Department of Sleaze


West Palm Beach criminal defense attorney David Roth explained yesterday that disgraced former Rep. Mark Foley isn’t a child molester at all—he’s a drunk gay man who was himself molested as a minor.

In other words, it’s Foley who’s the victim—of his alcoholism; his (unnamed) priest; and apparently, his sexual orientation.

From the A.P.: “’Mark Foley wants you to know he is a gay man,’ Roth told reporters in Florida as Republicans struggled to avoid election-year fallout from the congressman's behavior and sudden resignation.”

Attorney Roth said that “the disclosure was part of his client's ‘recovery.’ He also said that Foley “was molested between ages 13 and 15 by a clergyman. He declined to identify the clergyman or the church, but Foley is Roman Catholic.”

“‘As is so often the case with victims of abuse,” Roth went on, “Mark advises that he kept his shame to himself for almost 40 years'... Asked why he didn't disclose this information sooner, Roth said, ‘Shame, shame.’”

Shame, shame, indeed. But whose? This spin has Karl Rove’s thumb prints all over it. Rove has made anti-gay propaganda part of the Republican party machine ever since George Bush’s first campaign for governor of Texas, in 1994, when rumors flew that the popular incumbent, Democrat Ann Richards, was gay (she wasn’t, they say; but who cares?).

Whenever convenient, Rove seems to feel, target the gays. Which is just so sad, considering that Rove's own stepfather, Louis Rove, who raised him, and to whom he has said he was very close, was gay, according to a new book by James Moore and Dallas Morning News political reporter Wayne Slater (“The Architect: Karl Rove and the Master Plan for Absolute Power"; Crown: 2006).

What kind of person uses the sexual orientation of someone they loved as a weapon against others of the same orientation? A weapon, no less, in the pursuit of power?

And what the heck is Karl Rove’s sexual orientation, anyway? Not that it matters; and not that I care, or anybody should care. Sure, Rove was married (for three years, from 1976-1979); but so was his stepfather, and he was allegedly gay. And Mark Foley “fooled” everybody for years. So did Rock Hudson.

All I'm sayin' is: ya never know. We'd have to have reality-tv cameras on Rove, 24/7, for the rest of his life, to know for sure. (And maybe not even then. Remember when Jimmy Carter said he had "lust in his heart," God bless him?) And I don't think even Karl Rove would think that kind of invasion of privacy is a good idea.

The A.P. goes on: “The lawyer [Roth] said Foley, who is now in treatment for alcohol abuse, never had any inappropriate sexual contact with a minor. He said Foley was under the influence of alcohol when he sent the e-mails and instant messages.”

Isn't this the sort of victim-speak that usually makes the Hannity and Coulters take out their surgical knives? Where are these guys on this?

"I was advised by [Foley's] doctor,” Roth went on, “that despite obvious pressure and the trauma of what he has gone through as a result of the revelations that he has determined to be completely inappropriate and inexcusable that he is not in danger of hurting himself.”

Oh, well, thank God for that. Mark Foley isn’t going to kill himself. And let’s pray he's not in danger of anybody hurting him if or when he goes to prison, where I hear child molesters aren’t exactly the other inmates’ favorite people.