Portland mayor admits lies about sex with teen

[Vic]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Someone pull up a Mark Foley thread so we can see how hypocritical our resident liberals are being.

Meet the guy when he was 17, kept in contact with him, started having sex with him when he was 18. Seems like the exact same thing that got Foley ran out of congress.

Foley was forced to resign by his fellow Republicans, not by liberals.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: TheSnowman

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: TheSnowman
Have I been wrong for respecting the intimacies I've shared with women by lying when questioned on it? I've done as much more than a few times over my years, and I see no shame in it. Seriously, how is a person's personal relations anyone else's business?

Then isn't the proper response "I decline to answer your question, because it's none of your business", rather than to lie?

Have you never tried that answer? I find a firm "no, not that it is any of your business anyway" works much better.

The problem is when 'no' is a lie. My version isn't.

I consider it wrong to ever lie to anyone who has a right to know the truth, but where is there any problem with lying to a busybody who is just too damn snoopy to know that it is not his place to ask? Again, how is a person's personal relations anyone else's business?

If it's not their business, tell them the truth that it's not their business, and don't answer.

Or maybe it's ok for the US military to lie to you if they think you're a busybody?

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Someone pull up a Mark Foley thread so we can see how hypocritical our resident liberals are being.

Meet the guy when he was 17, kept in contact with him, started having sex with him when he was 18. Seems like the exact same thing that got Foley ran out of congress.

Foley was ugly and clearly out of his league... the very idea is just creepy.

the other party in the Foley case was also 16 and the whole thing seemed non-consensual. just to cnp from the wiki page,

The page forwarded the e-mails to a colleague in Alexander's office, saying "this really freaked me out," and repeating the word "sick" 13 times in one row to describe the photo request.

from my POV, it's the consent that's the biggest difference... if a 16 or 17 year-old really wants to hook up with an older guy or gal, knock yourself out. I think anyone that age is old enough to be able to fully consent to something. the IM's and emails that Foley sent out were a whole lot more like harassment.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: ProfJohn
Someone pull up a Mark Foley thread so we can see how hypocritical our resident liberals are being.

Meet the guy when he was 17, kept in contact with him, started having sex with him when he was 18. Seems like the exact same thing that got Foley ran out of congress.

You're partly right here. As with so many of these scandals, the 'hurting the other side' issue can unfortunately corrupt if not overwhelm the justice of the situation, leading people who are excessively partisan to turn a bline eye to their side's wrongs and to excessively and hypcritically condemn the other's.

But there are some differences here, which include the Republican culture on gays (being for discrimination, most saying it's 'wrong', etc.).

That's the different between 'High Times editor found to use marijuana' and 'Anti-Marijuana Magazine editor found to use marijuana'. Foley served an anti-gay party.

Another is the 'abuse of authority' or 'violation of trust' issue - Foley was in charge of the page program, which created the impression of a predator and a pen of sheep.

If a doctor dates a young person in their private life, that's one thing. If they cull from their young patients, it's another.

Having said that, as I said previously, the fact that this mayor himself put the relationship into the 'this is a vicious lie because it would be an inappropriate relationship' category, took it out of just his private behavior and turned it into a violation of the trust in his word that he had not done it and that it would be terrible if he did.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: loki8481
[Foley was ugly and clearly out of his league... the very idea is just creepy.

Now that's a new and unfortunate argument to inject - discrimination against the ugly. Your repeated comments about the good looks of the people invoved seemed harmless until it.

 

[nageov3t]

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: loki8481
[Foley was ugly and clearly out of his league... the very idea is just creepy.

Now that's a new and unfortunate argument to inject - discrimination against the ugly. Your repeated comments about the good looks of the people invoved seemed harmless until it.

joke, etc.

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: loki8481

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: loki8481
[Foley was ugly and clearly out of his league... the very idea is just creepy.

Now that's a new and unfortunate argument to inject - discrimination against the ugly. Your repeated comments about the good looks of the people invoved seemed harmless until it.

joke, etc.

Hoped so. I realized I responded without recognizing the possibility, but figured we could resolve it quickly if it was the case.

 

[smokeyjoe]

Another political sex scandal, eh?

 

[Craig234]

Originally posted by: Budmantom

Originally posted by: Craig234

Originally posted by: Budmantom
This should promote him to a cabinet position in the Obama administration.

Idiocy, predictably.

What laws were broken? IMO he was wrong to lie.

So now it's your opinion that it's wrong to lie?

Yes, in this case. I generally think that too, but you get into gray areas on the definition of lie, and some circumstances.

Reading Ted Sorenson's latest book recently, there are numerous cases where he worded things with lawyerly accuracy - but meant to mislead, from foreign policy communications, to an example where there was a new charity that had received one donation of $100,000 and he was asked by a possible second donor how the money was coming in, and he said 'good, the average donation has been $100,000'. Technically accuate, but misleading, so arguably a lie.

Are military commanders wrong to mislead enemies? Was Eisenhower wrong to deny the U-2 flights (I think he was)? Was the Kennedy administration wrong to lie about US involvement in the Bay of Pigs? Was Oliver North wrong to lie to Congress about Iran-Contra (an army of right-wingers say no).

Some might have argued in defense of this mayor's lie for various reasons. I'm saying I don't see his lie as justified.

For a closer case, there was Bill Clinton, having to weigh everything from the political witch hunt aspect of his sexual acts, to the harm to his policies and the people they would benefit, to the issue of the order for him to reveal that information being a judicial error, for him to consider - but I don't approve of his lie either. I'd bet that had he told the truth he'd have been attacked by many for doing so and causing the resulting problems.

People on the right espcially like to equate presedential honesty with 'giving information to our enemies'. They put the role of citizens as the nation's rulers, who are entitled to information and need it to oversee the administration, below the desire for secrecy for the government.