I cannot agree more with the assessment of the main stream media; the double standard is enough to choke a horse.  Having said that, the biggest disappointment for me was Fox's non-stop, show after show, coverage of this story.  When does anyone at these stations put a plug in it.  It just goes to show you, if Craig had give it more thought, he would have released the info himself, the same week Paris Hilton went to jail, and no one would have cared.

I don't know what Fuels this story....but then again, I don't know why Princess Di is all over the TV.  

It's an Idaho issue, and Bill Clinton's escapdes was a Hillary Issue.....evidently she did not care one way or the other... 

What good is a Free Press, if it is a False Press ?   David Foote  GoE

To me, this brief exchange on Thursday’s Hardball sums it up.

“MATTHEWS:  I do have a long political memory and I do remember how the Republicans got this big giggle at their conventions, not just with the attack by the late Jean Kirkpatrick again, quote, San Francisco Democrats, but our colleague, beloved as he is, Pat Buchanan was—got a lot of jollies out of the Republicans back in ‘92 in Houston when he talked about the Democrats being cross dressers and he meant it in a lot of ways.  I just find this interesting.  Hypocrisy does loom here. 

JOAN WALSH, SALON.COM:  Hypocrisy absolutely looms, Chris.  You‘re absolutely right.  I mean, what‘s happened is that the party—the Republican party has made itself the party of the bedroom police.  They have gone after gays.  They have snickered about San Francisco Democrats.  They went after Bill Clinton in a sexual kind of witch-hunt.  So they have left themselves really open to charges of double standards.”

That’s the logic, or lack of it. Because one Republican was a hypocrite, it “proves” that all Republicans are hypocrites. Never mind that this is an obvious logical fallacy (hasty generalizing; or, leaping from an accident of an individual to the substance of the whole). To top it off, liberals don’t even take blame for the fallacy, since Republicans “left themselves really open” to it. Liberals now feel that they can take any cheap shot they want, gleefully reveling in the sport of it, because they never promote family values in the first place.

Several comments:

• Joan Walsh argued that when Republicans promote family values, they left themselves open to charges of double standards. That implies Democrats don’t promote family values. Let’s remind them of their own hypocrisy when they claim to reach out to ‘values’ voters.
• Every time sinful human beings speak about virtue, we leave ourselves open to hypocrisy. That's the risk you take - and the price you pay. Is the answer to try harder to live up to the words, or to take the cowardly route and not speak about virtue at all? We know the liberals’ choice.
• To repeat the obvious: Larry Craig may be a hypocrite about gay issues. Does that mean Jean Kirkpatrick was? Or Pat Buchanan? How about asking Buchanan on to charge him with hypocrisy?
• By making this argument, then, we have no way to dispute that all Democrats are guilty of any sin committed by any Democrat. If you want to generalize, fine, let’s generalize. But liberals don’t want to generalize that way about themselves … which becomes, ironically, the ultimate double-standard.

It goes on, and on ...

In 2000 when the media had thrown their support behind Algore and in 2004, when the media had unabashedly supported Sen. John Kerry they lost both times to the "moral Christian right."  Or such was their analysis.  However, rather than cede these elections to the majority of mainstream Americans who stand for honesty and fairness, many of the same Americans who voted for W, they began to scheme how to smear as many conservatives who would stand in their way regardless of how baseless the claims, (E.g. Dan Rather) or how crazy the accusation.  Craig is probably a sleeze, but what our friends in the media want you to see is not the "private gay man," as they would give any of our democrat politicos,  but the hypocrital Republican moralist.  You have to see it this way- they will have their victory in 2008 no matter the cost.

Personally, I don't think the charges against Craig will stick once they go to court. There was no solicitaion, as far as I can tell, and no sex happened, soooooooo....????? 

Get Email updates from Fred http://socialnet.imwithfred.com/email_alert_july_26.html

I have no way of knowing the truth here.  He could have been trolling or he might have innocently played along with the foot tapping.  What seems to be overlooked here is that the public washrooms that we grandmothers send our grandsons into are dangerous places, thanks to homos.

I have never agreed more about the media bashing gays one day and then running a bunch of gay theme-shows like "Queer Eye", "Will +Grace", "Rosie" etc..... the next day. Just proves that it ALL has to do with party affiliation: Republican's are 'degenerate-sex-addicted-faggot's' and liberals are "progressive lifestyle advocate's" if homosexual.

Also, isn't the media always advocating the "right to privacy"??? Or what about a job applicant's right NOT to declare race, gender or sexual orientation??? If so, then why does the media love to ruin people's lives by divulging if they are gay or not??? I just don't get it!