The Larry Craig Saga will draw to a close today, CNN reports this morning. Citing “well-placed GOP sources”, the disgraced Senator will return to Idaho and give Governor Butch Otter the opportunity to appoint his replacement. And if Craig doesn’t jump, the RNC might give him a big push:
Several well-placed GOP sources in Washington and Idaho have told CNN that embattled Republican Sen. Larry Craig is likely to resign soon, possibly as early as Friday.
A GOP source with knowledge of the situation told CNN’s Dana Bash that the Republican National Committee was poised to take the extraordinary step of calling on Craig to resign.
However, that move was put on hold, the source said, because top party leaders have received indications that Craig himself is preparing to step down.
Sources have confirmed that high-level meetings on the matter were being conducted in Idaho on Thursday.
Three Republican members of Congress had already called for Craig’s resignation. Rep. Pete Hoekstra and Senators John McCain and Norm Coleman argued that a guilty plea for the misconduct in the airport restroom rendered him unfit for high office. The RNC must have agreed — and more than likely some of its members had already contacted Craig’s office to let them know they would demand his resignation if he didn’t quit on his own.
It seems like a high price to pay for toe-tapping and hand waving, but Craig pleaded guilty rather than dispute the charges. He has to take responsibility for that action as well, and as a Senator, he knows that his credibility depends on actions in and out of Washington. The accusations and the guilty plea reflect poorly on him and poorly on the GOP if they try to shield him. Basically, Craig embarrassed himself, and the party doesn’t want to pay the price for Craig’s individual actions.
That’s all perfectly understandable, even if not exactly laudable. However, if the party wants to start drawing these lines, then one has to wonder why David Vitter isn’t getting the same push. He didn’t plead guilty in court, but unlike Craig, he openly admits he broke the law and solicited prostitutes. Others serving in Congress at the moment have pleaded guilty to misdemeanors of more import than disorderly conduct without being forced to resign. If morality and credibility are at issue, why isn’t Vitter being held to that standard? It’s either that Louisiana’s Democratic governor would appoint a Democrat in his place, or that Vitter’s transgressions involved heterosexual sex and therefore are less objectionable.
Craig will depart soon, and these questions will fade away eventually. However, people will wonder whether the GOP decided to argue for standards in public officials, or whether they just found it easy to use Craig without endangering their political balance in the Senate.
UPDATE: Craig will resign tomorrow, according to GOP sources:
Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig will resign from the Senate amid a furor over his arrest and guilty plea in a police sex sting in an airport men’s room, Republican officials said Friday.
Craig will announce at a news conference in Boise Saturday morning that he will resign effective Sept. 30, GOP officials in Idaho and Washington told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity.
A Saturday on a three-day weekend? You couldn’t possibly bury that one any deeper in the news cycle.
Vitter didn’t accost strangers for sex in a public place visited by children. Hello?
Vitter comes from a state with a democratic governor. Hello?
I think it’s clear that if Craig goes Vitter should go as well. Double-standard, I think so.
Vitter comes from a state with a democratic governor. Hello?
I think it’s clear that if Craig goes Kennedy should go as well. Double-standard, I think so. At least Craig didn’t kill someone.
Maybe Craig is making the decision to resign for the same reason he chose to plead guilty to disorderly conduct. He needs to catch a plane and he just wants the whole thing to go away.
He doesn’t have to resign. He can stay and fight, hold onto his seat and continue to insist that he did nothing wrong. Vitter, at least, admitted to his conduct. And he didn’t break the law. You haven’t broken any laws until a jury says you did. Or you plead guilty in a court of law. As Craig did.
And anyway, this is nothing new. As another famous Louisianan said, something to the effect of you can survive anything in politics as long as you don’t get caught in bed with a dead girl or a live boy. Well we can add to that, you can survive anything in politics as long as you don’t plead guilty when you get caught in a public restroom tapping your toes and flapping your hand.
He pled guilty to a minor crime. This might not seem enough to force a resignation (personally, I’d like to see suicide as well), but the sheer stupidity surrounding what he did cries out that he needs to go. For the record, I think (and have written in the past) the Vitter should also go.
What is it about politics that seems to attract perverts, crooks and other lowlifes? And why can’t they all stay in the democrat party where they not only belong, but are made to feel welcome?
Leaving aside the morality differences, if any, there is a qualitative difference in judgement at issue.
To patronize a prostitute while in office is incredibly stupid.
To become embroiled in a “cruising a bathroom” situation, to even know what those various codes are, without reacting as most men would, then pleading guilty rather than fighting for one’s honor, reflects a monumental lack of judgment in addition to stupidity.
Remember, Craig had more than a month to reflect on what to do. After reflection, he pled guilty, apparently without advice of counsel.
Can anyone think that reflects an adequate level of considered judgment?
He’s served more than 20 years in DC. Has a single friend or colleague leapt to his defense, saying “That’s not Larry Craig?”
I think not.
“However, people will wonder whether the GOP decided to argue for standards in public officials, or whether they just found it easy to use Craig without endangering their political balance in the Senate.”
The latter.
“a high price to pay for toe-tapping?” Good Lord, Ed, the man is a pervert! His actions were thoroughly repulsive. Good Riddance!
If morality and credibility are at issue, why isn’t Vitter being held to that standard? It’s either that Louisiana’s Democratic governor would appoint a Democrat in his place, or that Vitter’s transgressions involved heterosexual sex and therefore are less objectionable.
The problem is Craig comes off as a weasel ala Bill Clinton, talks down to the cop and the sergent, lies to his Country, State and supporters (badly) and seems to have no real problem with his behavior or the incident itself at all. Vitter came out and admitted what he did like a man–he gets a pass.
Vitter openly admitted to his ‘mistake’–er–law-breaking.
Craig continues to obfuscate.
There’s a distinction, without a difference, that clearly stinks.
Craig continues to be creepy about something–well–innately creepy.
And Congress is full of creeps, btw.
I also think timing comes into play in the difference in treatment between the Vitter and Craig episodes.
Vitter admitted recently to fooling around with a prostitute several years ago. His affair wasn’t revealed shortly after pleading guilty in a sting operation like Craig was.
He dealt with the situation years ago with his wife. Craig has never done so and keeps looking for love in public restrooms.
If morality and credibility are at issue, why isn’t Vitter being held to that standard? It’s either that Louisiana’s Democratic governor would appoint a Democrat in his place, or that Vitter’s transgressions involved heterosexual sex and therefore are less objectionable.
The problem is Craig comes off as a weasel ala Bill Clinton, talks down to the cop and the sergent, lies to his Country, State and supporters (badly) and seems to have no real problem with his behavior or the incident itself at all. Vitter came out and admitted what he did like a man–he gets a pass.
If morality and credibility are at issue, why isn’t Vitter being held to that standard? It’s either that Louisiana’s Democratic governor would appoint a Democrat in his place, or that Vitter’s transgressions involved heterosexual sex and therefore are less objectionable.
The problem is Craig comes off as a weasel ala Bill Clinton, talks down to the cop and the sergent, lies to his Country, State and supporters (badly) and seems to have no real problem with his behavior or the incident itself at all. Vitter came out and admitted what he did like a man–he gets a pass.
If morality and credibility are at issue, why isn’t Vitter being held to that standard? It’s either that Louisiana’s Democratic governor would appoint a Democrat in his place, or that Vitter’s transgressions involved heterosexual sex and therefore are less objectionable.
The problem is Craig comes off as a weasel ala Bill Clinton, talks down to the cop and the sergent, lies to his Country, State and supporters (badly) and seems to have no real problem with his behavior or the incident itself at all. Vitter came out and admitted what he did like a man–he gets a pass.
I have to say, while saying Craig has bad judgment (for not consulting with a Minnesota lawyer about what kind of plea to make — there were many options he could have taken that would have disappeared the incident without a guilty plea) is dead-on, the audio of his conversation with the arresting officer makes the cop look terrible. The cop misled Craig about what his options were (guilty or not guilty, which is not true — there are 3 other intermediate options in MN) and there, frankly, are disputed facts that make it look like the cop is fugding a bit. If you add in that the cop wrote the report AFTER he had the conversation with Craig, it’s rather obvious that a few of those sensational details were thrown in just to bolster the arrest report (“I saw the color of his eyes”, “there was no toilet paper on the floor”). How would the cop see toilet paper that was behind Craig’s leg in Craig’s stall? He just threw that into the report out of spite. The cop never mentioned walking back into Craig’s stall after he flashed his badge and he was never in a position to see that. And has anyone been to this bathroom to check the lighting conditions? Can you even see that someone’s eyes are *blue* through the crack of that stall in the lighting conditions of that bathroom? The cop probably saw that Craig’s eyes were listed as blue on his driver’s license and just threw it in the report after the conversation to bolster the report.
