Novak: Senate Conservatives Knew About Craig’s ‘Weird Conduct,’ ‘Didn’t Do Anything About It’
Novak: Senate Conservatives Knew About Craig’s ‘Weird Conduct,’ ‘Didn’t Do Anything About It’
On Bloomberg Television today, right-wing pundit Robert Novak revealed that “sources in the Senate” have told him that Senate conservatives had prior knowledge about Sen. Larry Craig’s (R-ID) “problem” but intentionally kept it “in the closet”:
I have talked to several of my sources in the Senate, and this came as a surprise to me…They knew about it. They knew that he had this problem, and it was in the closet. And it was not just a homosexual relationship. It was this weird conduct. They didn’t do anything about it.
Watch it:
Novak added, “So Republicans, again, as in the case of Congressman Foley, their cover-up is coming back to haunt them.” Novak did not elaborate on what “weird conduct” Craig has carried out in the past.
Recall, then-Speaker Dennis Hastert (R-IL) “and at least three of his aides were told of allegations that then-Rep. Mark Foley (R-FL) had improper e-mail contacts with a former House page months before the incident became public.”
Ultimately, at least a dozen GOP lawmakers and aides admitted to having knowledge of Foley’s lewd behavior, “some of them for a year or more,” but kept the matter secret.
If Novak’s sources are correct, then the Senate ethics investigation into Craig — which conservatives have been aggressively pushing for — should determine what Craig has done in the past and which Senators were involved in covering it up.
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog Roll
Who gives a crap? Larry Craig is a great representative of the Republican party. Long may he hold his seat. Keep him front & center. This is the party of ethics & Christianity right? Ha ha ha.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:11 pmWhat did Jake the Fake used to say? Run… Cindy… run!
Stay… Larry… stay!
October 6th, 2007 at 5:14 pmShocking. They admit nothing until one of “their own” is caught, then do everything possible to distance themselves from him. They are more than willing to preemptively kill hundreds of thousands of Iraqis to prevent a handful of their leaders from possibly, maybe possessing WMDs that domestic and foreign intelligence cannot find. But to preemptively rid their party of hypocrites who are also, incidentally, breaking the law while IN HIGHER OFFICE? Puh-leeeze!
As I said, shocking.
Shockingly by-the-Republican-playbook.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:14 pmSenate code of omerta: nobody rats out another senator. Ever.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:18 pmthere’s a ton more stuff lying buried out there, you can be sure… lordy, how i wish the dam would just break and let it ALL out, repub and dem… what a catharsis it would be to have it on the table for all to see, once and for all…
October 6th, 2007 at 5:21 pmAnd, yes, I DO take it personally
#4 Well unless he is on the other side of the aisle or bathroom partition as it were….then hey everyone needs to know that shit.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:22 pmI swear that if a Republican caught, killed & ate small children, other Reps would hide that fact and if it became public the trolls would defend it. Just so long as a Rep didn’t abort a child… even they have some limits.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:22 pmI swear, they’re like a bunch of fishwives, gossiping in the cloak room about weird behavior. They knew about Foley and whispered about it, knew about Craig. Of course they all knew about DeLay and Abramoff, too, but were too cowardly to speak up. They knew about Cunningham, but ohhhh, he has a nice boat. They all know the president is a liar, but hey, what about Clinton? There’s not a personal of moral courage among them. Not one.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:23 pmBingo, Dave C. I’ve often said if Bush ate a live baby in the Oval office on tv during primetime, they’d be out there defending him.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:24 pmThey all know the president is a liar, but hey, what about Clinton? There’s not a personal of moral courage among them. Not one.
Comment by Candyce — October 6, 2007 @ 5:23 pm
Good point…
October 6th, 2007 at 5:25 pmWonder what spin Mary (that’s Mitch to you, Larry) McConnell will have to put on this…
October 6th, 2007 at 5:27 pmI’m sure the Republicans all wish that Larry Craig would just go away, and they could put this all behind them.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:31 pmApart from the issue of hypocritical gay bashing, the Republicans have a real problem with Parents.
