Whether senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was outed for political purposes remains a subject of pure speculation one thing, however, is clear: There is a very dedicated group of left-wing gay activists out there who have made it their goal to drag gay Republicans' sex lives out into the public eye unless they toe the line politically.
Regardless of whether you think the Republican party should be more accepting of homosexuality, this tactic of invading people's private lives and exposing them to the public is nothing short of blackmail. Instead of condemning it, however, the liberal press celebrates such efforts as Patterico points out in a blog entry debunking a fawning Washington Post profile of gay blogger Mike Rogers:
Imagine that a conservative Republican senator from Idaho typically votes according to the views of his conservative constituents — with one notable exception: he supports a wide range of proposals endorsed by homosexual activists. He supports gay marriage, allowing gays to serve openly in the military, and laws that confer “protected class” status upon homosexuals for purposes of filing discrimination lawsuits. His constituents are puzzled by this one uncharacteristic breach in his conservative facade, but accept his explanation that he is motivated by principle.
But he doesn’t tell constituents that he, personally, is gay.
Now imagine that an anti-homosexual activist has learned that the senator is gay, and tells the senator that he will expose the senator’s secret homosexual life . . . unless the senator decides to start voting against the gay rights agenda, in which case the activist will remain silent.
That would be extortion. But the activist could justify it with arguments similar to those advanced by Rogers. The revelation of the senator’s secret life would expose as a half-truth his lofty principled reasons for supporting the gay agenda. Instead of concerns about equality, maybe his votes were cast to keep his lover(s) happy. By revealing this, the activist could argue that he was simply exposing dishonesty. And there are all sorts of other possible conflicts lurking under the surface in such a situation. For example, the activist could even argue that the senator voted for the gay agenda out of fear of being exposed by someone like Mike Rogers!
Somehow, if a conservative thug threatened to out a Congressman unless he voted against the homosexual agenda, I don’t think the extortionist would be the subject of a puff piece in the Washington Post. Do you?
Read the whole thing.
—Matthew Sheffield is Editor of NewsBusters.
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
Romney is the Leader on this Issue
September 4, 2007 - 14:49 ET by Daniel BakerHe is the only one who supports a federal amendment, and campaigned vigorously for it. He filed suits before the Supreme Judicial Court and rallied volunteers.
No other canidate has been this concerned.
Whether senator Larry Craig
September 4, 2007 - 14:51 ET byWhether senator Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was outed for political purposes remains a subject of pure speculation
The guy was busted by a cop outside his home state. As much as the righties would like to think this was a setup, no one jumped to his defense, exactly the opposite happened.
And just the fact that you mentioned he was "outed" is an admission that you think he's gay.
Larry Craig
September 4, 2007 - 15:20 ET by Six String SpiffI doubt he was 'outed' or 'set up'. Even if he was, I don't want a deranged stall stalker to be in the Congress of this great country. Republicans are supposed to be the morally correct party. My conclusion to this flap, is the man was caught fair and square trying to do something quite nasty. I mean come on... sex in the CAN.. of an AIRPORT? Good grief... get em out. I am glad nobody ran to his defense. You can't defend physically tapping somebody elses foot and reaching under to the other stall whilst on the toilet... no way.
Blaster, we agree. I must mark this on my calandar.
The American Revolution Continued
...do you think Craig is
September 4, 2007 - 15:36 ET by TruthMonger...do you think Craig is gay and cruises bathrooms? If so then what kind of "damning" evidence do you have for this?
Hint: this bathroom episode isn't even in the ballpark...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
"vote Democrat in 08"
September 4, 2007 - 15:56 ET by RJThink about Supreme Court nominations and the damage a Democrat President would do. Voting to WIN the general election, not childish "punishment", is the only intelligent option.
I'm voting for people with
September 4, 2007 - 16:52 ET by TruthMongerI'm voting for people with basic American values of justice and party loyalty, in other words not Republicans who bail out and run for cover when a colleague like Craig who deserves justice...
The Dems are superior on these basics, so they won my vote - call it punishment if you like - that may be truthful - but its not accurate...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
TM...think CP
September 4, 2007 - 17:01 ET by LionKingIf not happy with the major parties, think third party like the Consitution Party.
[This is exactly why I do not consider myself a Republican. I consider myself a conservative. I try to vote for the most conservative person that has a chance at being elected....I do not want to squander my vote like I did in 1992.]
