We Don't Want You, Mark Foley

Many people have this belief that gays all think alike, look alike, act alike, and have the same agenda. Anything that one of us does is blamed on the entire community. So I am going to take this opportunity to use the "royal we" about Mark Foley.

This is what Mark Foley's lawyer said today :

“Mark Foley wants you to know he is a gay man,”

This is what I have to say:

*We don't want you.*

I understand the struggles of the closet. I know that in many parts of this world, you will lose everything you have, including your life, if you come out of the closet. Not everyone who stays in the closet is a coward, or self-hating, or a disgrace. Some people stay hidden for their entire lives and yet they help people and help make the world a better place.

Even Jim McGreevey (who also hid in the closet until he no longer had a choice), as scummy and self-serving as his behavior was, I could somewhat sympathize with him because he had at least been supportive of most gay rights causes and had not supported homophobia for political gain.

Mark Foley, on the other hand, aside from a few safe votes on bills that were not going to pass with or without his support (such as Employment Non Discrimination Act, and the Marriage "Protection" Amendment), consistently worked with the most homophobic, craven, opportunistic politicians this country has ever seen. In 2004, he stood by Bush's side, happy and content, as Bush and his cronies conducted a vicious anti-gay campaign across this country. He always put his party first, even as his party worked tirelessly to defame and exploit gay Americans for partisan gain. Foley's money helped elect a slew of homophobic politicians all across America, for over 10 years. The years from 1995 to 2006 were some of the most momentous ever for gays in this country, and while gays of other political parties faced constant smear campaigns, while Steve Gunderson and Jim Kolbe of his own party were shunned, while Kolbe was greeted with silence and contempt  at his party's national convention, Foley did not stand by their side. Foley sided with the most bigoted elements of his party time and time again. In 2003, when Mark Foley was outed while running for the Senate, he once again chose to stay silent, to reinforce the belief that being gay is a political death sentence in the Republican Party.

It was not enough for Mark Foley to collude with those whose main goal is to dehumanize the lives of gays for political or ideological gain. Mark Foley now - *WHEN HE HAS NOTHING LEFT TO LOSE* - suddenly comes out of the closet. He brings his jagged skeletons toppling out with him. Mark Foley manages to reinforce a slew of ugly, destructive, devastating stereotypes about molestation "turning" people gay, about gays preying on young men, about not being able to trust gays in a position of power because they will use their power to exploit youth.

Mark Foley has kneecapped every single gay politician in America today. He has hurt the chances of men and women around the country who want to work with children, yet are turned away because of their sexual orientation. This scandal may even help accelerate bans on gay adoption or gay foster care. This is a dream come true for the same fundamentalist extremes he enabled for his entire political career.

Where were you when we needed you, Mark Foley?

You weren't there.

Where are we when you suddenly need us, Mark Foley?

We aren't there.

We don't want you. 

Comments

[James]

If people want to help gay politicians who actually want to help America, go here:

http://victoryfund.org/

[MissLaura]

This is well-timed - I had just had a moment of pity for the man. You've talked me out of it. Being in the closet is a sad thing, but making the world worse for other gay people is a hateful, shameful thing.

[Mimikatz]

Nice job, James. Foley is a hypocrite and (like all Republicans, it seems) someone who can't take responsibility for himself or his actions.

As I have said several times, demonizing gays (for political gain or any other reason) is precisely what makes it difficult for gay Republicans to lead normal lives. Dems at least have some institutional support, but gay GOPers have to hew to a tight line and can't really be open, lest they disturb the base who they have so excited with all their anti-gay venom. And even though they know it is "only business," on some level it has to engender some self-loathing. What a truly sad bunch they are, except that they ruin other people's lives.

[...]

if the republican party wasn't so homophobic, it would have been easier for him ( or others ) to come out.. i am not excusing foley and i agree with your comments here.. it just seems to me the more rigid an ideology is, whether taliban or republican, the worse off those who belong to it become, and everyone else suffers too... more honesty and less hypocrisy would be a good motto for these same folks to follow..