The alleged incident took place in a PUBLIC Bathroom. Moms at the airport send their unaccompanied young sons there to pee.
They don’t welcome having to explain to their sons what “that man was doing??”
Well, Badger, that’s actually a troubling thing for me. Not the public bathroom issue, but that after everything we’ve seen coming of Republican corruption over the past 7 years, it took a gay issue for them to move toward using their legislative and ethical powers to go after one of their own, and that as the minority party. During their leadership, not a single investigation into party corruption or administration corruption. The indicted DeLay left amidst accolades on the House floor.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:38 pmThe Republicans are just creepy.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:45 pmI am sorry, but you are all full of it! This man’s sex life was nobody’s business except his and the police. He wasn’t molesting children (and neither was Foley, despite the spin that has been put on this. His behavior was inappropriate and scandalous, but not pedophelia.) Craig’s actions may be misdemeanors, but hardly a high crime of any type.
I am actually grateful that the venial sins of Craig and Foley because their stories may change people’s votes. I don’t want these people in power. They are hypocrites, but even worse, they are Republicans, and they vote wrong on every issue. But don’t tell me the other Republicans should have been turning him in, or hounding him out of office! Nonsense. I expect his peers to mind their own business. An argument may be made that Foley was making advances to minors–something that does cause concern. But Craig behaved strangely? So what!?
October 6th, 2007 at 5:45 pmSee no evil, speak no evil, hear no evil.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:47 pmTo paraphrase an old adage: The whole Republican Party is queer except me and thee. Sometimes I have my doubts about thee and I am an independent.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:48 pmOT – and, well, I think it’s good news…
Federal Prosecutor Caught In Child Sex Sting Commits Suicide
By: Logan Murphy @ 2:13 PM – PDT
Via ABC:
A federal prosecutor accused of flying to Detroit last month to have sex with a 5-year-old girl committed suicide Friday in his cell in a Milan federal prison.
Assistant U.S. Attorney John D.R. Atchison was found unresponsive, taken to a local hospital and pronounced dead at 10:17 a.m., Federal Bureau of Prisons spokeswoman Felicia Ponce said.
Atchison, of Gulf Breeze, Fla., was being held in a special housing unit in the prison, about 36 miles southwest of Detroit. Read more…
October 6th, 2007 at 5:49 pmhttp://www.crooksandliars.com/
.
He wasn’t molesting children (and neither was Foley, despite the spin that has been put on this. His behavior was inappropriate and scandalous, but not pedophelia.
Inappropriate to have sexual conversations with other people’s children in your charge? Yeah, I’d say so.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:49 pmWanna bet that good ole Mitch McConnell is in on this? He’s had a hard week — supporting Bush’s veto of S-CHIP, defending Limbaugh’s slurs against Iraq veterans who challenge Bush’s failed War, and now the never ending Craig fiasco. Couldn’t happen to a better guy.
See http://www.ditchmitchky.com for all stories about defeating McConnell in 2008.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:50 pmLarry is betting the republicans won’t hold hearings, because they have more to lose than he does. I’m betting Larry is right. The scumbags will shut up and shut down this investigation, and just pretend that nobody knows. They will also count on the cooperation of the media and the American public to forget about this in a week. Everybody knows the republicans are just closet fags, and nobody is going to do anything about it. Besides if other republicans senators “knew about his weird behavior” what has been going on in the mens room in the Senate? Whose been tapping their toes?????
October 6th, 2007 at 5:50 pmCandyce going back a bit we have the sexual harassment case of Republican Senator Bob Packwood.
Outrage toward Packwood in his home state of Oregon and across the nation grew by day. The scandal and legal entanglements surrounding it would lead the senator to tearfully end his political career in 1995.