Thanks, I will - the Repubs
September 4, 2007 - 17:09 ET by TruthMongerThanks, I will - the Repubs have lost me...started with immigration and spending, but this latest thang absolutely infuriates me - they have betrayed an inviolable ethical trust of mine when it comes to justice...INNOCENT UNTIL PROVEN GUILTY...
The Dems have this down pat when it comes to their own...
If the Repubs ever want my vote back then they need to get up to speed on it as well...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
You mean Loyalty Among Thieves is most important, TruthMonger?
September 4, 2007 - 17:35 ET by RJJust keep saying that to yourself:
I VALUE LOYALTY AMONG THIEVES
RJ, you nut:)
September 4, 2007 - 17:39 ET by TruthMonger...so you're proclaiming Craig a thief as well as a gay men's room cruiser:)?
Just keep saying to yourself:
I AM JUDGE, JURY, AND EXECUTIONER
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Where have you seen me make a judgement on him, TM?
September 4, 2007 - 17:49 ET by RJYou haven't. Also, try to follow the bouncing ball...
You said: "The Dems have this down pat when it comes to their own..."
I said: "So Loyalty Among Thieves is important to you."
Got it?
And I remind you again to change your Profile to include your new friends in your "other blogs"....i.e. MoveOn, DailyKos, HuffnPuff, etc. ;^>
I'm cleaning up the Dems my
September 4, 2007 - 19:10 ET by TruthMongerI'm cleaning up the Dems my friend - DKOS et al is not welcome anymore - now that I've moved in:)
And your judgement is proclaiming our reps as thieves - I don't like it. "Loyalty among a party" is my prefered parlance, if you please...
The Dems have this down to my liking - the Repubs definitely do not - and I can't work with rats like that - Repub, mafia or otherwise - so I declare in my own little universe that the RNC needs to be whacked and buried somewhere outside New Jersey - along with anyone else who betrays me and my pal Larry like this again:)...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
So, TruthMonger, let's get this straight
September 4, 2007 - 21:51 ET by RJYou accused me of judging Craig. I challenged you to show where I've done that.
Your response? Because I said you prefer the DemocRATS style of Honor Among Thieves, it somehow "proves" that I judged Craig.
Wow. That's some great "logic" you have there, TM. The DemocRATS will immediately recognize you for a fellow d-rat. No loss to our side.
----------------------------------
Think about Supreme Court nominations. Voting to WIN the general election, not punishment, is the only intelligent option.
RJ
September 4, 2007 - 22:05 ET by botgdo you mean to say that had Roberts and Alito been two Ginsberg clones partial birth abortion (and all sorts of stuff not even pursued by the ACLU due to the current make-up) would be acceptable birth-control?
Supreme Court, National Security, Borders, Fiscal Restraint, my litmus test for President.
Exactly, botg
September 4, 2007 - 22:20 ET by RJIt makes me kind of crazy to hear these childish, petulant, pouting conservatives say "if this or that candidate is nominated, I won't vote for him", or "because the Republicans did this or that, I won't vote for them."
There's a lot of things Republicans do that I don't like either, but how stupid the above attitude is!
It would be bad enough to have any of these Democrat fools become President, just for the damage they can do on a daily basis, but the long-term implications of the upcoming SCOTUS nominations make it many times worse.
---------------------------------
Think about Supreme Court nominations. Voting to WIN the general election, not punishment, is the only intelligent option.
Out of the closet, TruthMonger
September 4, 2007 - 17:01 ET by RJWell the gay activists would be proud of your willingness to be upfront in proclaiming your preferences. ;^>
But....Democrats have "basic American values?" Hahahaha!
Don't forget to add DailyKos, MoveOn.org, HuffnPuff, etc to your list of "other blogs" in you Profile.....
...the Dems do need work -
September 4, 2007 - 17:13 ET by TruthMonger...the Dems do need work - I will be busy - but the Repubs sunk so low in failing Craig that they actually went beneath the Dems - quite a remarkable achievement - unfortunately in the completely wrong direction:(...
And yes I'll be cleaning up the Dems on gay marriage as well - someone has to go in there and do it...it ain't exactly fixing itself now is it:)?
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Read the arrest report.
September 4, 2007 - 16:39 ET byRead the arrest report.
I did - and so? Protest
September 4, 2007 - 16:48 ET by TruthMongerI did - and so?