This kind of crap is exactly why police reports aren’t generally admissible. They’re frigging unreliable. Why would you trust a police officer whose job it is to solicit sex in bathrooms? Does that sound like an upstanding individual to you? Yes, Craig has bad judgment, but listen to the audio. There’s no way that Craig is lying 100%.
I think it’s shrewd how Ed keeps minimizing the Craig affair with comments that suggest there’s no ‘there’ here. That Craig didn’t do anything wrong.
Almost every blogger on the planet is bashing Craig, and rightfully so. You can’t get an Instalink that way. No page views. No income. It’s almost boring to point out how Craig’s actions are just so much more Washington business-as-usual.
Better to play the contrarian in this affair so you can make a few bucks, no?
Well played, Captain.
Indeed.
You cannot dispute the audio.
The audio makes clear that:
1. The cop misled Craig about his legal options and the legal effect of those options. That Craig waived his Miranda rights doesn’t change that fact, not to mention Craig clearly had a flight back to Congress to catch (and so perhaps the arrest was unconstitutional).
2. The cop likely fabricated portions of the arrest report to bolster it in light of Craig’s objections. We all know people who do shady things like this. We all know that cops do this.
So what exactly did Craig do that was wrong? Take a dump?
Sometimes the most mysterious thing is a fact clearly stated. QUOTE:” If morality and credibility are at issue, why isn’t Vitter being held to that standard? It’s either that Louisiana’s Democratic governor would appoint a Democrat in his place, or that Vitter’s transgressions involved heterosexual sex and therefore are less objectionable.” END. Ed you are my hero. Political expediency trumps everything. I assume you agree with your own statement. Thanks for having the ability to bring us to the real dilemma concerning this episode’s second act.
What Craig also did carelessly, was endanger his wife’s health, assuming he and his wife are…still on friendly terms.
“…or whether they just found it easy to use Craig without endangering their political balance in the Senate. ”
Option B) – very simply that is why.
As for his conduct in Minneapolis, it is, as noted on another blog, a credit to Minnesota that this did not go public for as long as it did. It was 10-11 weeks ago this happened and it is only getting out now? Such incidences don’t generally raise eyebrows in Minneapolis, anyway, I suspect. It looks like it did not even reach the front page of the local paper. There is a high percentage of gays living in that city so there is no real shock value to this kind of thing. The only reason the police were there was because of complaints – from travelers I would assume. If Craig were a senator from Minnesota, I doubt that it would affect him any where near as much as it will in Idaho.
“You haven’t broken any laws until a jury says you did.”
taken to the extreme, that is like saying it is not a crime to kill someone until you are convicted. You may have committed a crime but they need to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that you did.
Craig has only one real problem and that’s his homosexuality. I imagine that doesn’t play well amongst the voters back home and hence he’s a goner.
Well two big differences in my mind. Vitter fought the Amnesty bill as hard as he could, Craig voted for that bill. He burned his bridges to the base right there.
“You haven’t broken any laws until a jury says you did.” taken to the extreme, that is like saying it is not a crime to kill someone until you are convicted.”
Absolutely. No crime until you are convicted. There’s this weird little thing called due process. It requires all kinds strange stuff, like proof. Presented in court. Before a jury of your peers. And a conviction. And you’re entitled to defend yourself.
You can kill a hundred people and not be guilty of a crime. Ask any soldier serving in Iraq right now.
Craig will retire and immediately head up the GOP national convention which will be held at Plato’s Retreat.
Drudge’s headline says Larry Craig “MAY” quit, today.
I guess Fred Thompson’s “foot dragging” is something that just about anyone can use? But it looks STUPID.
As to those that say Larry Craig is innocent; sure. Just as innocent as Bubba.
At least on the left people talked about Monica, openly. Only Bubba held onto his lie. Until the DNA evidence came through.
But there ya go. The right wing religious nutters have one of their own to “thank.” Lying comes easy to socio-paths. And, then? There are people who just go on to say that without video taped proof of the “schtupping” they’re not buying Craig’s guilt.
See if I care?
Whose pushing Craig, now? Perhaps, at home, his wife doesn’t look so good?
And, perhaps in the senate there are other homosexuals, enraged that Craig is using the “Bubba ruse,” (prove it). On activities known to homosexuals to include “signals without words,” for the “love that dare not speak its name.”
Craig’s caught.
And, it damaging.
Now, it’s only a question to “whom?”
Lots of people who are not religious zealots have little respect, left, for the Bible thumpers. Of which Larry Craig excelled.
Dunno how you fix this one because it has to do with hypocracy. On the right.
Just as the affirmative action crowd now has to cope with it’s loser status; the republicans got dealt this blow.
We’re gonna see a lot of fancy feet dancing ahead. Do you know why? Repubicans don’t want to lose voters. And, they don’t want a wholesale retreat from homosexuals who no longer automatically pull the lever for Bonkeys.
It’s a tickle-ish art. And, believe it or not, the dancing is done, here, without words. Because to be honest? That’s costly. You won’t gain voters.
I have been curious about something about Sen. Craig’s stall behavior: How many people do you know who drop a piece of toilet paper in a public stall and it flies backwards and then go to pick it up at all and by bare hand? At work — in a relatively clean office setting — I see toilet paper pieces left on the floor all of the time; everyone leaves them alone for the janitor to pick up; I myself will clean up if something is on the floor but with another piece of paper to protect my hands (actually my probably irrational fears of infection). But I am the exception as I am a bit compulsive and I don’t like to have others see a mess when they come into the stall — I try do do my civic duty and I take it that I am in the minority. But Craig’s behavior is in a public Airport stall and I find it hard to believe this part of the story. I could be wrong as he may be a neatness freak but I do think it is spin.
It’s the “ick” factor. On a 1-10 scale Vitter’s offense is a about 3. Clinton’s escapades with Lewinsky are a 6. Foley and Craig rate at least a 9, while Stubbs’ were a solid 10. Seems that for Republicans the limit is probably a 4 or 5, while for a Democrat the sky’s the limit.
Dave Barry devoted a humorous column, once, to men’s room “ettiquette.” Where going in to pee, has lots of men steering clear of peeing into the stall nearest one being used by someone else. And, all of this stuff was NON-VERBAL.
Your left feet won’t wander into the stall next to yours, of that I can assure you. That it could become a homosexual “pick up signal?” Why not.
One of the cute ways people do illegal activities, is not throwing open their bedroom windows, and screaming their behaviors from the rooftops.
Heck, in another venue, you don’t think the Soddie’s worked hard at disguising just how they do pass their money’s onto the terrorists? “Films at 11” could confuse you so, you wouldn’t believe that terrorism is even funded in this country.
As to Larry Craig’s “real sin” … is that he didn’t care if it hurt the whole party; or his wife at home. This was strictly a game, to him. And, one where he put considerable mental efforts “to get away with it.”
People talk, too, about how “hands on” Bill Clinton was while he was president. But ya know what? His focus was koo-koo. Even when you’re the president, the world doesn’t have to accommodate your socio-pathology. Sorry.
It’s a hoot to think that Larry Craig thought he’d get away with it! Minor. Mist-to-mean-a. Cop didn’t call Smoking Gun. (You’re hearing from the cop now, because AFTER Larry Craig pled guilty, that record, by law, is open to the public.) Perhaps, he forgot to have them sealed?
Given that Craig’s been caught in homosexual storms, before, all you really see is how defiant he is. And, the piece you still don’t know … is IF this costs any other republican politician votes, come November.
The Mark Foley scandal didn’t seem important to me, when it broke. But there ya go. The republicans had 12 years in the majority. And, they lost it in 2006.
Losing, again? Well, that keeps the affirmative action party in control.
Will people feel they’re picking between two bad choices? What are we doing? Walking down memory lane to the 2000 election? WHY?
How hard is it to learn? Americans are looking for candidates who aren’t sociopaths. Who don’t lie. And, who don’t lead double, and triple, lives.
Meanwhile, folks, all ya got is one vote, each. You can demand Ted Kennedy steps down “too” … but just because you said it? Why, it’s on par with “innocent hand signalling, below the toilet stall door.” If the guy in the other stall doesn’t know what you’re doing, you won’t be picking anyone up, either.
But within the halls of congress? Oh, boy. Thanks to the democrats, homosexuals have “equal opportunity” jobs. You can’t touch them. And, the other thing that gets done? Democraps can run on these records. Insane to think repubicans can, too.
Craig brought this whole scandal out in the open. And, this is a plus for the Bonkeys. They have “their” issue headlining, now. What have you got, in return? NADA.