Members of the Senate used to come to the floor drunk. C-Span probably put an end to that. The Republicans thought that after 911, and a short successfull war in Iraq, it would be smooth sailing with no accountability. Their arrogance has come back to bite them.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:53 pmWait just a cotton-pickin’ minute here! Larry Craig was investigated on charges stemming back twenty years (1980’s) which had to do with allegations of inappropriate sexual conduct and yet the Repukes kept him in the Senate and did not police their own. What was that all about? It’s time for the people to get the “full background” on this pervert now. It will continue to haunt and kill any republican’s chance of winning anything in 08 if Larry Craig is still front and center, epitomizing the disgusting conduct and personal hypocrisy of the Republican party.
Now Novak is saying that the Senate knew even recently that this guy was toxic and did zilch about his conduct? Let’s get some names of those who knew about Craig’s problematic behavior and then investigations can begin.
Since Novak is the one “outing” those who supposedly knew about Craig, why doesn’t Congress subpoena Novak to get the names as well from him?
Is it just me or does Robert Novak seem to be at the bottom of the heap of some rotting pile of apples? He was embedded in the Plame treason affair and now this….hmmm…I’d say that to put Novak under oath would be the beginning to garnering some rather juicy inside information.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:56 pmLarry Craig knows that his complicit buddies in his party will keep up the appearances but wish he would go away. It will be quite interesting to see whose up for re-election and suddenly has a spiritual epiphany about truth, won’t it?
October 6th, 2007 at 5:57 pmBeing Rebulican is considered “weird behavior.” Larry Craig’s sweet tooth for an occasional hairy ass is the last thing GOP members running for re-election have to worry about come 2008. George Bush and the neocons have made being a “conservative” painful for years to come. Republicans are the reason the Congress has such a bad approval rating.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:59 pmBut Craig behaved strangely? So what!?
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
these aren’t private citizens, they are our elected representatives. like it or not, they aren’t entitled to “weird behavior” involving children or public sex, unless we know about it. If we know about it and vote them in or re-elect them, that’s fine, but when they hide their perversions, lie about them, and, in fact, attack others that want the same freedomw, then they need to be exposed and houded out of office. It’s really very simple, either we have morality and honesty in government, or we don’t. We can’t afford to ignore the likes of Craig or Foley. If they want to run with the public’s full knowledge of their behavior, and if they win, so be it.
October 6th, 2007 at 5:59 pmThe GOP will be like child’s play to “swiftboat” during election time. All the DNC has to do is to get television time and run a “anti pervert campaign” with Mark Foley’s seductive IM’s, Widestance Bathroom Queen Craig’s mug shot and guilty plea, and John Boehner’s dead eyes condoning it all…..add in Hastert’s colossol fatass and you’ve got a shot which will resonate with every american voter.
GOP – GRAND OLD PERVERTS! If they think that the Betray-us ad was effective, I imagine this one would be one for the record books.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:00 pmHint, TP: Post a tribute to the life of Congresswoman Jo Ann Davis (R-VA).
Comment by CT_V1 — October 6, 2007 @ 5:58 pm
why?
October 6th, 2007 at 6:01 pmSee your Grand Old Perverts today in action in Congress! Mark Foley!
Larry Craig! Dennis Hastert! And, of course, the Boner himself, John Boehner!
I think the best moniker for Larry Craig to date has to be “BATHROOM QUEEN CRAIG”.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:01 pmWhat I find amusing is Craig’s plantiff squealing about not being “gay”. Hell, if this guy doesn’t look gay, then I don’t know who does. I guess his wife was fooled. He’s fooling few others though with that affect.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:02 pmAs well, the protestations about not being gay instead of focusing on the main issue here which is “lewd behavior in a public men’s room” is also quite telling. This guy actually believes that seducing someone in the next stall for sex is okay if you’re straight. Now that’s phucked up in a much different way.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:04 pmJo Ann Davis passed away from breast cancer this morning, which is sad for her, her family and friends, but, having been an upholder of “conservative values”, why should TP do a tribute to her? Larry Craig is still doing his damage, and is still a danger to the GOP; he’s newsworthy.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:04 pmBut Craig behaved strangely? So what!?