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Well, I guess if you
September 4, 2007 - 17:05 ET byWell, I guess if you habitually make eye contact through the crack in the stall door for minutes at a time with the occupant, play footsie with him and run your hand beneath the stall divider, everything's fine.
Personally, I think he's guilty but if I were him I'd fight it. It probably wouldn't even make it to court. He hasn't resigned yet and I think he's being railroaded by his own party.
Again the ALLEGED behavior
September 4, 2007 - 17:19 ET by TruthMongerAgain the ALLEGED behavior is highly suspect - but in the end its still not nearly enough to stick him in a pink dress and send him on a gay cruise for life...I'm no lawyer but even I can see how almost non-existently razor thin this BS gay crusing "evidence" is...
Craig denies being gay, and there is nothing in the way of damning evidence to dispute him - all of these things you mention could easily be explained a thousand other ways...
BTW I thought he had resigned?!?!? There's still hope then...for Larry's justice - and my vote:)...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
I thought he resigned also?
September 4, 2007 - 19:14 ET by general companyThere's still hope then...for Larry's justice - and my vote:)...
Thank heavens
blaster, you miss, or deliberately ignore, Matthews' focus
September 4, 2007 - 15:19 ET by RJ...which is the political blackmail being practiced by gay activists, and that this blackmail is being applauded.
Sadly, many gay activists
September 4, 2007 - 15:31 ET by BinxlySadly, many gay activists are indeed applauding this because they see people who are homosexual or bisexual (basically the same thing) that choose to keep their orientation private, as being 'detrimental' to the cause. Its not that they are all ashamed, some maybe, sure, but the majority just believe it's nobody's business. What homosexuals often misinterpret is that they need to be MORE vocal about their orientation to gain acceptance. The truth is, if they treated their orientation the same as most heterosexuals do (not sharing or talking about it unless asked) then I think they would have many more people on their side in such issues as equal rights in partnership.
As for the Craig issue, he was blatantly caught red handed. His excuses such as 'I was reaching for something I dropped' has no weight since it was the hand opposite of the stall he was reaching in that he used, plus, his palm was up and rubbing the bottom of the stall, apparently a sign requesting certain lewd behavior. I'm not God himself, nor am I the cop that caught him so I can't be 100% sure, but from the sound of it, he's guilty as sin. The sad thing is, homosexuals who, some, defend acts like this, are ready to burn him at the stake for taking the more conventional route in voting against certain gay rights such as right to marry. I can see how homosexuals could see it as hypocritical, but don't they '*love* their own?' I guess not. You're not a welcome member of the homosexual community and identity I guess unless you ascribe to their politic as well. Plus, its not unheard of of someone to be a homosexual, but still, from a spiritual standpoint, disagree with such things as homosexual marriage. I personally am not against it, but I can see how some are. Even if they too are indeed homosexuals.
...how do you know Craig
September 4, 2007 - 15:37 ET by TruthMonger...how do you know Craig is gay binxly:)?
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Haha I don't know he is,
September 4, 2007 - 15:46 ET by BinxlyHaha I don't know he is, sorry if it came off as if I was saying he is. I'm saying I think his behavior was absolutely guilty of what they are claiming, which I guess in turn, would mean he is gay since straight men don't usually cruise airport bathrooms for sex with random men. Its just all the pieces don't fit, and being that I only have evidence to go on, I personally believe he's guilty. Again, he was 'reaching for something on the floor' that was not only not there, but if you were going to pick up something to your right in the process of doing your business in the restroom, would you REALLY use your left hand? Also, I don't know if Craig has a case of double-joints that allow him to pick up things with the backside of his hand, but if not, then he certainly wasn't going to succeed in picking up anything with his palm facing *up.*
Like I said though, I could be wrong, its been known to happen alot. I'm just saying from the information we have, I think he got caught, but even if he is gay, its a shame conservatives didn't rally around him as liberals would had his name been followed by a D and not an R. Even though I find that kind of lewd behavior reprehensible, the conservatives in washington should have been less trigger happy to drop him like dead weight. Plus, a political official's sexual preference is private and has no place in being factored in when deciding if he's fit to serve in the public sector. However, if he IS cruising bathrooms for cheap sex, then yes, it becomes a public issue since such acts (hetero or homosexual participants) are illegal.
