Correction

Metro admits when he's wrong--often with argument, resentment, and deep suspicion.

But having researched the Foley debacle a little more thoroughly, I find that referring to him, as I did, as a "child-molester" is inaccurate.

The youngest of the pages Foley traded hot-monkey-love e-mail with was sixteen, legal age of consent in the District of Columbia, despite I'm sure the best efforts of Republicans.

--Or perhaps they like it that low?

But the law is the law, and Foley was not molesting a child.

So his behaviour was just hunky-dory then, I suppose, by GOP standards.

Personally, I'm happy with the local age of consent here: fourteen. Because along with that fourteen-year-old age of consent fiction come some caveats:

1) Age difference matters. There is a world of difference between a twenty-year-old £µ©λing a fifty-year-old and a sixteen-year-old £µ©λing a fifty-two-year-old.

2) Power matters: a person in a position of authority such as a cop, parent or guardian, employer or representative, or presumably any elected officer has a moral duty to protect kids, even from their own desires.

Foley seems not to have actually £µ©λed any of his contacts, and they seem to have been willing enough to chat about their sex lives with him. So all he's strictly guilty of is being a moralizing hypocritical @$$#0|3. And a closeted moralizing hypocritical @$$#0|3 at that.

But as you'll soon see, the GOP's loaded with those--read my post below.