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 5:45 pm
Really? So your representative accosts men in public bathrooms, one place I don’t forward to or appreciate being ‘hit on.’ You’re telling me it’s okay that a prominent member of our governing body peers through the stall door crack, spying on men on the toilet and helps turn a restroom into a pickup joint? Nothing wrong? (hint: responsibility comes with the title ‘representative.’)
How ’bout if the history books recounted Thomas “wide-stance” Jefferson tapping Ben Franklin’s foot? Hey…nuthin’ weird or ‘technically illegal’ there, forefathers and all…
October 6th, 2007 at 6:05 pmShe continued to represent Virginia while battling breast cancer. She is an inspiration to all Virginians. She cared greatly about military vets, too.
Comment by CT_V1 — October 6, 2007 @ 6:04 pm
and yet the right jumped all of John and Elizabeth Edwards for continuing to campaign for the presidency. you should be ignored. All of you. Rep. Davis continued to defend Bush and the DC traitors he leads, so no tribute is expected or deserved on this site. Take it to LGF.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:07 pmIt’s beginning to look like there are a hoarde of closet queens in the GOP. Of course, their hypocrisy is so engrained at this point that they can’t admit it. Who cares if they’re gay or straight anyway? What people do care is that a representative of ours is a TOTAL HYPOCRITE. That’s what matters most to the people.
BTW, anyone hear anything more about the double murder in Florida – Gonzales and another young man who had intimate ties to the GOP and who were running a male prostitute service in Virginia, just outside DC?? There’s going to be another juicy tale in this one when it comes out. Were they silenced because they were threatening to blow the gay lid on the hypocritical GOP? It’s coming out in dribs and drabs now.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:07 pmThe two young men found dead were Ralph Gonzales and Jason Drake who had strong ties to Tom Feeney of Florida (scumbag Feeney). Evidently, their death is highly suspicious since one of them was second in command of the Florida GOP and the other was running the gay prostitution ring just outside DC. I think we’ll be hearing those two names connected with Tom Feeney in the future. The ugly details are coming forward and soon it should hit the mainstream media.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:10 pminteresting that the CTV trooll has, again, changed it’s handle…
seems another blog would be better suited to it’s needs…
not?
October 6th, 2007 at 6:11 pm.
I think Robert Novak knows something about all of this and this double murder ties into what he knows. He’s teasing us with his allusions to how much the GOP knows about their sickos. This double murder has strong ties to what Novak is talking about.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:12 pmThis type of complaint is not new. Conservative leaders knew about many congressional members engaging in unseemly behaviour, but failed to confront the issue, because:
1) they feared public knowledge of such acts would undermine Republicans image as being “free” of such behaviours
2) they feared confronting such acts would make Republicans seem mean, unaccepting, etc.
Once again, the eventual discovery, and then failure to address the offending parties, have made Republicans look worse than either of the worries listed above.
Perhaps more thorough vetting of the candidates prior to election, and replacement of those candidates in subsequent elections after discovery of poor behaviours would show Reps to be more responsible.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:12 pmCT V1 :
Larry Craig is again in the news because of Robt. Novak’s comments. Think progress is posting this for comments. If you have a problem with the timing or newsworthyness of this story….blame Novak.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:14 pmNumber 19–The operative word is “children.” We are all somebody’s children. The characteristic that makes something pedophilia is that it is with pre-adolescents. In many western nations, sexual interaction with young people the age of the D.C. pages is perfectly legal. Still, 17-year-olds will use bad judgment, and I agree with you that as a parent, I wouldn’t want my son left in the care of someone like Foley.
We don’t need to feign horror and exaggerate the immorality of the Republicans like Foley and Craig, or the people that permitted them to remain in office. The real crimes of the Republican are things like their illegal attack on Iraq, their destruction of the Constitutional protections, and torture and indefinite retention of prisoners without due legal process.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:17 pmThe ugly details are coming forward and soon it should hit the mainstream media.
