I was just watching John King fill in for Wolf Blitzer on CNN's The Situation Room. He interviewed Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council on the fallout from the Mark Foley scandal. Repeatedly during the interview, Tony Perkins implied that the Republican leadership might have resisted taking action on Mark Foley's emails to underage congressional pages,
because they might be perceived as "homophobic or gay-bashing". Yeah, you heard right.
Perkins was obviously trying to link pedophilia to homosexuality in an attempt to once again demonize the gay community with the myth that all homosexuals are pedophiles, and the fact that John King let those statements go unchallenged was extremely disturbing. So in essence, Perkins was claiming that Congress should actively and openly participate in gay-bashing and homophobia in order to weed out potential pedophiles.
TRANSCRIPT:
KING: More now on our top story, the scandal over former Congressman Mark Foley's explicit communications with a former congressional page. Joining us from Baton Rouge, Louisiana to talk about this as a potential political fallout is Tony Perkins, president of the Family Research Council.
Tony Perkins thank you for joining us. I want to begin with a simple question to you. You're a leader of a grass roots conservative organization that a lot of pro-family voters around the country look to for guidance and advice in moments like this. There are conservative activists like Richard Vagary (ph), conservative groups like Citizens United who say the Republican leadership blew this, they did not handle this well. The speaker and others should resign from office. Do you think that's the case?
TONY PERKINS, PRES., FAMILY RESEARCH COUNCIL: Well I think it's premature to say whether or not the leadership should resign. I think it certainly raises questions about what did the leadership know and when did they know it. We do know that they had indications that there were improper communications between this congressman and pages as long as two or three years ago. But, I think there may have been some fear that they had in pressing it forward out of fear of being seen as gay bashing or homophobic because of the orientation of Congressman Foley.
KING: Well let's talk about one specific incident. John Shimkus, the congressman -- he's the Republican chairman of the Page Board. He oversees essentially the page program. He is -- his job is to protect those kids whose parents send them up to Washington, it's a position of great responsibility.
(CROSSTALK)
KING: He acknowledges that in an e-mail exchange that he knew about months ago, Congressman Foley asked about the former page's wellbeing after Hurricane Katrina and requested a photograph. Any parent out there telling their young kid what to do and what not to do on the Internet would take requesting a photograph as a red flag of a serious problem.
(CROSSTALK)
PERKINS: Oh I agree.
KING: Congressman Shimkus went to Mark Foley and said don't do it again. But there's no evidence he called an attorney, no evidence he said Mark, you need counseling, no evidence -- we know he didn't tell the Democrats, didn't even tell other Republicans on that board. As we speak, sir, John Shimkus is still the chairman of the Page Board. Would you send your child to Washington to be a page?
PERKINS: Oh, I -- there's no defense of this behavior. It's outrageous, it's shocking. But it shouldn't be totally surprising when we hold up tolerance and diversity as the guidepost for public life this is what you end up getting. A congressman chasing 16-year- old boys down the halls of Congress, it's a shame. It's a tragedy and it does need to be addressed but not just the symptoms here.
We need to go to the source of the problem. And if the leadership was negligent, it should be dealt with and it should be dealt with in the most severe way possible. But what prevented the leadership from acting? Were they fearful of acting because they would be seen as homophobic or gay bashing?
I mean every parent in America should be -- should feel that their child is secure working as a page in Congress. I mean think about it. If our kids aren't secure in Congress, if they're not safe walking among our congressmen, where in the world are they safe?
KING: Well in your -- your voters -- your -- the people who are constituents of your organization who I think it's fair to say tend to vote Republican in most elections, not always, but conservative pro- family voters, they're out there across America. They might be registered as Democrats, but they vote on these issues. Should they support the Republican leadership? It says in the next five weeks you have to come out and vote. You have to keep us in office because you can't trust the Democrats.
PERKINS: No, I think this is a real problem for the Republicans as right or wrong are seen as the guardians of value, the party that preserves and works for family values. This certainly is not a family value. This is going to be, I think, very harmful for Republican turnout across the country because it's inconsistent with the values that the Republicans say that they represent. I think that's why we've got to go beyond this and see further into this, get the facts. There should be a full investigation. Who knew what, when they knew it and why did they not act?
KING: What are you hearing from your people out in the country? I know the organization has e-mail exchanges. It's involved in radio programming? What are you hearing?
PERKINS: People are concerned about this. I mean think about this. I mean any mother or father thinking about their 15, 16-year- old daughter or son that goes to Congress to get an experience of a lifetime. People will look for this opportunity as a chance of a lifetime to work in the halls of government, the most powerful country in the world and the thing that they have to be concerned about most is being sexually harassed or potentially molested by a congressman. It's outrageous. It shouldn't happen.
KING: I asked you about Congressman Shimkus and whether he should still be the head of the Page Board a few moments ago. I want to ask you about Speaker Dennis Hastert. Congressman Tom Reynolds, who's the chairman of the Republican Campaign Committee, said he came to Speaker Hastert and said it had come to his attention, this e-mail exchange, again, not sexually graphic, but an e-mail exchange, a 54- year-old, 50-something-year-old member of Congress to a 16-year-old kid asking questions, familiar questions and then asking for a photograph.
Congressman Reynolds said something to Speaker Hastert about this. The speaker says he probably said that but he can't recall it. Now the speaker is a very busy man in his defense, but this is a conversation about potential misconduct by a member of Congress involving a young child. Should the speaker have listened more closely?
PERKINS: Well, I would like to know what was exactly said to the speaker and why he did or did not do something. Was it out of fear of pushing something too far, overreacting and that because of the orientation of Congressman Foley, they would be seen as being gay bashing? You know was that a part of the decision not to act?
That's what I think we need to know. I do think that the speaker should have paid closer attention to this. I'm not prepared to say that the speaker should resign. I would like to see all the facts. I hope they're forthright and forthcoming in the next 48 hours and present this information to the American public.
KING: Tony Perkins, the president of the Family Research Council, we thank you for your time tonight and we'll touch base again as this unfolds in the days to come.
PERKINS: Thank you.
I immediately fired off an email to CNN and within 15 minutes, John Roberts came out with a disclaimer on Paula Zahn Now, clarifying that pedolphilia has "nothing to do with the act of sex". Note that they
failed to say that
pedophilia has nothing to do with homosexuality.
I'm tired of this crap. So if a congressman was caught sending inappropriate and lurid emails to an underage teenage girl, do you think John King would have allowed some wingnut to come on the air and claim that the leadership might have failed to take action because of the fear of hetero-bashing?
Please let CNN know that you find this unacceptable. Here are addresses where you can contact CNN:
Comments on The Situation Room
Comments on a Specific Reporter or Anchor
Comments on Errors You've Seen on CNN