I asked on another thread how the Republican presidential candidates are going to respond if asked during a debate why the party has demanded the resignation of Craig while not making similar calls for Vitter’s resignation.
Bennett (always a pretty sharp cookie) thinks it will be enough for them to simply point out that Craig pled guilty to a crime, while Vitter only admitted to a sin.
I’m not so sure. I think this is going to be a very awkward question to answer.
And I’ll bet it’s going to be asked.
filistro, our media aren’t the sharpest tools in the drawer.
I am sure there will be a lot of nasty questions, ahead, for the GOP candidates, no matter what.
On the other hand, unlike President Bush, who has never used speech well; we will see some of the stars on the GOP nominating stage really, really shine.
Just because there will be questions, doesn’t mean the republicans can’t win in 2008.
As to Larry Craig, he now not only goes; but he goes without the usual fanfare. Maybe, his wife can write a book? Seems this chore helped Mrs. McGreevey; who was also a beard to a homosexual politician. Those marriages are not fun!
Schamus writes: “It’s the ‘ick’ factor. On a 1-10 scale Vitter’s offense is a about 3.”
Heh.
If you only knew the half of it about Vitter, you would at least double, if not triple, your “ick” rating.
Did this thread die? Or has everyone gone to the beach?
Because, I think the “culture in DC,” is changing. You don’t hear the Bonkeys shouting from the rooftops, about “how sad it is that Larry Craig’s story” isn’t taking for face value, ya know?
And, it seems there’s a marked swing, on the Internet, pointing out the flaws in Craig’s reasoning. I’m not making this up. InstaPundit’s provided links. And, I saw Mark Steyn’s smackdown; meaning it’s not the pundits song-and-dance show, anymore. But the ways things seem to travel through this Internet. Where, just by watching Drudge headlines, you begin to suspect a story, when it’s hot. It’s hot.
John Warner has also packed up his inflatable Elizabeth Taylor doll; and he sez he’s not running in 2008.
It looks like the GOP will be entering the 2008 re-elections, with new blood vying for seating; against some old democrats, who may not get the traction they want?
How do you know when “cultures” shift? Sometimes? You look in your closet, and all the way in the back is a Nehru jacket that no longer fits.
Or you try to remember the “last day you rode your two-wheeler? The bikes’ comings, are big deals in kids lives. But what was the last day you rode one?
So, there ya go. Cultural shifts can occur; and you’re reacting to an “old trend,” without seeing that the Bonkeys get to have their own troubles, when you’re discussing how far we went on affirmative action fumes.
It also probably means, ahead, that besides choosing a president, people who vote will be looking at the whole list of candidates. Heck, they’re already in the voting booths. Why not think of all the races, then, as competitive?
I cannot imagine, even 20 years ago, that “playing footsies,” (an expression that sounds like it came from “under the table” when women’s legs were fair game for an “overture” from someone seated opposite. To what we’re discussing, now.) And, yes. There were people who didn’t have a clue.
I think, too, the cop in this arrest gets more sympathy than not. Even though I don’t know his name. But then, I don’t watch TV. Heck, not even Seinfeld!
Though InstaPundit has an excellent link to an old Seinfeld show “There’s nothing wrong with that,” where Seinfeld got accused of being gay; in a strange episode on miscommunication. When the show ends, he hasn’t defended himself well enough, for the female reporter (who overheard conversations) to change her mind. “Nothing wrong with that.”
But a lot of people just got an education.
“Playing footsie.” That didn’t involve words, either. Silent sex. An overture without music.
Florists must be very upset.
In the public bathroom, what lands on the floor stays on the floor.
Sorry, Captain Ed.
I agree with you fundamentally on so many issues – but Craig isn’t paying high enough for THIS ONE.
This man has played fast and loose with his own reputation, jeopardizing everything his national party does. And these signals ARE NOT SUBTLE AT ALL.
As the mother of two sons, I don’t appreciate the fact that too many public facilities have already FOR DECADES been turned essentially into “BATH HOUSES” for perverts.
All I can tell you is that Craig is the REASON our Founding Fathers outlawed homosexual behavior, rather than trying to run themselves to death on tiny threads in order to keep FAMILIES safe in public situations – PHYSICALLY SAFE.
I learned in my 20’s WHERE YOU HAVE TO DRAW THE LINE to prevent destructive SOCIAL BEHAVIOR that harms your community, and thus the children of the families you care about.
I am 56 yrs old, just right at your age, and I am not even a GRANDPARENT, yet, as you are.
I’m shocked that you think that men and women signalling eachother in public facilities takes precedence over the PUBLIC COMPLAINTS that they feel REALISTICALLY has sway over the health and safety of their families when they go to public gathering places, whether it is airports, malls, city parks, or entertainment parks, or fancy restaurants, or truck stops.
Precedence belongs to the FAMILY AND COMMUNITY SAFETY AND HEALTH.
When the Law is in a public restroom because of GENERAL PUBLIC COMPLAINTS, and 40 arrests in 2 months JUSTIFIES THEIR CONCERNS, CRAIG is part of the problem AND NOT a mistreated public servant!
In the public bathroom, what lands on the floor stays on the floor.
I think the whole thing is ridiculous. I think the fact that people actually say that what Vitter did is no biggee because he fought the evil horrid amnesty bill is even more ridiculous. I mean if it were the other way around would they be saying that what Craig did was ok?
What the hell? Are we going to say that soliciting anonymous sex is acceptable so long as you suck up to the right people? And since when is foot tapping worse than actually paying for sex with strangers?
So far as I know Vitter has not done and will not do anything about the tens of thousands of illegals working to clean up New Orleans. They are too useful. The whole railing against the bill was just pandering and considering the fact that there are people in the area ready and willing to hire those folks it does not seem that everyone has a problem with them anyway.
But the point here is that this man’s life has been ruined for something that would not even be an issue if he was not a Senator. I read that 40 men had been arrested or accosted or whatever in the same way in the last 4 months and so far as I know no one cares or knows who they are.
I just wonder if this will make it easier to go after other people. The politicians may get more careful, but that does not mean they are better people. And no one is perfect. None of us are.
Is the guy a pervert? I don’t know the answer to that but it seems that the Democrats do not need to waste their time going after Republicans when other Republicans are more than willing to do it for them.
Vitter should not have to step down as his action were done prior to him taking office as a senator. Craig shoudn’t have had to step down unless the cops got him on something more risque than hand gestures and feet touching (and what does that even mean, was he playing footsie or did his foot brush against the cops and then quickly pull away). To me, if you’re going to cahrge someone with lewd behavior it has to actually be lewd. Yes, he may have ultimately been been cruising for a gay lay, but no sex occured in the bathroom because the cop completely jumped the gun on this. Even if he were gay, which I don’t know, and trying to find his next lover in the toilet (and that says a lot about the gay lifestyle that someone is looking for their next relationshiop in the bathroom stall next to them but I digress)theres’ nothing illegal about that. Sorry,the conservative Taliban might think its icky, or obscene even for gay guys to be meeting up at all, but sorry this is the 21st century and stuff like that happens.
And because the cop jumped the gun we’ll never know if it would go beyond footsies to sex in the bathroom or if it was totally innocent or if Craig might find someone who he’s interested in and they’ll take the relationship out of the bathroom and over to a hotel room. Or maybe it would be enough to get the guys number to continue later. Of course if the cop waited long enough he could have gotten Craig in the act.
As it stands now Craig’s life is ruined and he lost his job simply becuase his feet touched someone else’s feet and he engaged in hand gestures.
Knowing this would be the reaction, is there any wonder that he might want to have it not come out and after being reassured by the cop that all he had to do was pay a fine and no media would be alterted that he would agree to do it,even if he wasn’t guilty.
I’ll say this much about the conservatives. No loyalty whatsoever. The senator could have brought home the bacon for years to his state (and apparently did) but at even the whiff of controversy, even if nothing untoward happens and he’ll have his life ruined and have to step down without even an ethics probe.
If he’s going to be treated so harshly the cops should at the very least have let him have sex with someone in the bathroom, since he’s going to have to pay the charge as if he did have sex in the bathroom, even though all he got out of it was at best a foot touching.
After hearing the audio there are more questions than answers. The way the cop brow beat Craig was over the top and it blew his own credibility. So, I googled the cops name came across a couple links I found interesting.
This link is to a blog that had information regarding another incident at the airport that involved the same cop.
http://www.bannerofliberty.com/BOL-2007MQC/8-29-2007.1.html
This link goes into more detail.
http://digg.com/politics/Man_Arrested_for_Riding_His_Bike_Home_From_an_Airport
What was the crime again?