If he is innocent, he will be vindicated in the end. If he's as guilty as I think he is, then I hope he will reflect not on 'not getting caught' but rather evaluating what leads him to engage in such reprehensible acts as opposed to meeting a mate the old fashioned way, by simply asking them on a date! :-P
this is my problem -
September 4, 2007 - 16:43 ET by TruthMongerthis is my problem - everyone's demand for his removal is based on supposition, assumption - it "doesn't look right" and so forth, our justice system does not work that way...
Craigs LEGALLY GUARANTEED civil rights were not protected, and worse yet his "fellow" conservatives left him hanging out to dry - dispicable...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
I whole heartedly agree the
September 4, 2007 - 16:50 ET by BinxlyI whole heartedly agree the abandonment of his was reprehensible and sad quite simply. What should be done is, investigation into what exactly transpired, but again, leaving that to the personal and allowing the man to still do his job.
very glad we're on the same
September 4, 2007 - 16:54 ET by TruthMongervery glad we're on the same page:)
Craig's gone now, tho - and it's too late:(
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
It truely is, all this
September 4, 2007 - 17:10 ET by BinxlyIt truely is, all this malarky aside, I think he was doing his job pretty darn well, regardless of his personal life or interests. :-!
The Craig case wasn't
September 4, 2007 - 17:51 ET byThe Craig case wasn't political blackmail and to speculate as such is stretching for a topic. No one, except for the republican party had it in for Craig because of his voting record Bush referred to Craig as “a goddamned traitor” and told the National Republican Senatorial Committee to start recruiting someone to run against the Idaho Senator in 2008.
...it all adds
September 4, 2007 - 17:59 ET by TruthMonger...it all adds up:)
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
You're trying to change the subject AGAIN, blaster
September 4, 2007 - 18:03 ET by RJAll you did was say "no it wasn't...so there" and then go off on another unrelated rant. Maybe this time you could actually read Matthew's column and respond to that, instead of whatever happens to be in your head, or whatever you happened to read somewhre else.
Again: Matthew's column wasn't specifically about Craig. It was about blackmailing closeted gays. The WaPo blogger applauded the threatening behavior/blackmail.
Got it?
Okay....fair enough.
September 4, 2007 - 18:38 ET byOkay....fair enough. Here's my take--If you're a closeted gay politician and you're sponsoring anti-gay legislation and you get caught in a homosexual relationship in a public place or someone outs you or you're busted by the vice squad--you took the risk, you pay the consequences. In the old days of the early-mid nineties, the republicans would preach personal responsibility, until too many of them chose not to practice what they'd preach.
So, blaster, it's ok with you
September 4, 2007 - 21:39 ET by RJif a closeted gay is blackmailed? You agree with the WaPo gay blogger?
Have a link?
September 4, 2007 - 19:20 ET by general companyBush referred to Craig as “a goddamned traitor”
I would realy like to read where you found this quote.
Craig is hetoro until proven gay:)
September 4, 2007 - 15:33 ET by TruthMonger...do you think Craig is gay and cruises bathrooms? If so then what kind of "damning" evidence do you have for this?
Hint: this bathroom episode isn't even in the ballpark...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
None, other then he was
September 4, 2007 - 16:12 ET by general companyNone, other then he was arrested for it. I personally think the blackmail angle could be far worst then gay marrige. Our representatives that put themselves in this type of situation are begging for blackmail or this type of treatment. We just cant have it, and if Craig is innocent then why did he plead guilty, would you have? I know I wouldn't had.
He pled guilty to
September 4, 2007 - 16:40 ET by TruthMongerHe pled guilty to disorderly conduct - which he felt guilty of, and it's highly admirable to take responsibility like that - qualities desperately needed in our leadership I think - I hope I would have done the same...
Is taking the responsibility what you mean by "putting one's self in this situation?" Maybe you could see how I take exception to that. Surely you don't mean our reps shouldn't use public restrooms:)...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Surely you don't mean our
September 4, 2007 - 16:56 ET by general companySurely you don't mean our reps shouldn't use public restrooms
If it gets you a disorderly conduct charge I might.
But seriously, why then did he feel compelled to plead guilty to that charge? Maybe because it sounded far worst then the other one?
Look I don't know if he is Gay, Guilty or just stupid, but he is certainly one of these. I also don't know why he resigned so fast if he is innocent, but he does.
...maybe he felt bad
September 4, 2007 - 17:27 ET by TruthMonger...maybe he felt bad about disturbing the guy in the next stall...?! That sounds nice to me - polite, considerate, apologetic...