Comment by Veritas — October 6, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
Doesn’t this have a connection to Pat McHenry?
October 6th, 2007 at 6:20 pmThe ugly details are coming forward and soon it should hit the mainstream media.
Comment by Veritas — October 6, 2007 @ 6:10 pm
And apparently the little pipsqueak Patrick McHenry is a character in that charade. Can’t wait!
October 6th, 2007 at 6:23 pmWe don’t need to feign horror and exaggerate the immorality of the Republicans like Foley and Craig, or the people that permitted them to remain in office. The real crimes of the Republican are things like their illegal attack on Iraq, their destruction of the Constitutional protections, and torture and indefinite retention of prisoners without due legal process.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 6:17 pm
Agreed. And as I pointed out earlier, it takes a gay scandal to move the GOP to speak out, which is pathetic. Especially when they’ve been the biggest enabler Congress in history perhaps.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:28 pmNumber 35 — I guess I am lucky. In 60 years, I have yet to observe sex occurring in a public bathroom. Furthermore, no one has ever hit on me in a bathroom that I noticed. Maybe I was missing the hints. I didn’t know about foot tapping and fingers under the dividers. I don’t think I would get too upset if someone tapped their foot in the next stall, but that is just me.
So if failing to be horrified by Craig’s crime is an unpardonable sin to you, I guess you have stricter moral standards than I. (As a matter of fact, I am sure you will tell me you do.) I don’t have fainting spells over this nonsense, and I guess I don’t understand why other people do. The bathroom sex activity of men like Craig is obviously designed to be inconspicuous. So get on your high horses.
The next time it will be a Democrat involved in a scandal and you will be more sympathetic, I am sure (although I doubt you will admit it).
October 6th, 2007 at 6:34 pmThe bathroom sex activity of men like Craig is obviously designed to be inconspicuous.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
In a PUBLIC RESTROOM of a major American Airport???
October 6th, 2007 at 6:38 pmThey could at least report her death before doing Craig story #4395495.
Comment by CT_V1 — October 6, 2007 @ 6:09 pm
Jes’ fer Li’l CT’s sake, I checked Rush’s (ugh…), Billo’s, ‘n Heil Hannity’s websites. Hmmm… no mention, AT ALL, of Rep. Davis’ death there, at least not on the front page, so to speak. Ny Times ‘n Fox Snooze both had it, right at the bottom, and on Fox, it was considered so important that it was nearly the LAST item listed.
Can we safely assume Li’l CT will now start railing bitterly ag’in El Rushbo, Billo, and Heil too?
3… 2… 1… Launch attacks!!!!
October 6th, 2007 at 6:39 pmIn a PUBLIC RESTROOM of a major American Airport???
Comment by Badger — October 6, 2007 @ 6:38 pm
At least it was IN the restroom…
October 6th, 2007 at 6:40 pmEarly reports on this episode contained mention that the reason he married a former staffer was in part to squelch rumors of his homosexuality.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:43 pmCome again, Mr. Cantankerous.
Comment by CT_V1 — October 6, 2007 @ 6:43 pm
Geez, Li’l Feller, yer too lazy ta do yer own homework, assessin’ blame ‘n all, ‘n I’m good enough ta help ya out, ‘n now ya git all snarky on me and MAKE ASSUMPTIONS that may or may not be true, but ya don’t speak up a’gin El Rushbo, or Billo, or Heil for their insensitivity.
Yer practicin’ double standards here, Li’l CT!!!
October 6th, 2007 at 6:46 pmMembers of the Senate used to come to the floor drunk. C-Span probably put an end to that. …
Comment by Badger — October 6, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
You are robably right, but I have my doubts about Boehner.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:47 pmWe were told last year by the Congressional Ethics Committee members after Foley’s scandal that they will wrap it up in short period of time and let the public know what happened.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:50 pmI remember a question was asked to H. Berman(D. Cali.) who is member of the Committee about the length of this investigation and he replied :”The investigation will be completed in weeks, not motnhs”.