A whiff of controvery? Tip of the iceberg rather. Most of us here finally turned against him over the immigration bill. He didn’t give us the time of day on that. Barney says he has known for years. You can trust Barney. I’m glad he’s gone, having voted for him too often. I hope his wife and the kids take this golden opportunity and hightail it outta that relationship.
Fox News has just announced that Craig will announce his resignation tomorrow.
GOOD RIDDANCE.
“Even if he were gay, which I don’t know, and trying to find his next lover in the toilet…theres’ nothing illegal about that. Sorry…this is the 21st century and stuff like that happens.”
And it’s a crime.
609.72 DISORDERLY CONDUCT.
Subdivision 1. Crime. Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place,
including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will
tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of
disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor:
…(3) Engages in offensive, obscene, abusive, boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive,
obscene, or abusive language tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.
http://ros.leg.mn/bin/getpub.php?type=s&num=609.72&year=2006
I have a right not to be groped, caressed, fondled, solicited or propositioned while I have my pants down for the purpose of elimination.
Craig wasn’t busted for having fun with a gay man. Craig was busted for offensively touching a man to find out if he was gay.
Just what kind of America are you clowns looking to build together?
Up at Lucianne, all that is told is that Craig will annunce “something” t’marra. Maybe, he’ll say “he’s just gonna use the next “stall.”
Meanwhile, in terms of how non-verbals work; President Bush was asked what he thought of Craig, and the President said NOTHING. He just turned, at that point, and walked off the stage.
You really can learn a lot from non-verbal behaviors. Or? You can think Bush just had to go to the bathroom, himself, in a hurry.
Yeah. Craig will be gone. There are no insiders giving him any support. (He’s been calling around to everybody he knows; which is a lot of people.)
Now, t’marra, he can claim “BEN GAY,” but not gay; and no one will believe his REASONS. In other words? He went too far in the “excuses” department.
And, my guess is that with him gone, other than the bathroom jokes; we’ll be shrugging and saying “nothing’s wrong with that.”
Once, the MSM had the messages. And, they could “help” or “hinder” someone. This time around? All the noise you’re seeing is on the Internet.
And, the cycle spun itself out fast, too.
Another politician, according to Glenn Reynolds, is New York’s Governor Spitzer. Came in with a popularity landslide of 80%. Tried to hurt a cop. It back fired; and soon his career will be toast. (Oh, his excuse? “He didn’t know.”)
Lots of excuses, that are old hat to politicians, have just lost their abilities to sway. Nothing like empty suits in the wind.
Suzanne Craig, by the way, is in the same boat as McGreevey’s wife. For some women? Being married to someone “important,” where there’s no love at all in the bedroom, is something a couple of women actually bargain for. Until the shit hits the fan.
Sure. You could ask. Was Mrs. Craig “the last to know?” And, were her kids safe from the pervert?
Jr565, Larry Craig was NOT charged with lewd behavior! He was charged with doing the signals that homosexual men do, when they use public restrooms, looking for blow jobs; and other forms of sexual relief.
The reason LEWD conduct doesn’t come into play, is the same reason it didn’t come into play when Oscar Wilde (at the end of the 19th Century got charged with something less than “homosexual” activities. To what Wilde referred to as “the love that dare not speak its name.)
And, there’s plenty of evidence for secret societies; secret handshakes. And, ways of circumventing the laws; by not talking opening about what you’re after.
Some people, here, want to lecture that “republicans are doing the work of Bonkeys” because they’ve called on Craig to step down? HA!
Today, when the President just turned on his heel, and wouldn’t answer the media question about what he was thinking … when it came to Craig; also speaks volumes.
And, given the circumstances; that Larry Craig warned no one this was coming down the pike, you had better believe he’s spent time, from his reluctance to come out of that toilet. To the ways he tried to take advantage of the cop; pretty sure that he could “fool the public.”
It’s good news that he didn’t get away with it!
And, it’s great news that the Internet just lets you bathe in public opnion; so you can see a whole variety of responses. No rancor. Nobody’s throwing rocks at anybody else. The dialog’s been civil.
This is the part that must have surprised Larry Craig, most of all. A pervert who thought he “could get away with it.” He should be introduced to ex-governor of New Jersey, McGreevey. They can share “secrets,” together. But neither one has the key to “getting away with it” by claiming to be “not gay.” Just using Ben Gay.
And, a lot of people, here? Who had no idea there was this strange signalling system in place? Well, for some it started to be a story full of smells, when it looked odd, with other toilets available, Craig sought out the stall right next to one in use. And, he bypassed the VIP lounge. To go into a toilet that’s brought complaints to the police. Who sent in the vice squad. Where NOT USING LEWD CONDUCT as the arresting mechanism, arrested 40 perverts, including Craig, in a short period of time. AND, THEN, the cops didn’t go to the Internet for Smoking Gun to post anything.
So, that trial balloon that this was a set-up, got pricked. And, it’s not flying.
As to “everyone” sharing the same mindset. That will never happen in a free society.
Regarding Vitter –
Part of the icky is WHAT – but part of the icky is also WHO WITH AND WHERE AND WHEN.
Vitter was never caught trying to do it in PUBLIC FACILITIES, not giving a rat’s behind who might walk in on him IN PROGRESS, including little children.
It’s bad enough to be without moral values – it’s horrendous to be additionally tasteless and crass, AND A PUBLIC SPECTACLE of such crass and disgusting behavior.
Even Barney had the “good grace” to keep his in his own basement!
Not excusing all this lack of morality in Public Servants.
Part of the problem the DIMS have is they won’t draw the line ANYWHERE, while they complain that we conservatives draw the line TOO SOON, in their opinion – which is worth ZILCH all things considered – BECAUSE THEY DO REFUSE TO DRAW THE LINE AT ALL – except if their Dim politician is caught in public ACTING LIKE A CONSERVATIVE, like Zell Miller, Joe Lieberman, and another Congressman who decided to venture the opinion that the surge might be working, and earned the wrath of MOVEON.
We conservatives would rather draw the line SOMEWHERE, even if the line seems to zigzag, in the opinion of Moderates and Liberals.
Posted by The Yell | August 31, 2007 5:40 PM
AMEN! MEGA DITTOS!
It’s mindboggling. What are the odds that, given the billions of visits each year to public men’s rooms, the only political figure caught in an embarrassing peccadillo would be the one who has dodged rumors of homosexuality for 40 years?
The only strange coincidence that matches this statistical oddity is the fact that almost every politician involved in a drunken car crash bears the last name of Kennedy.
Speaking of which I propose a new law that states that any public official convicted of a crime or instance of moral turpitude should be forced to resign.
And I wish the law to be retroactive to 1969.
Yes, Rose, there’s a difference between the two parties!
Barney Frank, who wants voters to vote for the Bonkeys, has already spelled out the “campaign ahead.”
THE CRISIS is this. The affirmative action crowd bled away mainstream voters. And, they’re worried. They also know that there are republican men who are homosexual, but who prefer voting for republican candidates.
SO, how can you sell this one?
Barney Frank’s said that when the sodomy laws were finally flipped over and turned, the case came from Texas. Where Bush, as governor, then, was on record as saying homosexuality was against the law.
Up at the supremes, the court divided. And, that Texas law (where cops could jump into a person’s home, uninvited; and then arrest two men for engaging in homosexual sex), was illegal. But the decision came out 5/4.
According to Barney, there’s a lot at stake. And, given how Americans really aren’t pressing the “affirmative action” bandwagon,anymore, you could see that on the republican side, the religious right had claimed the party to itself. And, if we continue to elect republicans “then the old rules outlawing homosexual acts (between consenting adults), will be outlawed, again.
Barney Frank’s pointing to Scalia’s dissenting opinion, where he blasted the 5 who bought the arguments that “consenting adults” over-rode established anti-homosexual laws … Will, in fact, go the other way.
In other words? Yes. The Bonkeys will fight the republicans by claiming the religious right influences the GOP. Just so people keep voting for democraps. In a field where everything seems to split close to 50/50. (Meaning both parties seem to be having difficulties finding the mainstream voters.)
So, I expect, up ahead, just like Bush refused to say a word, when asked about Craig; that we’re looking at something Rove, himself, would suggest. There’s no need to add language to these facts.
Don’t get caught in the storm.
That Larry Craig “made it in politics?” Well, so did Bill Clinton.
But they “made it” before the Internet. Before all the interactions that you get when people come together to discover what they don’t know; and how things pan out, when it seems a politician is lying through his teeth.
Barney Frank’s not lying. And, yes, we’ve moved closer to accepting homosexuals for what they are. As long as they’re not doing it in public toilets. (Which seems more the venue of married men. Just the group that also supports whores.)
As a topic? The less said, ahead, the better.
I’d also bet Larry Craig, when calling around to the various political power houses on his Rolodex Wheel, discovered. Support wasn’t there for his tricks. Maybe, politics is changing? It seems all for the good.
