An Open Letter to the House Republicans

Dear House Republicans,

Some of you appear unclear on the concept of just what to do when you find out that someone you work with likes to prey on the underage boys who work for you and your other co-workers.

This is a crime.

You might think that the guy preying on the boys would know it’s a crime considering that he passed legislation clarifying that what he was doing is a crime. But people who prey on children tend to be sick fucks, so maybe we can understand him as being too sick and evil to understand that the laws he signs also apply to him.

You, however, are not sick fucks. You are grown men with families of your own. You write and pass the laws of our country. You should understand how they work.

If you become aware that some sexual predator is having, say, cybersex with an underage boy, your first obligation is not to the Party. It is not to report it to your other Party members.

Your first obligation is to protect that child. Go to the police.

If you can’t bring yourself to go to the police over one child, when you discovered that there were multiple children, that should have compelled you to go to the police, not to play “Who, if anyone, told Denny Hastert and when?”

You have done many things that I strongly disagree with (see ‘habeas corpus, the chucking of), but I assumed that you had what you considered good reasons for doing so.

Covering up for a pervert who preys on children just so that you don’t have to deal with the hassle of trying to fight for another congressional seat?

That’s morally bankrupt.

In essence, you sacrificed these boys to this fucker so that you could stay in power.

That’s evil, too.

Shame on you.

Aunt B.


4 thoughts on “An Open Letter to the House Republicans

  1. Why exactly is the Congress still employing underaged kids as pages? Trust me, there are thousands and thousands of college juniors and seniors eager to do an internship in Washington. While they don’t have the world’s greatest judgment all the time, they are as a class perfectly capable of opening doors, delivering inter-office mail, and getting coffee for the rest of the office. I’ve known a number of young men who have worked as pages. If their experiences in the late 1980s-mid-1990s are representative, Foley is only minor-league skeevy and that’s probably the source of the reluctance to out him as criminal. Some of the congressmen with the most conservative constituencies and most virulent anti-gay legislative approaches reputedly make the Borgias appear straight-laced and prudish. Once the closetdoors open, Republican voters will be heartsick and angry. (Not to single out Repeople. Dems also have some reputed losers of the "drunk and handy uncle" variety.)

  2. Based upon what I’ve seen in the last twelve years, Bridgett, I think you’re giving the Republican electorate far too much credit. The Republican base seems to be motivated largely by a holier-than-thou mentality ("it isn’t what ‘we’ do, it’s what ‘you’ do that counts"). The Republicans seem to rally their faithful to the polls with a mixture of fear-mongering and moralistic scapegoating. While I think many a Republican voter will be disgusted by the actions of Rep. ShortEyes, they’ll just let it pass for the sake of sticking to the program. The best case scenario this November would be for Republican voters to stay at home, but I believe that spite will prove more powerful than apathy. The Republicans have really steered us into dangerous waters, but I think their typical voter would rather see the ship sink than have it piloted by the negro-loving, queer-coddling, God-hating, gun-controlling, commie Democrats.Maybe I’m being harsh and unfair, but the ostensible election results from 2004 didn’t leave me in a charitable and forgiving mood.

  3. I’m merely making observations based on past practice in page scandals and other sex-related incidents. In 1982, one Dem and one Republican were caught diddling teen pages. The Republican’s career was over at the next term election. The Democrat continued to serve until 1997. Henry Hyde? He’s outta here. Clinton? Many Democrats continue to weigh his accomplishments versus his infidelities and on balance find the former outweigh the latter. I guess what I’m arguing — probably without any convincing evidence — is that Republican voters are ok with supporting scummy politicians until they can’t ignore the flag-draped elephant in the voting booth. Then they purge the offender instead of acknowledging the systemic corruption that their choices promote and sustain. (Kind of like punishing the most heartbreaking cases of incest rather than critiquing patriarchal power relations in the household…you sacrifice a few "bad patriarchs" but that’s the price of normalizing the system as a whole.) They will then vote in another person nearly identical in ideology, education, social class, and political connections to the previous candidate and be surprised when fifteen years down the road, the new guy is caught doing the same thing the old guy did. Democratic voters seem more willing to allow for sexual bad behavior (or even widely acknowledged drug dependency) if they feel the Congressperson is still representing their political interests. They seem more inclined to believe that politicians are human and flawed, that the system permits and perhaps encourages craptastic acts by the powerful, and that you can be an effective politician even if you don’t have Sunday School morality. Maybe all that means is that they’ve got low standards and an exhausted cynicism about the political process. I don’t know. I’m willing to believe I’m being overbroad in my characterization. My local politics are very different from those in TN and probably have skewed my thinking.What I do know is that in practical terms, what that mentality has done to the Republican Party is to morph the GOP from being the party of fiscal and racial conservatism to a pack of uptight (sometimes closeted) hypocritical big-spending busybodies. I often hear people complaining about the evolution of the nanny state. Well, sweet jumping Christ, it’s not the Democrats who are proposing, promoting, and passing all this crap!

  4. Actually, the page administration knew about this in the 2000-2001 timeframe. That’s borderline Clinton era. I don’t think it’s ANY party’s fault. The fault lies with the guy and the page organization that knew about it but refused to act. They’re not democrat or republican. They’re just the page leadership.Something REALLY scary, though? If THIS type of behaviour is swept under the rug for 6 or 7 years, what ELSE is being ignored?

Comments are closed.