I don't call that stupid - and he says he's not gay - he says he's guilty of disorderly conduct, takes the responsibility - so let's punish him for job loss for being a stand-up citizen and doing the right thing?!?!?!?
He's a human being - not perfect - and everyone else in Congress has been guilty of something minor once as well - should we kick all of them out...?
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
Where is the responsibility one should have for one self?
September 4, 2007 - 18:39 ET by general companyHe's a human being - not perfect - and everyone else in Congress has been guilty of something minor once as well - should we kick all of them out...?
I fully understand where you are comming from, and as cynical as I may be, I dont know if he is guilty or not, but he did resign awfly quick and pleaded guilty just as quick. Many of these reps feel privledged and above any responsibility they should take, isnt that why he plead guilty for Dis Conduct?
The only point I am realy trying to make is simply, our reps have got to behave better then this. That is why we elect them, this is what they try to convince us of while running for office. In this day and time you just cant take it for granted that you will get a fair shake from anyone. If you feel you are getting a raw deal then keep your mouth shut and deal with it in court. That is why I suggested he is stupid, he of all people should know that.
...so isn't pleading guilty
September 4, 2007 - 18:53 ET by TruthMonger...so isn't pleading guilty taking responsibility? That's what confuses me here - I think he did take responsibility - and it looks like you're saying he didn't take responsibility - and furthermore you want to punish him with job loss for this exceptionally minor offense...
The justice system will punish him sufficiently pursuant to his guilty plea...
Job loss seems light years way over the top to me...
And someone here told me today he has not resigned yet...
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
...so isn't pleading guilty
September 4, 2007 - 19:38 ET by general company...so isn't pleading guilty taking responsibility?
For you and me maybe, but I believe he did so he would not be accused of the more damming charge in public. Look if was being responsible he would not had been arrested for anything, right?
Job loss seems light years way over the top to me...
Maybe, but he did quit.
And someone here told me today he has not resigned yet...
They were mistaken http://www.nytimes.com/2007/09/02/washington/02craig.html?_r=1&oref=slogin
He is obviously your rep, and I know how you feel I think. Vitter is mine, a true conservitive, but I feel very betrayed for the simple fact that I personally went out of my way to help him get elected. What do you think those folks think of me now? I shudder to think.
Sentences
September 4, 2007 - 19:53 ET by BlondeTM,
Yeah, and Nifong got sentenced to ONE day in jail. Seemed the judge thought the loss of his job and his lawyer's license was "more than enough" punishment.
Say what? This man willfully suppressed evidence, actively participated in prosecutorial malfeasance, not to mention sheer meanness....to further his own political ambitions. He should have been sentenced to at least five years for his blind ambition and arrogance at the expense of innocent victims. Victims, I might add, of his own deluded sense of self-importance.
Craig didn't have to resign, but he obviously did it for his own reasons....I infer from that alot, actually.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Let the Voters Decide
September 4, 2007 - 15:43 ET by Chris NormanI put this comment on an earlier, played-out, post. I feel strongly about this, so I'm copying it here:
I don't know if Craig is guilty of soliciting or not. What I care about is this rush to resign we keep seeing on the Republican side. Unless the problem makes it illegal for the member to serve in Congress, I think it should be up to the constituents to decide if their senator or representative continues to serve. Otherwise, we should just forget about holding elections and, instead, let the pollsters and pundits decide who serves in Congress ...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
This makes sense to me, but
September 4, 2007 - 16:20 ET by general companyThis makes sense to me, but you still cant afford to have your rep's indiscretions possibly lead to blackmail, that is not what they are hired to do, nor what anyone expects from them. I mean what if it wasnt found out? How would you know he was representing you or his blackmailer?
My senator Vitter will probably be dealt with in much the manor you described.
Once it's out in the open,
September 4, 2007 - 16:25 ET by Chris NormanOnce it's out in the open, like now, it would be hard to blackmail him - right? If what he has done is bad enough, the voters will turn him out - or he doesn't have to run again. I just think these resignations are setting a bad precedent for the future. It's taking less and less to trigger resignations - at least, on the Republican side.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Once it's out in the open,
September 4, 2007 - 16:47 ET by general companyOnce it's out in the open, like now, it would be hard to blackmail him - right?
That is true, do you think he would had outed himself? No he wouldn't or didn't, this is the problem.
It's taking less and less to trigger resignations - at least, on the Republican side.