I’ll also bet that when the media tries to trip up a republican politician, the frost will be as noticable as if you’re talking to the Queen of England.
I asked on another thread how the Republican presidential candidates are going to respond if asked during a debate why the party has demanded the resignation of Craig while not making similar calls for Vitter’s resignation.
Tell me, filistro, how will the Democrats respond if asked why they have not demanded the resignation of any of their many problem children? I don’t think I need to name names.
Or do you simply take it for granted that nobody would have the nerve to ask a Democrat such a question?
I see Ed is still sore over losing the amnesty battle.
More remarkable still is the fact that if he was a democrat he would remain in office and the same newspapers would be writing editorials telling us why cruising for sex in restrooms is no different than going to strip joints. Who can forget Barney Frank and his male prostitute–for $80 dollars no less! It’s a personal choice would be the slant.
Soliciting sex from and intern and then lying about it under oath is a whole lot worse than Craig’s plea. Yet Clinton has a good chance of returning to the White House as “first man” revered by close to 150 million Americans. His rape charge easily forgotten. Go figure.
Having said that I don’t take any of this outrage seriously. I think most of it is homophobic–nature’s biological imperative. As to Craig’s duplicity in regards to his “closet status” it was the norm not to long ago. How would you feel if you woke up gay one day. You would lie about it to. Probably hate yourself to boot.
Finally, if the question mentioned earlier is asked at the debate, my response would include the caveat that if he was a democrat this would be no story.
Just what kind of America are you clowns looking to build together?
Are you insinuating something about me? I’m not defending his gayness or saying I’m gay or that I’d want some guy groping me in the bathroom. its not lewd behavior though and despite my reservation about someone being gay, they shouldn’t be arrested in a bathroom simply because they act gay in a bathroom. If a gay guy asks someone out in a bathroom who they believe is gay, that’s not a crime. If two gay guys play footsie in a bathroom its not a crime. Sorry. If two gay guys do alll the hand gestures in the world its not a crime. If two gay guys head off to a stall and start screwing,then put em in jail.
They should be arrested in a bathroom if they act lewdly (ie start fornicating) in a bathroom. What is this, the Minority Report? He’s getting charged with crimes he has yet to commit? He should lose his livelihood for something as innocuous as touching feet? Are you serious?
But who are you calling a clown you twerp?
The Yell wrote:
609.72 DISORDERLY CONDUCT.
Subdivision 1. Crime. Whoever does any of the following in a public or private place,
including on a school bus, knowing, or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will
tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, is guilty of
disorderly conduct, which is a misdemeanor:
A bar/nightclub is a public place. So if a heterosexual guy makes a pass at a woman in a bar, he is disturbing the peace? Because this happens every single night in every single bar around the country. It’s called hooking up.
A lot of times a guy gets shot down and moves to the next woman he tries to hook up with. If he gets lucky he might be able to take her home. Sometimes you can catch them right in the middle of the bar kissing one another or dirty dancing. Shocked, I know.
Rose wrote:
Part of the icky is WHAT – but part of the icky is also WHO WITH AND WHERE AND WHEN.
Vitter was never caught trying to do it in PUBLIC FACILITIES, not giving a rat’s behind who might walk in on him IN PROGRESS, including little children.
It’s bad enough to be without moral values – it’s horrendous to be additionally tasteless and crass, AND A PUBLIC SPECTACLE of such crass and disgusting behavior.
Vitter however actually DID IT. IT being having sex.Craig did not. Now would he have? We’ll never know because the cop jumped the gun and got him on foot touching, which is one step below (but just barely) sex with prostitutes.
Carol, I think with conduct like this, which many adults here, who prolly don’t have small chidlren at home are merely looking at from Craig’s POV, but actually contributes to growing alarms over growing abuses of others – and of violence against others – and public health endangerment, as well – is actually going to only backfire on the homosexuals.
It isn’t as if they used public opinion to destroy the Texas laws against sodomy.
They used OLIGARCHY. And they didn’t give us a VOTE over it – they made sure we do not have a vote over it.
THEN they try to make it a “crying shame” if we the GENERAL PUBLIC are not “tolerant” enough of THEIR MINORITY SOCIAL ENGINEERING experiments done using OLIGARCHY methodology.
Sorry – that generally backfires.
We aren’t nearly as interested when the stories break locally about some public facilities being taken over this way, in the “RIGHTS” of PERVERTS to “FLIRT” as we are in the HEALTH AND SAFETY of our children and other vulnerable individuals.
When it is a local story, and the cops have to move in and clean an undesireable element out so it is safe to use the public facilities again, NOBODY LOCALLY is SCREAMING about the perverts’ “CIVIL RIGHTS”.
GET THIS STRAIGHT – they don’t have a right to turn public facilities into PRISON SHOWERS types of places, with several inches of goop on the floors.
The fact that they don’t feel they have any SOCIAL COMMUNITY OBLIGATIONS to conduct themselves any better than this is precisely why parents do not trust them to be a member IN GOOD STANDING of the community.
I certainly don’t and never have, and nobody I am acquainted with either, feel that the government has the right to make our social arbitration FOR US against the mainstream will of the hearty MAJORITY of Americans.
ESPECIALLY NOT JUST BECAUSE THE DARNED PHRRYQUEING ACLU USED A FIXED TRUMPED-UP TRIAL IN FRONT OF A SPECIAL INTEREST SOCIALIST JUDGE to get what they wanted, over-riding the will of the known SUPERMAJORITY of Americans.
NOBODY is going to get them the public approval they CLAIM they are after by shoving this trashy and unsafe public behavior down our throats, and trying to pretend it is only all about his “civil rights” to “FLIRT” – when we are all grown-upes here and we all know perfectly bleeding well precisely what went down.
Communities who do not put the children first will dissolve – and I do not vote for living in an “ESCAPE FROM NEW YORK” society, just because some of you don’t give a phreep what goes on around you – because there is no one around you that you have dedicated yourself to protecting from great harm, i.e. Jessica Lunsford.
For any creep trying to tell me they aren’t related – then explain why you think that Craig had no obligation to “control himself” as a decent human being in a public facility, helping promote the turning of such places into dangerous areas by that conduct – yet we are supposed to think you care about whether or not any public places are made to be a place of promotion for the lack of self restraint of other deviant behavior that always gathers to the same sites, i.e. bath houses, back allies, flop houses, etc etc etc.
EVEN THOUGH SUFFICIENT PUBLIC COMPLAINTS WERE REGISTERED WITH THE POLICE TO HAVE THEM PUT SOMEONE ON ASSIGNMENT TO HALT THE BEHAVIOR IN QUESTION.
WORST OF ALL is that they are so determined, they do not stop for ONE MINUTE to consider the difference between what our Founding Fathers said is the obligation of a minority to COURT THE APPROVAL OF THE MAJORITY in making major social changes, RATHER THAN CIRCUMVENTING the CONSCIENCE OF THE COMMUNITY.
When you violate the conscience of the community, you will reap a harvest you do not like.
Vitter is from Louisiana. That is like Toady Chappaquiddick Kennedy being from Massachusetts.
He is prolly the best Louisiana could do, anyway.
But at least Vitter did NOT put anyone else in a position of having to be caught unawares being an unwitting and unwilling WITNESS to said conduct, while increasing the exposure all who go in there afterwards to VDs, and then insulting the dickens out of us all by lying about it, too.
I ain’t defending Vitter. I ain’t defending ANY Louisiana politicians, on ANY issue.
I ain’t defending Toady Kennedy, Barney Franks, Jim Laughtenburg, Harry Reid, Nancy Pelosi, Hillary Clinton, Hanoi John – I think they all should go.
But Craig isn’t being railroaded. He was finally caught, having been pushing the envelop of everyone’s tolerance of his own conduct for DECADES.
He could have taken his opportunities to defuse this trigger, instead of further priming it.
My eye has NO PITY for a grown man in a position of high responsibility, who takes a bad situation and makes it worse, and letting him off the hook would only exasperate the situation we deal with these days in public facilities – just as letting Clinton off the hook with all his legal issues has already exasperated many kinds of illegal conduct.
He has no right to promote a situation which makes it more difficult for families in public places, and himself get off scott free, while helping to degenerate the general living conditions for the average citizens of this nation.
*****************
I am from Texas. One of our last elections, they had a proposition on the ballot about a homosexual issue.
We have 271 counties.
ALL COUNTIES BUT ONE voted against the homosexual issue by about a 2 to 1 margin, averaging about a 3/4 vote against the homosexual issue.
The only county to vote FOR the issue was TRAVIS COUNTY – in other words, AUSTIN, TEXAS.
