He might be a middle-aged white guy from the Mountain West, but Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) suddenly understands the travails of people stopped for "DWB": driving while black. In the course of his interview with Matt Lauer, aired last night and excerpted on this morning's "Today," Craig tried to play the profiling card.
MATT LAUER: The fact that these motions seemed to replicate a well-established sequence of signals for soliciting anonymous sex, it's a coincidence?
View video here.
LARRY CRAIG: I now know that this cop, this officer [shades of "that woman, Ms. Lewinsky"?] is a profiler. He said looking into a stall was one of it. And then a hand gesture or a foot tap is another one. Now I know all about profiling. I know what people feel like when they're profiled. When innocent people get caught up in what I was caught in as an innocent person, it's very angering at times.
Should we expect Al Sharpton to turn up at Craig's next press conference, expressing solidarity with this latest victim of The Man?
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Yeah right
October 17, 2007 - 06:44 ET by rgoldI think the senator's explanation requires a willing suspension of disbelief.
He's right on the money my
October 17, 2007 - 08:48 ET by TruthMongerHe's right on the money my so-called conservative friends
with friends like you guys Larry need no enemies
A service of the new NB respect police
Regarding that officer.. that cop...
October 17, 2007 - 06:53 ET by KillgraveThe butch set him up.
Crime Here
October 17, 2007 - 06:57 ET by allanfEven if everything the officer said was true, what is the crime here?
Being Republican
October 17, 2007 - 07:03 ET by rimskyBeing Republican
Trying to Understand
October 17, 2007 - 07:11 ET by allanfI really am tryining to make some sense out of this arrest. Does the act of putting your hand below the level of the stall divider constitute a crime - or only if it is done with specific "intent"? Does putting your hand on the other side of the divider (I don't know if that was alleged) constitute a crime.
Or does following some secret ritual known only to gays that consitutes a crime? Or is it being gay that constitues a crime?
I also wondered how the officer would know sitting in a stall that Craig was peering in through a crack.
If Barney Frank had been arrested in this instance, this officer would no longer have a job.
I'm with you allanf
October 17, 2007 - 07:38 ET by Dee BunkThere is no crime here and people should be outraged by this arrest.
exactly - he was
October 17, 2007 - 08:50 ET by TruthMongerexactly - he was "disturbing the peace"
fake "crime fighting" like this is why so many cops have their "donut patrol" reputation
A service of the new NB respect police
To me, the most provocative
October 17, 2007 - 09:56 ET by robert108To me, the most provocative question is why the cop offered a reduced charge to Craig, voluntarily and without a lawyer present?
If he really had him on a sex charge, why the reduction? It all smells funny.
This whole thing stinks.
October 17, 2007 - 07:06 ET by motherbeltThis whole thing stinks. There is no way "that cop" could "know" a well-established sequence of signals for soliciting anonymous sex, because there ARE no signals. It's simply not true that homosexuals seek anonymous sex in restrooms. It's an urban legend.
<sarc off>
How do they reconcile these seemingly contradictory things?
So What if the Do
October 17, 2007 - 07:09 ET by allanf.. and so what if two homosexuals try to connect in a restroom? Does it follow that trying to pick up a woman in an airport a crime? If a woman winks at me is she giving me an agreed upon secret heterosexual signal and now subject to arrest?
I thought the illegal conduct was actually engaging in sex in a public place.
allan, there is a
October 17, 2007 - 07:21 ET by motherbeltallan, there is a difference between flirting and actively soliciting sex.
This whole thing with Craig hinges on the assumption that certain signals in a men's room constitute a solicitation for sex, right here, right now, in this public place. So if the "anonymous sex in a public place" thing with gays is not true, then how would the cop "know" what constitutes a "solicitation"? That is what I was getting at- the contradiction.
Once again, the minority
October 17, 2007 - 07:32 ET by BinxlyOnce again, the minority within a minority ruins it for the 'normal' within the initial minority. It is NOT a myth that some gay males cruise public bathrooms or rest stops for 'no strings attached' sex. That said, however, it is NOT a 'norm' amongst homosexuals simply because we've heard of stories. I've heard TONS of stories of ignorant african americans being violent and acting like 'thugs.' I've even been privy to it personally as I was once quite literally mugged walking out of a bar late one weekend.
While much like the homosexual bathroom sex issue has been proven with examples, so has the fact that some african americans are violent thugs. Does this mean ALL african americans are thugs? heck no! I've also met plenty of old, wealthy, white Republican males who quite literally would rather watch a child starve than even THINK of donating their money. Does this mean that ALL white republican males are stingy and cold-hearted? Certainly not.