[Jodi]

To much analysis. Foley has proven himself to be a dangerous criminal sexual deviate.

His former life is over. He may do jail time. We shall have to see. His posturing now is not for the Gay Community or the American People. It is for his legal situation.

He and his lawyer are preparing his defense, for when and if he is charged with crimes.

[Vereker]

Foley's behavior with the pages horrifies many of us in the gay community (as I've commented). In fact, it has been extremely difficult to read blogs about this scandal. People are rightfully indignant at what Foley's done, but there's a lot of homophobia and well-intentioned misconceptions woven together out there, and I think we all feel a bit traumatized if we've been trying to sort through it all in the blogosphere.

And then...that fucking SOB comes out and says there's one thing he's got to say, and that's he is GAY and that he was MOLESTED, implying (wrongly) to many that the LATTER made him the FORMER. And that everyone had to see it.

It just pisses me off big time. Particularly because Foley apparently already came out in 2004, during a debate against Jeffrey Jay Fisher (so I've been told).

That was no bombshell. That was the GOP making a lot of false associations, because they are running like hell from this scandal.

[James]

"He and his lawyer are preparing his defense, for when and if he is charged with crimes."

I agree, but his saying he's a gay man wouldn't have much of an impact on his defense. The part about being a drunk, and being sexually abused as a child, yes.

[freepatriot]

why would being drunk, or the fact that foley was molested as a child have any bearing on any criminal charges in this case ???

do we allow bank robbers to claim they were drunk ???

if it don't absolve a bank robber, I fail to see how it could impact the trial of an on-line sexual predetor

and about being molested as a child ...

since when is that an excuse for the further victimization of children ???

had foley come out without any criminal charges being filed, the fact that he was molested in the past might count for something

since foley didn't seek help until he was facing criminal charges, I don't give a shit what his childhood was like

this isn't about foley as a child.

there are REAL Children who have been victimized here, and foley ain't the victim

[QuickSilver]

Mark Foley has kneecapped every single gay politician in America today. He has hurt the chances of young men and women around the country who want to work with children, yet are turned away because of their sexual orientation. This scandal may even help accelerate bans on gay adoption or gay foster care. This is a dream come true for the same fundamentalist extremes he enabled for his entire political career.

Well said. I agree with those who suggest this was a calculated GOP smackdown, the spreading the "creepy gay" meme. It was very crass and, quite possibly, highly effective.

How sad that Foley is still so habituated to doing favors for the old Republican team, and so isolated from the gay mainstream, that he didn't give any thought to how pulling a stunt like this puts him completely and eternally at odds with the gay community. He'll never be able to win any favors from us. In or out of prison, he could have used a few favors.

[LAL]

It really isn't complicated; if you are going to line your pockets with the profits of a war monggering administration, what can you expect him to be? A self loving gay man? He obviously wasn't all that "in" before this story broke...The whole idea that Buchanan went on HARDBALL last night and spewed his vitrialic lies of pedifilia and homosexuality as being part-in-parcel for why Foley is the rethuglican-rehab poster boy is dispicable! His message doesn't surprise me, but be clear what he is saying. Christians, the bushy kind are suddenly suppossed to clear the way for Foley to contriction and forgiveness, that is as long as he does what he is told by the machine...

[jwp]

Rove got his lede.

On the Today Show: Foley molested by clergy. Is that any excuse for bad behavior.

Now, it is all about is that an excuse for bad behavior (are liberals bad theme).

And last night on CNN there was a panel about was it a crime.

Now buried, who in the Repub leadership knew, and what did they do.

I don't even necessarily believe the clergy thing. Rove could have invented it.

Clever.

[raj]

Foley wasn't and isn't gay. He was and is a man who may--or may not--have had homosexual sex. There's a huge difference.

And that's regardless of his political positions.

[QuickSilver]

How clever that Foley's lawyer talked about a "clergyman". So they can decide what religion, then go out and recruit a dead one, I suppose.

[Undeniable Liberal]

Everybody seems to be missing the big picture:
Nobody could have anticipated the breach of the levis.