And the trending is against them.
They aren’t making friends in Texas. ESPECIALLY NOT by using the ACLU and STAGED, TRUMPED UP FALSE CIRCUMSTANCES to strike down POPULAR LAWS.
NO! WE DO NOT WANT TO POLICE THE BEDROOMS! BUT WE WANT SAFE COMMUNITIES AND THEY HAVE NOT CONTRIBUTED THEIR FAIR OBLIGATIONS TO THAT END!
And this is one more example – you guys defending the rights of perverted activities in public facilities, regardless of the rightful and legitimate use of the facilities, and the impairment of the General Public to use any said facilities for LEGITIMATE PURPOSES.
I don’t care if you think I am harsh and intolerant.
An incident took place in San Antonio about 20 years ago, in a public restroom of a high end restaurant, and a 9 yr old boy was found strangled by the towel roll, after he had been molested – out of site of his family’s nearby table for only a few minutes, not more than 5.
DEAD JUST FEET AWAY WHILE HIS FAMILY ENJOYED A CELEBRATORY MEAL OUT TOGETHER.
The family then had trouble with Liberal elements claiming nothing happened to the boy, and he just committed suicide. It took a lot of shameful events over several months to make sure the real truth was known.
The incident took place just a couple of weeks after I had been there with my 7 yr old son, and didn’t let him “be a big boy” and go by himself!
I not only do not have sympathy for those who want to pervert the natural function of public restrooms, QUITE THE OPPOSITE.
It has been my contention all along that the chiefest of reasons to deny SO-CALLED (by Stalin) “basic civil rights” to those who want “rights of conscience” in the general population IS BECAUSE THEY REFUSE TO SHOULDER RESPONSIBILITIES OF CONSCIENCE TOWARDS THE COMMUNITY – such as this conduct of trying to act like the WRONG was to the SENATOR instead of to the PUBLIC ASSURANCE of the properness and safety of the public facilities.
A COMMUNITY DOES NOT EXIST OUTSIDE OF ITS NESTING FUNCTIONS FOR THE FAMILY AND A COMMUNITY’S POSTERITY.
Every community that has abandoned that FIRST AND PRIME DIRECTIVE has destroyed itself.
Craig’s OBLIGATIONS exceed his privileges and our politicians need a wake-up notice on that fact.
You are right, of course.
Just think – what if IT had been MURDER, instead of just SEX.
Of course, we do still waste our time with solicitors, too.
Men’s Restroom Etiquette Lessons For Senator Craig
I have purposefully avoided talking about what everyone else has been talking about…cuz…what else can be said? Anyway…I couldn’t resist this.
…
Craig’s gone. He got no support from GOP honcho’s, either.
As a matter of fact, just to rain on his parade, Drudge already has the headline that the Idaho governor has chosen the Lt. Governor, Jim Risch, to replace, him. So much for whatever he wanted to eke out of t’marra’s news conference. But INSIDE the beltway, so to speak, Larry Craig got no support.
It’s a new day.
Slow news day? Perhaps.
But Glenn Reynolds just posted that he’s had his busiest month EVER. And, he comments that he never expected this in August. People may go on vacation. But they “keep up.” And, it’s not by opening up their daily newspapers.
I’m excited at this change.
That some people will try to convince others that Larry Craig “got railroaded.” Well,you’re not convincing me!
As a matter of fact, just to share a story with Rose, when my son was in high school; I was one of the volunteering moms on a bus trip. There were two buses full of kids. I was in the second one. Sitting up front. And, while we were out on the freeway, the bus in front pulled over. He opened the rear of his “cab.” And, the driver of the bus I was on, also pulled over. THERE WAS NOTHING WRONG WITH THE BUSES. Just two homosexual guys, “making contact.” I watched this. As the bus driver went out and began playing with the tuchis of the other driver.
Then, we were on our way, again.
At the stop, however, I saw the two drivers heading into the men’s room. And, I “knew.”
I said nothing.
Who are you going to tell?
But if homosexuals want to be accepted; and this has been what we’ve heard … Then, the “consenting adult” behaviors is on thin ice.
How thin is that? The sodomy laws were vacated by the Supreme Court; on the Texas case. But it wasn’t unanimous. It was 5/4. Enough to change the laws. But really not human attitudes.
And, I think its homosexuals, themselves, who are now more nervous than ever. They can’t apply pressure to get “more rights.” And, if this is what homosexuals do; where they marry for “cover” but are not intimate with their wives … What you get is false. It’s a false front.
And, this is more disgusting than “hand signals” made under stall doors, in men’s toilets.
I think that’s why Larry Craig didn’t stand a chance. Oh, yeah. He took his chances! He was as cock-sure of his own skills as Bill Clinton.
But it’s not passing muster.
This is a good thing.
It means more and more people are aware of the harms done when women are used as disguises. And, the men? They think they’re leaders. Top of the senate. And, high up in their church. But frauds are frauds.
And, this discovery belongs to the Internet. It’s not the MSM, here, that’s given you more information than you knew was possible.
Some people don’t believe Craig did anything wrong? Who cares. Opinions are free.
But even his exit from congress has been marred, by the leaks that threw his press conferences, to the dogs.
How do we know the cop wasn’t stretching the truth to get an arrest?
Jack, give it up.
Larry Craig put so much pressure on this kid; especially because he knew what he was up to! But he was just like Bill Clinton. And, freaks like that, if you have to prove something will that; will railroad ya all the time.
And, I think the American people see this. They no longer take it for granted that there are “experts” out there who “know better.”
This is even true when college professors are pumping up their knowledge to make it seem they know more than you.
And, the cop has the tape!
And, the cop NEVER WENT to any Internet site and unloaded what the National Enquirer would have paid him money, for! The cop stayed within the real rules.
The pervert, however, was cock-sure he’d get away with this!
Well, he didn’t.
And, we don’t even know the half of it. Because the MSM isn’t getting the President to comment. BUt Larry Craig’s been working his phone like crazy. And, no support came through.
YEs, Larry Craig’s career is destroyed. He did this to himself. His judgement was so off base he didn’t think the consequences would come out where he’d be caught.
The cop deserves a medal. Hopefully, he won’t have to be treated for hemmerhoids, for all that “sitting.”
“If a gay guy asks someone out in a bathroom who they believe is gay, that’s not a crime. If two gay guys play footsie in a bathroom its not a crime. Sorry. If two gay guys do alll the hand gestures in the world its not a crime.”
It’s too bad Craig didn’t have someone willing to make these arguments to defend him. He might have beaten the charges. But since he chose not to defend himself at all, we’ll never know.
Sen. Craig To Resign On Saturday
It looks like the media’s "stall-to-stall" coverage of Sen. Craig’s arrest at a Minneapolis airport will result in his
A medal? Really? Pressure? I didn’t realize cops never stretch the truth. Perhaps you should read this about the same heroic cop and his buddies.
http://digg.com/politics/Man_Arrested_for_Riding_His_Bike_Home_From_an_Airport
Larry Craig is a failure as a man, a Senator, and a rancher(filed bankruptcy long time ago), and the cops are often thugs, and there you have it.
Well, Bennett, it came to pass that Larry Craig got charged, but not for “doing it.” Not for lewd behaviors. But there was an on-going sting operation in this bathroom; and the public at large has been “informed.”
IF people sympathized with Craig, it would have shown up. Doesn’t. Didn’t. And, the GOP, itself, also capbable of “hand signals” … gave Larry Craig the Old heave ho.”
I’m not sure about “adults can do anything they want,” in the “getting it on” department, either. Since the commons has public rules.
I think you can get arrested for spitting on the street.
And, a man in Palos Verdes, California, has just been sentenced to 6-months in jail “because he didn’t have permits” to fix up his home’s fence, or driveway. (Glenn Reynolds put that one up.)
Again, there is, I think, a bigger issue, here. One where Larry Craig wants to get away with his sexuality. ANd, the reality that the GOP insiders, where he ran to for some support, have ditched him.
Ya know, even when it came to the immigration vote, now that everyone knows Craig went “along with it” … in spite of the fact that he represents Idaho-ans, who were mostly against it. Could raise the issue that someone got his vote for sex. Or someone actually blackmailed him into this vote. You’ll never know. Because “conscience” isn’t up there as one of Larry Craig’s traits.
As to homosexual activities; done in public, there are laws on the books that keep men from doing it. Or accosting others. That’s just the way it is. And, the “rules” teeter-totter on public opinion.
This was the big kahuna. Where Larry Craig was playing with fire. Of course, he thought his saying “I’m not gay.” And, “this is all a misunderstanding,” would fly.
Didn’t fly. Didn’t get off the ground.