This also holds true with homosexuals. While the minority within that minority does engage in morally damnable acts and may live unsavory lifestyles, it does NOT mean that what works for one works for the flock. Is it a shame some homosexuals prowl bathrooms for sex? Absolutely. It is, however, an even greater shame that because of such things, and people's uncomfortability with someone living a 'different' lifestyle, that they assume this is a standard amongst homosexuals. It is not.
Secret Code
October 17, 2007 - 07:41 ET by allanfMotherbelt, perhaps I missed that point because I find it hard to believe that there is some agreed upon secret code, known only to gays, the end result of which is virtually always a sexual encounter in a public place. (As opposed to say getting a room).
That is what the state would have to prove to sustain charges.
The airport police in MSP have way to much free time on their hands.
The smell test
October 17, 2007 - 07:51 ET by TaserCatI think Larry's been a good representative for the people of Idaho.
That being said-- as any guy who's used airport bathrooms would surely tell you, swiping my hand across the bottom of the bathroom stall and touching another guy's shoe are two of the LAST things I would EVER do in a public bathroom.
His defense just doesnt pass the smell test.
It doesn't matter. So what if it's true
October 17, 2007 - 08:12 ET by Dee BunkYou can't arrest someone for wanting to do something illegal; they have to actually do it. Even shoplifters who put something in their pocket or under their coat can't be arrested until they leave the store. Until they leave it hasn't been stolen. You can't arrest someone for prostiution or solicitation until money changes hands.
I can walk up to a friend in any public place and ask them if they want to have sex right here right now. They can't arrest me for that. What if we laugh afterwards instead of actually doing it? I can also talk with a friend about how I'm planning to join the mile high club and say when and where and how I think I'm going to get away with it and they can't arrest me unless I actually do it.
It's completely 100% outrageous that he has been arrested for this.
Dee, whether you or I think
October 17, 2007 - 08:18 ET by motherbeltDee, whether you or I think it is outrageous, it is a fact that prostitutes get arrested all the time for merely "soliciting" sex. But I see your point...one is for money, the other is not. The difference is that prostitutes come right out and say it, and in this case, the cop is claiming that certain "signals" were sent by Craig. Unfortunately, I believe the judge has said Craig can't rescind his guilty plea for disorderly conduct, so we won't find out how they would make the case for "solicitation".
But...
October 17, 2007 - 16:02 ET by TheDeuceWhat's the crime here? Please, be specific...
Why is it that lefties believe that 'the people' noted in the 2nd are different than the 'the people' mentioned elsewhere in the Bill of Rights?
I find it hard to believe
October 17, 2007 - 08:09 ET by motherbeltI find it hard to believe that there is some agreed upon secret code, known only to gays, the end result of which is virtually always a sexual encounter in a public place
Look, I'm not saying that's true. I have heard it, but I don't know. What I'm saying is that the cop is claiming that.
On the one hand, we have the cop claiming this; on the other, gay activists claim that it is an urban legend. And that's why I said there are contradictions here.
Look, if you do a Google search on "gay sex in restrooms" or some such nonsense (and no, I haven't done it, I'm just theorizing), you will probably come up with articles that support the claim and articles that refute it. They are going to have a tough time proving it. Which is why Craig probably should not have pled guilty to disorderly conduct. It would have been interesting, in a ghoulish sort of way, to see how they tried to prove their case.
As for the MSP police having too much time on their hands, I believe the cop's contention was that they had had a "problem" with this behavior in the airport restrooms and that's why they were on the lookout for it. Whether it was actually a "sting" operation, or a chance happening, I don't know.
Is tapping your foot really code for public sex?
October 17, 2007 - 08:42 ET by ding7777Yes.
The signal has been around for decades in the United States and Europe. Generally, one person initiates contact by tapping his foot in a way that's visible beneath the stall divider. If the second person responds with a similar tap, the initiator moves his foot closer to the other person's stall. If the other person makes a similar move, the first will inch closer yet again. The pair usually goes through the whole process a few times, just to confirm that the signals aren't an accident.