[CJT]

Thank you for that post. As a lesbian, it very accurately describes the way I feel about this whole disgusting matter and how a lot of innocent men and women are going to pay the price for this creep's behavior.

[mainsailset]

Amen to this post. I would add the observation that I noted from Foley's lawyer's press conference; namely, that their behavior is extraordinarily narcissistic.

[Raenelle]

We alcoholics think he's giving us a bad name as well.

[Redshift]

Can we institute a Roy Cohn Award, if there isn't one already?

[Rick B]

One thing that really pisses me off about Foley was his announcement that he was gay, as though that excused him of acting on his attraction to teenage boys.

Every heterosexual male out here who is not severely hormonally deficient is attracted to teenage girls. Every damned one of us. If the adult males who are attracted to teenage girls were eliminated, "Buffy the Vampire Slayer" would have lost 30% of its audience.

What most of us don't do is act on that attraction. Our fathers start discussing 'jailbait' with us at an early age. We get the message. "Look but don't touch - and don't get caught looking by women."

I can see how a gay guy in the closet might not get that 'jailbait' message directly, especially if he feared talking about sex with his father. But the gender doesn't change the problem of beeing attracted to teenage 'jailbait.' In or out of the closet doesn't make a difference.

So Foley might be gay. So what? Gay or straight, he is sexually sick if he is approaching teenagers.

[Sara]

I suspect we have need to return to some clear headed and basic analysis about whether everyone should be simply up-front as to sexual orientation -- not because so many people are profoundly interested, but because it is healthy psychologically and in the legal-political dimension. Back in the 50's I had a great prof who had been forced out of the upper reaches of the State Department by McCarthyism because of his Sexual Orientation -- a China Specialist. (McCarthyism was about both lefties and 'homo's' who, it was understood, could be blackmailed.) What should be clear is if there is no "secret" the opposition has no power to blackmail. McCarthy employed Roy Cohen because he understood these dynamics about secrecy.

There really should be quite limited tolerance for Gays and Lesbians in Public Life who are not reasonably clear about identity. Private life is a very different story -- but public life is about policy consequences, and the ability of opponents to use the dynamics of secrecy to forstall totally unrelated policy objectives by holding the red card of sexual orientation over any player just has to be eliminated -- and openness is the clear way to resolve it.

As many are anticipating (Josh Marshall, David Corn) we are about to be treated to multiple outings of high ranking Republicans -- elected and staffers -- who are Gay. They will go down because the GOP is the party of homophobia as well as the party of the Roy Cohen sort of secret Gay Elite. (If you haven't read Nick von Hoffman's bio of Cohen and his dealing with Nancy Reagan to get him a jump on the line of early AID's Cases for access to the NIH trials of early AID's drugs,, while still denying he was either Gay or had AIDS, -- while her husband was intentionally avoiding the disease, and firing the Surgeon General who was attempting to move to a progressive Public Health policy, do treat yourself.) The enemy of everything is secrecy -- it provides the red card holder with power.

Foley should be required to name the "clergyman" and the church before anyone accepts his story of abuse in his early teen years. I happen to believe he may have been abused, because I did follow the RC story with interest, and his behavior over the years fits with certain trajectories -- but beginning with the people (more than 500 of them) who went public in Boston -- and the thousands who now belong to SNAP (Survivors Network of those Abused by Priests) -- Gay and Straight, who have told their stories in the interests of system change going all the way up to Ratzinger, Where was Mark Foley when they were standing in the Chancellory Door and making demands? He was a public figure during that time -- and he failed to support other abused who were making the case. He was keeping his secret so as to keep his deputy whip slot in the Republican line-up. That is why he should be told to F*** Off, not necessarily for other reasons. He wants to adopt the narrative of what happened to the victims of Priestly Abuse, without paying dues.

In fact, many victims did have terrible consequences, drugs, drink, suicide, professional and vocational employment problems, relationship problems, -- it is huge. What has he ever done about it except strut around the Hill flaunting his broad pink tie?