Yes this is true as well, mind you I am not sure he should had, but I do no that he should not had pleaded guilty for some thing he was innocent of.
General, I'm not arguing
September 4, 2007 - 17:05 ET by Chris NormanGeneral,
I'm not arguing that it be swept under the rug or, in this case, back in the closet. The only thing I'm argiung against is this immediate and automatic resignation, at the drop of a hat. Like I said, let his constituents decide if he's unworthy to represent them. I don't like what's happening here.
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
I dont disagree with you,
September 4, 2007 - 18:45 ET by general companyI dont disagree with you, but he had choices. I have to admit that I was very suprised at how some in his own party suggested he step down so quickly. Why, is all I keep asking myself?
Republicans are so cowed,
September 4, 2007 - 18:49 ET by Chris NormanOh, I agree. He had choices and chose the easy way out. As for Republicans, they're so cowed, that they now form circular firing squads - without the urging of anyone...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Circular Firing Squads
September 4, 2007 - 18:55 ET by BlondeFor the pols...that may not be such a bad idea, actually.
But we (R) constituents are going to get caught in the cross fire.....when we have to pay 60% of our income in taxes to support Her Highness and her high minded view of how to run our lives.
To that, I OBJECT!
These (R) congresscritters we've elected better get with the program. And fast. And if they're going to continue the nonsense, business as usual, I think we need to effect a grass roots effort to oust them all & replace them with real Republicans.
I for one would love to evict Bob Martinez the RINO from his Florida Senate seat. Maybe JEB is looking for a job...it's not unprecedented.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
Being a Republican means
September 4, 2007 - 18:57 ET by Chris NormanBeing a Republican means always being disappointed and let down...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Senator Craig could
September 4, 2007 - 16:18 ET by MidAmericaSenator Craig could have saved his career. All he had to do was switch to the democrats and denounce Bush. The ACLU and every other fringe/nut group would have rushed to his defense. He would have gotten friendly interviews with all the msm. His picture would have adorned every sort of magazine with a halo softly surrounding his face. He would have become an instant 'expert' on every issue facing the country. There would be talk of vice-presidential possibilities.......
Yep, 'ol Craig boy thought he was only hearing toes tapping but actually it was opportunity literally banging on his door.
Since they now make
September 4, 2007 - 18:09 ET by Chris NormanSince they now make airport toilet stalls so narrow that you have to back into them because, once inside, you can't turn around and since they now have cops just waiting for someone to stick their foot under the divider, I think I'll just hold it until I get to my destination, rather than run the risk of getting arrested for soliciting with my Size 12 shoe..
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Chris
September 4, 2007 - 18:23 ET by BlondeWell for heaven's sake....don't tap those water skis!
This is so lame. I believe the guy was probably trolling....and got busted (rightly so...obviously there was a problem at this particular, um facility). Who'd want to take a child into a public facility where that kind of activity takes place?
Having said that...it sounds to me like the "evidence" was far too thin to actually prosecute. Craig plead guilty to a lesser charge (big mistake, IMO).
That the (R)'s roundly denounced him was a sell-out of the first order, but then again, he didn't help his cause by pleading guilty. But shame on us for causing the destruction of one of our own on such a nebulous non-event. Seriously, if money had been offered, or somesuch...different story entirely.
It's a shabby affair, the whole way around. The only silver lining in this cloud is perhaps the Guv will appoint a conservative (R) to complete Craig's term. Hoping, anyway.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
See, Blonde, there's the
September 4, 2007 - 18:45 ET by Chris NormanSee, Blonde, there's the problem. I find airport Muzak so catchy (when I can escape the omnipresent CNN), I frequently find myself tapping to the beat. :)
I commented, elsewhere on this post, that I don't know if Craig was soliciting or not, but I object to these Republicans who resign at the drop of a poll. I think it's up to their constituents to decide if they're worthy to represent them - that's what elections are for. This is almost getting to be parlimentarian (for lack of a better description)
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
Precisely, Chris
September 4, 2007 - 18:49 ET by BlondeThe little cannibal routine by the (R)'s was disgusting. Let Craig's constituents handle it. He plead guilty to a misdemeanor.
Better turn your IPOD up to full blast on the plane, and off in the terminal. I'd hate to see "Chris Norman" busted for tapping his foot!
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
They'll never take me
September 4, 2007 - 18:52 ET by Chris NormanThey'll never take me alive! :)
Republicans are so whipped and conditioned by the media, they don't have to wait for the "bell" to run away from one of their own who's in trouble...