Next, one of the men will slide his hand under the divider. This usually means he's inviting the other person to present himself, as if to say, "Show me what you got." The partner can respond by kneeling on the floor and presenting his penis or rear end underneath the divider. Or he can swipe his own hand under the divider, as if to say, "You go first." Some married men make a point of displaying their wedding band (like Sen. Craig allegedly did) to make themselves more alluring.
more FAQs
Innocent until proven guilty
October 17, 2007 - 09:00 ET by TruthMongerWhether it's code or not - does that irrefutably mean that Craig was actually attempting it - or might it have been coincidence? It would have to be proven he was attempting it - he denies it - so how can it be proven? A guilty plea for disorderly conduct does not prove gay sex solicitation...
Is waving your hand under a stall - if that's what craig really did - illegal? No. Is shoe touching illegal? No.
We are "throwing him under the bus" when he needs our help - he is being attacked and we are abandoning him - how do the military people here feel about that i wonder...?
The libs are also throwing him under the bus as well if he is gay...
Gay Christians don't count apparently...
A service of the new NB respect police
I'm with you
October 17, 2007 - 16:06 ET by TheDeuceThis is EXACTLY what I expect from the left, but not from my brethren on the right.
Why is it that lefties believe that 'the people' noted in the 2nd are different than the 'the people' mentioned elsewhere in the Bill of Rights?
Public Place
October 17, 2007 - 09:38 ET by allanfDing, it is the lewd act in public part that does not follow. Here is what Keith Griffin of crusingforsex.com said:
The policeman was making a leap from "flirtation" to "lewd act in public"
Sanity here
October 17, 2007 - 08:36 ET by okiehawk44Common practice in all law enforcement jurisdictions calls for arresting men for "soliciting sex" from a prostitute -- it does not say the police must wait until the act is in progress or just completed. He knows what he was up to and he got himself caught and he knew there would be tremendous consequences. He did the wrong thing and got caught and now wants a do-over.
Law over mob "sanity" any day
October 17, 2007 - 09:02 ET by TruthMongerthis is how the watercooler or the lynch mob works - not a court of law
A service of the new NB respect police
Soliciting Sex
October 17, 2007 - 09:27 ET by allanfUsually when a prostitue is arrested, there is a verbal agreement to exhange a sex act for money.
In this case, there were some hand signals that may, or may not have resulted in a lewd act in a public place.
Specifically...
October 17, 2007 - 16:07 ET by TheDeuceWhat did he get caught doing?
Why is it that lefties believe that 'the people' noted in the 2nd are different than the 'the people' mentioned elsewhere in the Bill of Rights?
Tapping his foot?
October 17, 2007 - 16:09 ET by Free StinkerTapping his foot?
Creeeeeepy
October 17, 2007 - 08:09 ET by NoMoreClintonsThis guy is a creep and he might have gotten some sympathy if his reputation hadn't preceded him. He should be driven from the Senate as he is an embarassment to the GOP and just gives the dims and their minions in the msm more ammunition.
And the Democrats are
October 17, 2007 - 08:13 ET by motherbeltAnd the Democrats are notoriously capable of forcing the Republicans to shun and oust their sinners, and notoriously firm in standing by their own.
I'm not saying Craig shouldn't go..I just wish the Democrats would have the same standards for their own wayward sons.
I would rather we take care
October 17, 2007 - 08:20 ET by the_red_stateI would rather we take care of our own and pressure him to resign rather than let him continue to be fodder for the libs. Gets him out of the spotlight faster while still leaving in place a certain member of congress who has the "cold cash" for us to target.
so every senator that
October 17, 2007 - 09:02 ET by TruthMongerso every senator that commits a misdemeanor must resign? is that your rule?
A service of the new NB respect police
I couldn't disagree more. He should stay and expose
October 17, 2007 - 08:23 ET by Dee Bunkthe homophobic left
My First Post
October 17, 2007 - 08:23 ET by TexndocI've been a member for a while but just enjoy being a spectator here, but I have to give my opinion here. I received a call from the RNC and told them to call back when this guy was gone from the Senate. If you don't think he will KILL the election in 2008 you are wrong. Huffington Kos and Soros love this mess. The Republican Party's Britney. He will be in so many ads towards election (even if he left now) that Jay Leno would be jealous of his TV time. I'd love to meet his supporters here who when at the airport feel the need to "go" and:
1) Select a restroom no where near your gate, that you have to go out of the way to get to.
2) Select a restroom known for homosexual activity.
3) Select the ONLY restroom in the airport known for homosexual activity.
4) Tap your foot (to the music I guess)
5) Reach around the partition and under it, or if we are to believe, pick up ANYTHING off the floor.
