Or Jim McGreevey, for that matter.
Here’s how a letter writer to the Globe put it today:
AS A gay man living for more than two decades in Boston, I have known many gay men raised in strict Catholic homes, two of whom were molested by their priests. Not one of them grew up to be a closeted Republican who worked to criminalize his own behavior.
Foley should have sought professional help, as many of my friends did, long before he mixed alcohol, his own apparent homophobia, congressional pages, and the Internet, and brought himself to this ignominious place.
If he had taken personal responsibility for his mental health earlier, it would not be thrust upon him now by events he set in motion by his very failure to do so.
Here’s how I put it to a friend, a few weeks back, regarding McGreevey’s book tour:
[McGreevey] seemed to manipulate his coming out into extending the power of his corrupt administration for another three months. I’m not a big fan of McGreevy, as the coming out seemed less courageous and more calculated than anything else. Besides, I highly doubt that this was too much of a secret, as statehouses are extremely prolific gossip mills.
I’d add that he’s a sad example of anything. He used his sexuality and self as a means of crass retention. He did not care for himself or his loved ones sufficiently to see himself as an end in himself but rather as a means toward something new, something more. For Foley and McGreevey, being gay provides the excuse for the sickness in their souls; their personhood is used to justify the very warping of their self that they have engaged in.