


Whoever, being at least 4 years older than a child, engages in a sexual act with that child or causes that child to engage in a sexual act shall be imprisoned for any term of years or for life and, in addition, may be fined an amount not to exceed $250,000. However, the court may impose a prison sentence in excess of 30 years only in accordance with § 22-3020 or § 24-403.01(b-2). For purposes of imprisonment following revocation of release authorized by § 24-403.01(b)(7), the offense defined by this section is a Class A felony.

§ 22-3009. Second degree child sexual abuse.


Whoever, being at least 4 years older than a child, engages in sexual contact with that child or causes that child to engage in sexual contact shall be imprisoned for not more than 10 years and, in addition, may be fined in an amount not to exceed $100,000.

Deleted - does not apply


(2) The victim was under the age of 18 years at the time of the offense and the actor had a significant relationship to the victim;

Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.