Political Punch

One more clarification:

Judith Levine's book is "Harmful to Minors: The Perils of Protecting Children From Sex."

The Salon article is "What's so bad about good sex?"

The quote about Judith Levine is from a Salon article on her book, "What's so bad about good sex?"

Donald from Hawaii, you wrote:

“Jake Tapper, I really hope you're not trying to equate a private and consensual relationship between two adults with former Congressman Mark Foley's pointed sexual harassment of teenaged male congressional pages who were at the time nominally under the direction and protection of the House GOP's leadership.”
You’d never know it from the way the Democrats knew they could score political points off of the Foley scandal, but liberals have been big supporters of children having sexual relations against the “idiots” who don’t see the “wisdom” of it. See the support they’ve given to the so-called “Rind study,” Judith Levine’s “Harmful to Minors,” and Harris Mirkin’s “"The Pattern of Sexual Politics: Feminism, Homosexuality, and Pedophilia.” If they didn’t want to be very hypocritical, many if not most of them would have had to level with Americans during the Foley scandal and say that while they saw nothing wrong with Foley being involved with teens, it was his position of power over them that they objected to (that would have made them less hypocritical, since that would mean they still weren’t bothered by Gerry Studds’ relationship with a page when it surfaced during the 80’s, if they didn’t condemn his actions).

“In the introduction of her new book, ‘Harmful to Minors,’ Judith Levine writes, "In America today, it is nearly impossible to publish a book that says children and teenagers can have sexual pleasure and be safe too."

On sexual matters, as well as on others, Democrats and liberals know they can’t get elected by fully revealing their real beliefs or pushing for them all at once. The method has been putting on a mainstream face and only gradually changing things while in power. But if you look at other countries, like Europe and Canada, where liberals have more power, and at liberal venues, you can see what is probably coming down the road. Many if not most liberals are all for lowering the age of consent (during the 90’s, it was 12 in the Netherlands, “age of consent reform,” Wikipedia). And there’s also a strong current against marriage altogether, because the idea of marriage is “heteronormative,” and is tied to religion in its origins. In a generation, we could very well see efforts to ban clergy from marrying people with the power of legal force (it would be ceremonial only), since some might “discriminate” if they don’t believe in marrying homosexual couples, or to replace marriage altogether with civil unions, to get past marriage’s ties to religion and make it a completely civil institution.

Why is it that when some people get a little bit of power...they "Lord" it over anybody who works for them? "I am God here"! is the attitude most of them have.Stop voting for these sex offenders.

Mahoney needs to have an ethic investigation done on him. Any politician Democrat or Republican who abuse their powers must submit. I have no toleration for such despicable actions.

Lee: "Obama supporters, however, have often called him a "saint."

What a transparent lie.

McCain has never claimed to be a saint, and has repeatedly admitted his failings.

Obama supporters, however, have often called him a "saint."

Yeah, lets dig up some old dirt...

It seems John McCain had a relation with Vicki Iseman. According to two former McCain associates, who had become disillusioned with the senator, some of the senator’s advisers had grown so concerned that the relationship had become romantic that they took steps to intervene.

Fact is that this isn't the first affair McCain had. As Matthew Yglesias puts it, "repeatedly cheated on his first wife Carol, of a number of years, with a variety of women, before eventually dumping her for a much-younger heiress whose family fortune was able to help finance his political career." McCain has admitted that he had affairs.

What is even more damaging to McCain is the fact that Iseman lobbied for Lowell W. "Bud" Paxson, the head of what used to be Paxson Communications. McCain had flown on Paxson's corporate jet four times to appear at campaign events and had received $20,000 in campaign donations from Paxson and its law firm.

McCain meets on love boat with criminal mastermind.

Can not wait till November 5th and this is all over...too much drama and not enough real sense.

"This summer I saw headlines that stated that Obama was having affairs on the compaign trail and that Michelle was furious. I do not know if it was true or not but could be. "

Not having an affair. Just an attractive black woman who was a staffer. Militant Michelle had her exiled.

I'd like see the press hounding this guy and the DNC leaders that have actively been covering it up, just like they did Foley.

Give it up Mary. Your lies won't work. Obama will be our next president because he has better IDEAS.

This summer I saw headlines that stated that Obama was having affairs on the compaign trail and that Michelle was furious. I do not know if it was true or not but could be.

Is there something about the water there?

I hope he loses. This is the creep who wouldn't endorse Obama because his "district is conservative and he "wanted to be able to lobby McCain." In other words, he was a democrat in name only. Joke's on him since there won't be a McCain presidency or a Congressman Mahoney!!

Vera Baker? Really?

Here's the thing; there have been so many whisper campaigns, viral emails and smears directed towards Obama that new accusations just don't stick anymore.

Sure there's a certain segment of the tinfoil hat society that will gladly add adultery to the list of crimes they believe Obama is guilty of, but your average moderate undecided voter has put up their shield against these sort of attacks.

So unload everything you've got, because at this point, shows like Hannity and Rush sound more like third-rate tabloids or worse, flat-earth conspiracy theorists than serious thought-provoking sources of political insight.

What a bummer.

If it's true, I hope he is held accountable by his wife.

I'm a Democrat. I've never been one to care too much about a politician's sex life. However, I do mind hypocrisy.

If you partially base your 2006 campaign on morality while simultaneously carrying on an affair--you need to go.

Doesn't matter if you're a Republican like Robert Livingston during the Clinton impeachment hearings of Mahoney here.

Just go away!

Poor sap can't even get his name in print. That's kind of like describing Sarah Palin as "the Republican nominee for the position once held by Dan Quayle."

"Don't forget to cover the Obama/Vera Baker story before the National Enquirer scoops you."

1. For the longest time you guys were saying he was gay now he isn't . . .
2. At worst if true, he is no worse than John McCain and he hasn't dumped his wife and kids like John did in his run for his money honey aka Cindy.

Jake Tapper, I really hope you're not trying to equate a private and consensual relationship between two adults with former Congressman Mark Foley's pointed sexual harassment of teenaged male congressional pages who were at the time nominally under the direction and protection of the House GOP's leadership.

This election is about far greater issues than Tim Mahoney's alleged sexual impropriety and hypocrisy.

Well . . .

He is a step up from the toilet stalls and page boys that the Republicans go after . . .

"Don't forget to cover the Obama/Vera Baker story before the National Enquirer scoops you."

So does that mean Palin had an affair and her son Track has serious drug problems as earlier reported by the National Enquirer?

When you cover Joe Biden ask to speak to his Deputy Director of Policy. Yoo know Vera Baker's business partner and fellow Howard U grad.

Don't forget to cover the Obama/Vera Baker story before the National Enquirer scoops you.

can McLoser find a way to blame this on Obama/Biden?

if so, maybe Sen. Craig's "wide stance" is somehow attributable to Schmidt or Davis?