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
This used to bug me too...
September 4, 2007 - 19:17 ET by TruthMongerbut then i turned Democrat and it ain't a problem for me anymore:)
happy days!
Protest Craig's conservative abandonment - vote Democrat in 08'
TM, Since you have to
September 4, 2007 - 19:22 ET by Chris NormanTM,
Since you have to decided to have a party change operation, in protest over the Larry Craig resignation, are you planning on fully embracing your new party? Are you going to become a troll here? Or are you going to quietly go about getting Hillary elected? Please advise... :)
The dogs bark, but the caravan moves on.
- Arabian Proverb
My two cents...
September 4, 2007 - 18:49 ET by m4ster chiefRightly or wrongly we put certain people on pedestals. You can have your Hollywood dunces, your pro sports thugs, your coiffed and egotistical news anchors...I couldn't care less about them. But people like the congressperson I helped elect (or not) to office; I like to think that person is just a cut above the great unwashed herd. Same with the commanding officers I had during my Navy career...I idolized most of them and tried to emulate them. I don't "hate" homosexuals, but I don't want, or need, to know what they do in their bedrooms; and, don't push your sexual behaviors in my face and ask me to accept them. I will not state here that some of my best friends are gay, but I could accept a homosexual neighbor living next door, etc. What could I do about it anyway; just live and let live.
What REPULSES me is the thought of my congressman, the guy I voted for, sitting an airport bathroom stall peeping through the crack in the door and feeling around underneath the divider...and I can't even imagine what would have happened had that not been a police officer in the stall next to Craig. So maybe some of Craig's colleagues felt the same way. If Craig wants to play hide the salami with a good buddy at home, in his car, in a motel room, that's one thing. But a United States Senator, attempting to have sex in a dirty, probably smelly airport bathroom stall? C'mon...what ever happened to standards in "the greatest deliberative body in the world?"
Sunrise at sea; a breeze across the deck, salty spray tickles the face, the aroma of fresh coffee, stack gas, and haze-gray paint is in the air. Another Navy day aboard ship as a Navy Chief...the perfect life!
I agree compleatly m4ster chief
September 4, 2007 - 20:06 ET by general companyWhat do you think would had become of me if I had taken offence, of him looking in on me?
Exactly, hate crime, 10-20 in the jailhouse. We all seem to think (well what if their are children in there). I am thinking what if I happened to be in there, I don't need this kind of nonsense around me. I would probably feel compelled to make comments and find authority, and if my comment were not well receive, thats right, hate crime.
BTW I have been propositioned in a mens room before, I cannot tell you how angry and cheap it made me feel. Everyone else thought it was funny(wife, friends), me I was humiliated, thinking to myself how could anyone mistake me for being gay?
gc
September 4, 2007 - 20:19 ET by BlondePoint well taken.
However, if it makes you feel any better...the propositioner doesn't care what you are, or what you are not, other than willing.
This kind of public solicitation of whatever sort is disgusting any way you look at it. Particularly in a totally public situation (i.e. with kids around). A bar might (and I add might) be a tad different....but for solicitation to occur in broad daylight, in such a public forum as an airport, is a symptom of where our society is these days. Very, very sad.
David Gregory, do you know which damn network you lie for? ~ Uncle Jimbo, @Blackfive
precisely why
September 4, 2007 - 21:35 ET by PKthis kind of crap is precisely why gays were not allowed in the military or in federal jobs that required high security clearance.
the fear was that someone whose interests were contrary to those of the United States Of America would extort these people into giving up secrets or perfoming acts of treason. those things actually happened.
then we became politically correct and now they are at it again.
WTF over...
C
Rogers Tried to Blackmail Craig in Jan 2006
September 4, 2007 - 21:43 ET by Robin BoydMatthew - Mike Rogers attempted to blackmail Sen Craig in January 2006. Rogers said he would "out" him if he voted "yes" for Alito's confirmation. At the time of the letter, Rogers did not use Craig's name but when you read Rogers "outting" of Craig in Oct 2006 the claims about "union station", etc are the same. The WaPo forgot to mention the blackmail...
http://www.blogactiv...
Oh my
September 4, 2007 - 22:38 ET by general companyHere ya go TM, he must be feeling your support.
http://michellemalkin.com/2007/09/04/larry-craig-he-was-for-resigning-before-he-was-against-it/