What were his other choices? Well, sure. He could have “lawyered up” to fight the charges. But why think a lawyer would have cancelled this out, on the quiet? Seems once it hit the news, Larry Craig’s choices dimmed.
Could he have avoided the shame that now comes with denouement? I dunno. He sure did stick himself into a hornet’s nest. Maybe, if he was more honest upfront? Maybe, if he told the leadership right away, there would have been a way for him to exit gracefully?
“Gracefully,” so far, is not part of this story.
I’ve wondered what would have happened if Craig had told us “I’m gay”, say right after his last election, and then served out the remainder of his term as a good Senator for us here, voting against the immigration, etc. Would we re-elect him? I don’t know for sure, but I have a hunch it wouldn’t have hurt him politically as much as he might have feared. I doubt he ever really considered the idea though.
This is a massive tempest in a mighty small teapot.
So he tried to get him some in an airport bathroom.
BFD.
Like he was the first politician to ever do so.
Or the last.
Like Nixon and his dirty tricks,he was only doing what thousands,perhaps hundreds of thousands have done and are doing,he just had the misfortune to get caught and like Nixon tried to first bluff,then threaten his way out.
Geesh,people,defeatocrats do this crap every day and we never hear a word(Ooops,just remembered.As long as defeatocrats are the MSM’s favorites,we won’t hear about,either).
Leave the man alone.let him get whatever he can get wherever he can get it,if he can now and let’s get on to more serious business.
Like voting for Fred Thompson for President.
MASSIVE tempest in a VVVEERRRYYYY small teapot.
Well, there’s nothing to hold Larry back now.
“I’ve wondered what would have happened if Craig had told us “I’m gay”, say right after his last election… I don’t know for sure, but I have a hunch it wouldn’t have hurt him politically as much as he might have feared.”
I don’t know Idaho that well but I suspect you might be right. I also think that maybe his issues aren’t as straightforward as being gay and that’s it.
Maybe it comes from being in the closet, but its the man’s behavior that causes the contempt, not his sexual preference. Meaning, it’s not that he’s gay (if he is), it’s that he was cruising public restrooms. This reminds me of McGreevy, the NJ governor who turned out to be gay. By itself, so what? The real story was about how he put his lover into the homeland security position, something he wasn’t qualified for.
I say “clowns” because you promote insanity.
You are promoting the political principles that nonconsensual physical contact in men’s rooms is a natural civil right.
You are insisting that Senators deserve a pass for crimes lest they lose their “livelihood”.
If you want to further destroy your party for another cycle, run with that, even for a month.
I demand that real adults keep their hands and feet to themselves, and that a public servant be a servant to the public.
Posted by Bennett | September 1, 2007 2:23 AM
That worked for Barney. He took a hit, but he bounced back – but then, HE is a DIM – and they have no expectation whatsoever of MORAL VALUES being a requirement for office.
But Craig didn’t do that – he instead decided that although he was the target of investigative speculation about his persuasions, he would – while under the spotlight – take an opportunity to PROMOTE THE DECADENCE of PUBLIC RESTROOMS – immediately gaining the wrath of every parent, who has enough to worry about these days, THANKS TO IRRESPONSIBLE LAWMAKERS AND JUDICIARY BENCHWARMERS, who think that “WRISTSLAPS” are the way to handle vicious assaults on children.
And this clown thinks he wants to try to gain sympathy for his situation in which he thought he had the freedom to PERVERT THE NATURAL FUNCTION OF PUBLIC FACILITIES to something that is physically dangerous for FAMILIES, and not be held accountable for his part in damaging the whole situation that families must deal with on a daily basis.
I highly resent the idea that WE HAVE A GREATER OBLIGATION TO ALLOW HIM TO HOLD ONTO ONE OF THE PREMIER POSITIONS IN THE WORLD than HE has to the General Public in creating a HOSTILE ENVIRONMENT, FROM THAT POSITION.
What happened to the concept that such a position SHOULD BE EARNED?
We in the General Public HAVE NO OBLIGATION TO YOU WHO WISH TO PROMOTE A MORE DECADENT SOCIETY. It has gone downhill far enough the last 50 years, and it need go NO FURTHER.
And you have NO INHERENT RIGHT to be the most destructive force in your society that you can be, whether from doing your worst, or whether CONDONING THE WORST IN OTHERS – IT IS NEVER THE CIVIL RIGHT OF ANY HUMAN BEING TO BE A DESTRUCTIVE FORCE in their community.
Rot happens naturally, at a difficult enough rate to handle.
IT IS NOT A CIVIL RIGHT!
It is most frustrating and sad that most of the discussion surrounding this sordid tale focuses on Craig’s hypocrisy as the real crime and not the disgusting actions he pleaded guilty to.
I have little doubt that if this were an “out-of-the-closet” Democrat congressman, the demand would be for the resignation of the policeman for harassment. A depressing reflection of the times we live in.
Thankfully, there is at least a large segment of one party that insists on holding political leaders to a higher standard.
Posted by jack | August 31, 2007 11:20 PM
How do we know the cop wasn’t stretching the truth to get an arrest?
&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&&
Because Craig told the tape in the transcript that he didn’t argue the EVENTS – just that he “didn’t want to be misunderstood”.
Well, 40 arrests and nobody else had any complaints that the same actions were being “misunderstood”.
And some of you guys are upset about some “possibly misunderstood” “hand signals” in a bathroom – WELL GET REAL!
THAT ISN’T THE CONDUCT THAT GOT POLICE ORDERED TO GO TO THE RESTROOMS.
And it’s been going on for DECADES, now.
And when you are going to stop offensive conduct, you have to figure WHERE you will draw the line. And most of the grownups in the room KNOW WHERE TO DRAW THE LINE – IF YOU ARE SERIOUS ABOUT STOPPING THE CONDUCT IN QUESTION – and you stop it BEFORE IT STARTS – NOT HALFWAY DOWN THE LINE.
It’s like parents intent on sto pping FIGHTS get their kids in trouble FOR THE NAME CALLING AND TAUNTING, even though “blood wasn’t drawn, there”.
YOU DRAW AN EFFECTIVE LINE.
And believe me – TAKE A VOTE FOR A BLOODY CHANGE – we don’t want THEY HAND SIGNALS going on there either – we know what makes these events escalate.
Oh, Carol – no, a 5/4 COURT RULING didn’t change the attitudes of the SOCIETY.
Surprise, Surprise, Surprise!
But then, a 9/0 court ruling would not, either. If they were INTERESTED in SOCIETY ATTITUDES, they would have gone for VOTING IN GENERAL ELECTIONS, and tried to WIN the approval of THE GENERAL PUBLIC.
These are folks like the guy who tried to steal the New Mexico territory over John Chisum’s DEAD BODY, L.G. Murphy – as he told another man, Chisum is a man who respects the law, and around here, I am the man who OWNS it.
They aren’t interested in contributing to laws that allow their preferences, THEY ARE INTERESTED IN OWNING IT AND MAKING THE NATURALLY LAW ABIDING ELEMENTS LUMP IT!
THAT IS NOT A DEMOCRATIC REPUBLIC, though, THAT is a DICTATORSHIP.
THAT is not an AMERICAN PROCESS – to try to change the SOCIAL FABRIC of America through COURT RULINGS, over the heads of the GENERAL PUBLIC.
It’s just DIM STANDARD OPERATING PROCEDURE – since STALIN SUGGESTED THE TACTIC TO THEM in the 1950’s.
BTW, the resignation took place a few minutes ago.
BTW, Carol, yeah, I saw your story of the two bus drivers – and there you were with KIDS, who might possibly need to go to the bathrooms, too!
Good grief!
These guys tell us they have a right to be accepted in Society because they are “just as responsible as everyone else – and guess what – they don’t even understand the CONCEPT of responsible behavior!
They are sitting here telling us “handsignals in the bathroom” are nobody else’s business.
And they want THEIR opinions respected. AND they want the REINS to Societal mores!
I say, NO!
Like voting for Fred Thompson for President.
– Ken
*******************
Like his Bumper Sticker:
Fred in ’08 – Enabling the Clintons!
Others serving in Congress at the moment have pleaded guilty to misdemeanors of more import than disorderly conduct without being forced to resign.
Can anyone please direct me to a list of these people? That would be valuable. Thanks.
Carol mentioned it first, but I must admit it had occurred to me that Craig *was* being blackmailed over the amnesty vote. Fox News was covering the voting; I remember a few of the Beltway Boys expressing surprise that Larry Craig seemed to be bouncing back & forth, but overall seemed to be supporting the bill.
I’ll admit I don’t know much about Idaho (other than they grow great potatos…..or is it potatoes….I’m having a DQ moment) but Idaho appears to be a very conservative state. Does Idaho have a great need for farm workers? Do illegals play a large role in bringing in the potato crop?