Republican leaders knew about Foley,but the GOP Speaker then chose not open his mouth so Republicans can keep Foley’s seat in Florida..
Political considerations were the only reason behind hiding Foley’s story from the public.
I am sure some of the posters here are well intentioned. It is hard to watch the hypocrisy of your opponent without some sense of self righteousness. Too easily, though, I think we can lapse into the same behavior as Rush Limbaugh and his disreputable crew. It is called scandalmongering.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:54 pmYou gotta love Novak. He used to be the Right Wing Loon’s best friend. Now he’s mad at them because he doesn’t feel he has the access he once had and now he’s turning on them. Not that I mind or anything, but the guy still is a sleeze.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:54 pmPolitical considerations were the only reason behind hiding Foley’s story from the public.
Comment by tarazan — October 6, 2007 @ 6:50 pm
Probably the same w/ Craig. I have to wonder what might be creepin’ up on Hastert and Domenici too, seein’ as they’ve decided to retire.
But enough of all this chaff… I wannna hear ’bout that nasty little Patrick McHenry. Who knows what? Com’on, DISH!!!
October 6th, 2007 at 6:55 pm#59, Marie,
Good point about C-Span, it probably keeps all these congressmen on their toes, except for Boehner, who chose to pass out lobbiest’s checks on the House Floor with cameras rolling.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:56 pmthere’s a ton more stuff lying buried out there, you can be sure… lordy, how i wish the dam would just break and let it ALL out, repub and dem… what a catharsis it would be to have it on the table for all to see, once and for all…
The damn may not be broken, but there’s a hell of a crack in it. Anyone besides me notice how many whistleblowers there are these days leaking to the MSM things that should have seen the light of day a long time ago?
October 6th, 2007 at 6:56 pmNot that I mind or anything, but the guy still is a sleeze.
Comment by bilbobaggins — October 6, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
Yeah… **snicker**… that’s the last thing the righties need… Novakula feelin’ slighted!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…
October 6th, 2007 at 6:57 pmCOMMENT: These are REAL crooks!!
Comment by John Kerry — October 6, 2007 @ 6:57 pm
Geez, John… faulty memory a’gin. Ya couldn’t remember yer own military record the other night. And now Berger?
He pleaded guilty to a MISDEMEANOR… nothin’ like the multiple FELONY convictions Scooter got…
October 6th, 2007 at 6:59 pmMusta been a tap dancing practice in the Senate bathroom stalls.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:59 pmEarly reports on this episode contained mention that the reason he married a former staffer was in part to squelch rumors of his homosexuality.
Comment by Marie
This is true. Staffers told the press that he had never shown the slightest interest in the woman staffer he married. And he married her shortly after the scandal where he voluntary said “I’m not involved in that homosexual scandal” even though no one had asked him. Pretty convenient if you ask me.
October 6th, 2007 at 6:59 pm#51 candide
I guess I am lucky. In 60 years, I have yet to observe sex occurring in a public bathroom. Furthermore, no one has ever hit on me in a bathroom that I noticed. Maybe I was missing the hints. I didn’t know about foot tapping and fingers under the dividers. I don’t think I would get too upset if someone tapped their foot in the next stall, but that is just me.
How about if the tapping foot moves over to your side of the wall (not easy to do ‘by accident’) and starts nudging your foot? How about if the guy who’s occupying that other stall had just been standing outside your stall trying to peek in? How does one accidentally wave his hand under the wall of the stall, palm up, and it’s the left hand under the right wall?
If you don’t really know anything about what Craig was accused of and what the cop observed, don’t comment on it.