This guy needs to go NOW. How bad is it? I have never refused to contribute to the RNC and if I lived in Idaho and there was a Democrat now in a special election, for the first time in my life I'd go to the dark side. And "cop bashing" just makes me more furious. If a little boy had been accosted in that restroom, the public would be SCREAMING why this situation wasn't being addressed. It is, a perve Senator is caught, and some are saying, well. he didn't have his you know in the other guys you know!~
Beam me up, Scotty.
great!
October 17, 2007 - 08:44 ET by okiehawk441st / middle / last post -- I AGREE 100%
My 2nd post
October 17, 2007 - 08:51 ET by TexndocI have to go to work now (can't let the staff see me playing on the internet) but let me leave with I almost cried when Mark Levin, my Great One, was making the same flimsy "don't the cops have better things to do?" excuse for this guy on his radio show. Lord, and Matt Lauer parades him on PRIME TIME TV. Don't his "supporters" have a clue here?
A visit with Tappy Toes and the Mrs. on "The View"? No, let's wait until closer to the election.
typical republicans right here
October 17, 2007 - 09:07 ET by TruthMongermeanwhile a Democrat congressman hoards cash in his freezer and the other Democrats run him out of town
actually they don't do they?
for one thing the congressman hasn't been proven guilty yet
and even if that happens his associates will still defend him and fight for him tooth and nail...
but let's use your approach instead - good strategy, bro - real winner
A service of the new NB respect police
Go Away, Larry
October 17, 2007 - 08:26 ET by mattmI used to get angry at all the coverage. But now that Larry Boy is shoving himself all over the public airwaves, I no longer blame the media in this case... They're still biased...if Larry wasn't a GOP-er this would be a very minor story, but if he won't shut up about it himself, he deserves the negative publicity he gets.
If he was innocent he never should have plead guilty to the original charge. He should have been adamant against the charges from the beginning.
This is where Republicans screw it up all the time: they leave themselves open to be the butt of jokes and give the Libs a perfect target for their hateful propaganda...
Thanks alot Larry...you can shut up and go away now.
mattm... I could not
October 17, 2007 - 16:24 ET by bigtimermattm...
I could not agree more with your post.
People I know in Idaho are sick of seeing his face, wished he would of resigned when he said or implied he would and let this move on, another republican was going to take his place, and hopefully still will in time.
The leftist msm are using him, and loving it against the conservatives.
Larry Craig was infuriating with his illegal immigration votes and such...I called his office numerous times, my husband and I lost respect for him long ago...my husband is from Idaho, we are just yards away from the state line of Idaho.
I said from the beginning of this whole bathroom arrest that I thought he was obviously set up....which I still think, he should not of pled guilty, he did...end of story as far as I am concerned.
But NOOOO...he has to get all over the television now...he is pathetic in our opinion.
Like you say...just go away.
I wouldn't mind if he resigned - if and only if
October 18, 2007 - 09:06 ET by Dee Bunkhe said he was doing so because of the unfair treatment he's received from the liberal media.
Is Larry Craig gay? I
October 17, 2007 - 08:27 ET by drillanwrIs Larry Craig gay? I don't know, and I don't care. If he were an admitted homosexual I wouldn't care, as long as he was responsible and honest (unlike a man who would be a closet gay ... and in a "phony" heterosexual marriage in which even his wife has been mislead) for his actions. Assuming Larry Craig is gay, he has failed that responsibility ... and continues to do so, now that he has been pulled into the glare of daylight and needs to, most importantly, admit the truth to himself and his family.
Having said that, I recall how heroically the democrat governor of (was it?) Maryland a couple years ago admitting his alternative sexual preference ... even while in an heterosexual marriage. Why, he was hailed as so brave ... and never mind who he was "involved" with and the national/homeland security involved ...
And then you have Larry Craig ... possibly looking for a hit and run in an airport men's room ...
So, the difference between the Governor (D) and the Senator (R)?
http://bp3.blogger.com/_-r8QwF7lMmQ/RwBGF73SWYI/AAAAAAAAAQg/ppEjeWbpLck/s1600-h/Shelton_C20070904.jpg
It does
October 17, 2007 - 08:51 ET by okiehawk44It does matter to me what "sexual persuasion" candidates subscribe to -- it also matters to me if they are a pedophile or wear women's clothes or engage in any other activity we are told is genetically predetermined -- be HONEST about yourself and if I care to vote for you then I will and so will others -- Craig is not an honest person to himself, his wife, his family, his constituents, his colleagues, etc.