Again, I remember several panelists on Brit’s show expressing surprise at Craig’s vote. Perhaps he was already being blackmailed?????
If there had been no previous hints as to Craig’s sexuality perhaps he might have been able to ride out this episode……but there were prior hints so, he became a hot potato.
Now that he’s resigned it will be interesting to see if anyone else steps forward to confirm past behavior. I know one fellow says he had a similar experience with Craig in Union Station in DC, but he’s remained anonymous and probably will remain so considering the current bruhaha.
Sure we have immigrant farm workers here. Former Senator Symms–his family grew rich off them, picking their apples. Craig sold out to a few businessmenandwomen, was under really really heavy pressure from the rest of us here, and didn’t give us the time of day, really. I’m sure he knew his position on immigration was killing him, probably hence the wavering. I doubt there was blackmail involved. Money in the mail to him, much more likely.
I listened to the tape too … it really didn’t impress me much. See also, the discussion over at Volokh Conspiracy on how the “Crime” was pretty weak gruel. BTW, a case can be made that the officer was leading people on — it is interesting how the officer is the one who made the complaint. Not some random innocent.
I would appreciate a list of those who pled to misdeamnors though. I’m sure some have. BTW, adultery and sodomy is/was once illegal too. Many, including Rs, did that too. They, however, were “forgivable” for some reason. I understand the embarassment to the party though. That’s a fair thing to raise. Not sure if that warrants pushing out a democratically elected senator though. The people of Idaho could do that in the next election. That’s how it works, right?
He pled guilty btw for the same reason many do — fighting it, even if innocent, can be harder on one’s rep and life overall.
As to the “public” nature … as noted by some, people troll for dates and sex of all types in public places all the time. This includes places that might have minors. The “code” done here btw, esp. while IN THE STALL, is not really a threat to kids either, is it? The idea here seems to be that he was arrested for getting a bj on the floor or something.
Sex w/prostitutes btw can be dangerous for one’s wife too.
Great post as always, Captain.
Every man in America now has reason to fear they could find themselves being arrested in a public restroom, facing the same accusations.
I explain why in my article “The arrest of Senator Larry Craig and why every male in America should be afraid.”
http://stormythoughts.blogspot.com/2007/08/arrest-of-senator-larry-craig-and-why.html
Maybe my next one will be titled “The arrest of Senator Larry Craig and why every deaf person should be afraid.
Though Vitter’s behavior was unacceptable it occurred prior to his entering the Senate. This was years ago and he did all he could to repair the damage.
IF I recall correctly Vitter confessed to his wife prior to any risk of exposure. He was motivated by conscience not scandal.
He has done his best – to OUR knowledge- to not repeat the same bad behavior.
This certainly separates him from Craig, IMO.
As an aside: Being from Louisiana I much prefer our politicians screw whores as opposed to us. LOL
“He pled guilty btw for the same reason many do — fighting it, even if innocent, can be harder on one’s rep and life overall.”
Since he’s now resigned his Senate seat in disgrace and become the object of ridicule and scorn, maybe fighting wouldn’t have been harder on his life after all.
If he had put up more of a fight they might have decided not to charge him at all, given what they had. Oh, well. He went to play and got played instead. That would be interesting to find out, though. We know there have been something like 41 convictions out of this operation. I wonder how many people have refused to plead out and got a free pass. Because the cops are clearly counting on the “it’s not worth the embarrassment” factor.
Hi Poodlemom. Shows ya, two heads are better than one.
I suspected that the amnesty bill was “big potatoes” to the Bonkeys. They had snared Bush. And, then?
That’s the homosexual lobby for ya. They don’t blackmail often; but then, if they can get the “big guys” on board … they go for broke.
McCain spilled, and broke his presidential yearnings. And, ya know what? When he regained his consciousness, he was totally surprised.
And, no. McCain’s not gay.
On the other hand? Larry Craig’s gay. And, was caught up in the page scandals back in 1982. He wasn’t married, then. And, he used the excuse to publickly berate those accusing him. Who were underage pages.
He said “just because he’s a bachelor” …
Keep this in mind.
He wasn’t married. And, the current crop of kids and grandkids aren’t his. But belong to his wife, Suzanne. Did she know? Does she have to ask her hairdresser?
Some women look at marriage as an economic arrangement. Suzanne brought 3 kids in; and this perp adopted them. Though I’d bet the first big missing piece in “that” marriage was in the bedroom!
Ya know what? There are women stupid enough to believe their husbands don’t want sex “because they’re too fat.”
What did Suzanne get out of her marriage all these years?
And, by the way, EVERYONE IN DC KNEW CRAIG’S GAY. Even Barney Frank’s said so. He said he’s also a hypocrit. Which is the reason Franks gave for saying Craig should go. The Bonkeys don’t need republican queers.
Craig reminds me of Elmer Gantry. That great American novel, where the lead character is a sociopath; connected to Jesus. But his tent operation was to rip off those who believed. Not so unusual. McGreevey is now training to be a man of the cloth.
It hurts religions when they can’t rid themselves of their psychopaths.
But people make excuses.
Choice Comments On Craig
Pam’s House Blend
How does it feel, Larry — all your conservative "values" friends have deserted you. The same people who you bonded with to demonize the lives of openly gay taxpaying citizens calling for your head.
Cest Moi Pol…
Carol,
Just to set the record straight (pun intended. LOL). Barney Frank said Craig should NOT resign.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007 : (Boston, Massachusetts) Barney Frank (D-Mass) one of only two openly gay members of Congress says that Idaho Republican Sen. Larry Craig should resist calls for his resignation. “What he did, it’s hypocritical, but it’s not an abuse of his office in the sense that he was taking money for corrupt votes,” Frank told the Associated Press.
To repeat Theresa, Vitter’s from a state with a Democratic governor. Hello?
And, to add to that my own .02, Craig’s activity was gay; can’t have that in the homophobic GOP. Hello? Idaho is next to the Wyoming of Matthew Shepard infamy. Hello?
I agree with your point about Sen. Vitter. and, it is not really clear that the dalliances with prostitutes did not occuur since he became a senator. There does come a time to put politics aside and stand up and clean house. So what if the dimwitted Kathleen Blanco, a Democrat, would appoint a Democrat to Sen. Vitter’s seat? The GOP is already down a seat and would win that seat back in an election as the Democrat “brand” is lousy in Louisiana. I think the more I hear and read the transcript of Sen. Craig’s interrogation, I am more convinced that he should have fought it in the first place. He was in a no-win situation, but I think would have cleared his name and could have announced that he would not seek reelection in 2008 with a clear record and consience. As an aside, I am very saddened how so many left-wing and some conservaties are relishing this with Sen. Craig. We should remember, it is not about Sen. Craig only but his wife, family and grandchildren. There are REAL human beings involved. Let’s show a little compassion. I am glad he resigned under these conditions, but he should have fought in the first place.
I agree with your point about Sen. Vitter. and, it is not really clear that the dalliances with prostitutes did not occuur since he became a senator. There does come a time to put politics aside and stand up and clean house. So what if the dimwitted Kathleen Blanco, a Democrat, would appoint a Democrat to Sen. Vitter’s seat? The GOP is already down a seat and would win that seat back in an election as the Democrat “brand” is lousy in Louisiana. I think the more I hear and read the transcript of Sen. Craig’s interrogation, I am more convinced that he should have fought it in the first place. He was in a no-win situation, but I think would have cleared his name and could have announced that he would not seek reelection in 2008 with a clear record and consience. As an aside, I am very saddened how so many left-wing and some conservaties are relishing this with Sen. Craig. We should remember, it is not about Sen. Craig only but his wife, family and grandchildren. There are REAL human beings involved. Let’s show a little compassion. I am glad he resigned under these conditions, but he should have fought in the first place.
SocraticGodfry,
HOW do you know Craig is homosexual? How do you know he is not a sex addict that gets off on high risk public sex with strangers, despite the gender or if it’s even human?
You’re leap in assumptions is rather large.
Despite how you want to turn this into a gay issue it won’t work, unless you contend that ALL homosexual people seeking these high risk encounters are “closet” gays.
If this is your contention then please explain the likes of openly gay, very wealthy, attractive George Michael who was in a gay relationship when he was busted trolling for random sex with strangers in a park.
UNLESS it is your contention that ALL homosexuals are not only born gay but they are also born to lead a high risk life style that includes these high risk encounters.
If gays are born gay and high risk then it seems you will be supporting random sex among gays in public places.
And as for your contention there is no room in the Republican party for homosexuals, please explain the “Log Cabin Conservatives,” a group of homosexual Republicans.
Round and round she goes. Where she stops no one knows.