It’s real simple. What you do in the privacy of your own home is your business. What you do in a public restroom, apart from the things a public restroom was intended for, is the public’s business. When you’re a U.S. Senator, it’s the public’s business with exclamation points.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:02 pmNumber 52–Yes, in a public bathroom. I do not condone it, but ask any psychologist or psychiatrist and they will tell you that the greatest thrill for both heterosexuals and homosexuals of Craig’s ilk is having sex in a public place without letting anyone know it is happening. Regardles of whether one approves or not, the point is, it will be hidden.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:04 pm#68 bilbobaggins
This is true. Staffers told the press that he had never shown the slightest interest in the woman staffer he married. And he married her shortly after the scandal where he voluntary said “I’m not involved in that homosexual scandal†even though no one had asked him. Pretty convenient if you ask me.
Craig even said, after the earlier accusations, that they were only picking on him because he wasn’t married. So he went and got married.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:06 pmYou are robably right, but I have my doubts about Boehner.
Comment by Marie — October 6, 2007 @ 6:47 pm
lol, Marie!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:06 pmNumber 69–Do you seriously think Craig would have gone on beyond foot tapping if the cop hadn’t responded? Give me a break!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:06 pmAh, yes, more redundant pieces of Sen. Craig. A burning issue, indeed.
Hint, TP: Post a tribute to the life of Congresswoman Jo Ann Davis (R-VA).
Comment by CT_V1
Right Wing Loon CT_V1 seems to think that Senator Craig is a non issue. At least he wishes it would be. If wishes were horses…
And he wants us to have a tribute to a Republican congresswoman who, I bet, no one on this blog has ever heard of, I know I haven’t. What did she do to deserve this tribute Right Wing Loon?
October 6th, 2007 at 7:07 pmWilliam Jefferson (D-LA)!
Sandy Burglar!!
COMMENT: These are REAL crooks!!
Comment by John Kerry — October 6, 2007 @ 6:57 pm
Nah, the real crooks are in jail. Ney and Cunningham ring a bell? As in Cunningham, biggest crook in congressional history?
October 6th, 2007 at 7:10 pm#70 candide
Regardles of whether one approves or not, the point is, it will be hidden.
No. When you’re trying to pick up your prospective partner in the restroom, it won’t be hidden. Everyone who turns down your offer will know, as will anyone who accepts and anyone who witnesses it. When there are two pairs of feet appearing under the door of one stall and there’s a lot of grunting and heavy breathing, it’s not a secret. It’s an airport restroom, for crying out loud! What restrooms get more traffic than that?!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:10 pmShe continued to represent Virginia while battling breast cancer. She is an inspiration to all Virginians. She cared greatly about military vets, too.
Comment by CT_V1
So tell me Right Wing Loon CT_V1, if some obscure Democratic Congressperson died, do you think any of your right wing sites like redstate.org would do a tribute to them? I don’t think so. Knowing the people who post to those sites, they would more likely post something like “good riddance to bad rubbish”.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:11 pmDENVER – The gay escort whose allegations forced the resignation of nationally renowned evangelist Ted Haggard now says he was also visited by Idaho Sen. Larry Craig.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:12 pmWilliam Jefferson (D-LA)!
Sandy Burglar!!
COMMENT: These are REAL crooks!!
Comment by John Kerry
So Right Wing Loon John, what makes these people “real crooks” as opposed to all the Republicans who have been caught, or are currently being investigated, for having their hands in the cookie jar or for perverted behavior.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:13 pmIt’s an airport restroom, for crying out loud! What restrooms get more traffic than that?!
Comment by chimpeach — October 6, 2007 @ 7:10 pm
Especially post-9/11. Imagine the ruckus if one frightened restroom user had notified police that he suspected “terrarists were gittin ready ta attack!”
October 6th, 2007 at 7:13 pmhe was also visited by Idaho Sen. Larry Craig.
Comment by Marie — October 6, 2007 @ 7:12 pm
Ouchy ouch ouch!!!!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:14 pmAh, yes, more redundant pieces of Sen. Craig. A burning issue, indeed.
Hint, TP: Post a tribute to the life of Congresswoman Jo Ann Davis (R-VA).