Well, that's basically what
October 17, 2007 - 08:54 ET by drillanwrWell, that's basically what I was getting at ... And it's why, in addition to Craig's NOT seeking privacy from the media, said media keep harping on this story.
Best political cartoon of
October 17, 2007 - 09:00 ET by stratmanBest political cartoon of the year so far.
Thanks!
Killing them with kindness isn't working. Time to get scrappy with the Donkeys.
the MSM has been absolutley
October 17, 2007 - 09:18 ET by TruthMongerthe MSM has been absolutley brilliant as usual in all of this - and conservatives have once again been their ever-useful idiots. The MSM has successfully baited you into a Gay conviction of Larry Craig based on a nothing disorderly conduct offense...
So congratulation to you all. You are willing idiot dupes re-re-re-hashing gay this that gay this gay that gay this gay that gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay gay
All we know FOR ABSOLUTE SURE IS
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
DISORDERLY CONDUCT
So one last time I ask you - must Republican Senators resign for DISORDERLY CONDUCT - irregardless of the actions behind it - whatever actions are behind it? That is what many of you are all saying here...
In other words, in the near future, if a Republican Senator is lets say just "having a very bad week, maybe gets angry, maybe starts yelling in an Airport, and the police arrest this senator for disorderly conduct, and the senator pleads guilty - THEN HE MUST RESIGN FOR THIS - IS THAT THE STANDARD YOU ARE PUSHING HERE OR NOT?!?!@?!@?!?!?!~
Answer please
A service of the new NB respect police
I'm Outta Here
October 17, 2007 - 09:29 ET by TexndocOh Lord.
The "MSM baited" me into a "gay conviction"?
Did they bait Senator Tappy Toes into a gay "guilty plea" when the only two who knew about this were him and the cop?
LOL - even Laura Ingraham, who I'm listening to, said she had to tune out of the interview because she couldn't stomach this guy. SHE PLAYS CLIPS OF THE GUY FOR LAUGHS, fer Chrissakes.! I'm really outta here - got to go learn to practice Hillary's socialized medicine. Can't wait! This Boob continually on the tube will get us there.
Try this...
October 17, 2007 - 17:14 ET by TheDeuceOk, so a pro-family republican is confrontd by a cop in a public restroom.The cop tells him that he's benig busted for soliciting sex in a public place.
Do you think MAYBE the republican thinks that a disorderly conduct goes away quietly rather than havnig to stand in court fighting a soliciting public sex from a cop, same sex or not? C'mon...the left's been making shit up wholesale for years. Just the charge alone would have caused an uproar.
Who was the guy exonerated during Reagan's administration who asked, 'where do I go to get my reputation back?'
TM -
October 17, 2007 - 09:38 ET by drillanwrI'm not judging or asking Craig for anything but what you just stated ... and piss-poor judgement (which does cause me worry about his judgement when it comes to making important decisions while in office ...)
Anyhow ...
I'm not generally one to demand resignation for anything less than tens of thousands of illegal dollars in a freezer (well, probably for diddling with under-age congressional pages ... that's a matter of abuse of power/position).
I do believe Craig's situation is political fodder for the media that supports the opposing political party ... hence, his continual willing publicizing this case instead of just making the initial statement(s) and refusing to address it any further, has now put him in the position of being a political liability for his own party.
To be fair, I feel Trent Lott handled his own non-issue (of praising a 100 yr. old man at his birthday party) in much the same stupid way.
Republicans need to understand the concept of addressing the issue (or apology) once, and then MOVING THE HECK ON ... This continual self-flogging and their willing volunteer public flogging by the MSM is disgusting ...
forget gay - should every
October 17, 2007 - 17:29 ET by TruthMongerforget gay - should every senator resign if they plead guilty to disorderly conduct?
yes or no
still waiting for an answer
A service of the new NB respect police
term limit
October 17, 2007 - 09:41 ET by iveseenitallThis is only one of the hundreds of stories ( so many not reported) associated with the pack of pathetic, ignorant crooks we have running our government. Is this story important?--not at all. Like most news today, it's backyard gossip.The Congressional approval rating is now 11%. A term limit of 6 years and out would go a long way to improving that number. Unfortunately, like tort reform and so many other important matters, it'll never happen. As a result, a helpless, apathtic, duped America is on its way out. Weep for this once great nation. Sad.
NEVER,NEVER trust a "liberal"
Who did what?
October 17, 2007 - 09:51 ET by Blogger Guy00001"well-established sequence of signals for soliciting anonymous sex"
Actually, that's what the cop did.