Comment by CT_V1
The reason for the Republican attention, as in the Foley case [laws created], it was Craig that helped create the “dont ask-don’t tell policy”
Its the hypocrisy [[CT_V1]] stupid. [Said like Carville]
October 6th, 2007 at 7:14 pm#73 candide
Do you seriously think Craig would have gone on beyond foot tapping if the cop hadn’t responded? Give me a break!
Why don’t you go look up the transcript from Craig’s questioning by the cop. You don’t know what happened, and until you do, you’re putting your ignorance on display.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:14 pmNumber 69–Do you seriously think Craig would have gone on beyond foot tapping if the cop hadn’t responded? Give me a break!
Comment by candide
Maybe not with that particular prospect, he probably would have waited until the next person entered the stall and started over again. Craig walked past at least 6 other bathrooms to get to the one he was in, on the opposite side of the airport from where his flight was taking off. Now, why would he do that. And, why are you defending him?
October 6th, 2007 at 7:15 pmNumber 76–I reiterate, in 60 years, I have never noticed anything like this happening in a public restroom. But I wasn’t looking.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:16 pmI think the best moniker for Larry Craig to date has to be “BATHROOM QUEEN CRAIGâ€.
Comment by Veritas — October 6, 2007 @ 6:01 pm
Check the Zoo for a better one: Tappy McWideStance.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:17 pmThanks to Spudge Boy for that one!
Yeah… **snicker**… that’s the last thing the righties need… Novakula feelin’ slighted!!!! BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA…
Comment by The Republic of Stupidity
Do you remember him whining about a month ago about how he feels shut out of the White House these days. I guess that Novak isn’t someone you want on your enemies list. They were pretty stupid to shut him out. I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see him again gain favor with the Bushies after this.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:19 pmSandy Burglar!!
COMMENT: These are REAL crooks!!
Comment by John Kerry
This thread isn’t about either one, when it is MR P Clone, then it will be responded too. Until that time, nice try.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:19 pmif some obscure Democratic Congressperson died, do you think any of your right wing sites like redstate.org would do a tribute to them?
Comment by bilbobaggins — October 6, 2007 @ 7:11 pm
Currently on the dailykos website:
After a 2-year battle with breast cancer, Rep. Jo Ann Davis of Virginia’s 1st Congressional District, died this morning, according to an alert from Roll Call. She was 57.
Shawn O’Donnell, Davis’ Democratic challenger in 2006, released the following statement of sympathy:
I wish to extend my sympathy to Representative Jo Ann Davis’ family in their time of sorrow.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:20 pmCV_T, did you post a tribute to Juanita Millender-McDonald when she died of cancer earlier this year?
October 6th, 2007 at 7:20 pmI don’t have a problem with Tappy being gay.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:20 pmI do have a problem with his hypocrisy and moraler than thou attitude on Capitol Hill. And I hope he stays around embarrasing his fellow closeteers for the duration of his term. His replacement would be another Repubhypocritelican.
I wouldn’t be at all surprised to see him again gain favor with the Bushies after this.
Comment by bilbobaggins — October 6, 2007 @ 7:19 pm
Either that, or start dishin’ even more salacious bits…
BWAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA… a vampire scorned… BWAHAHAHAHAHA…
October 6th, 2007 at 7:21 pmThey could at least report her death before doing Craig story #4395495.
Comment by CT_V1
Why? As I asked before and you ignored, do you really think that redstate.org would report the death of some obscure democratic congressperson?
October 6th, 2007 at 7:22 pmdo you really think that redstate.org would report the death of some obscure democratic congressperson?
Comment by bilbobaggins — October 6, 2007 @ 7:22 pm
I checked fer him, Bilbo…
El Rushbo, Dild O’Reilly, Heil Hannity, ‘n LGF were all sans obit for the good Rep. I’m a little disappointed that CT didn’t lash out at them too. Seems like a double standard to me…
October 6th, 2007 at 7:24 pmNumber 69–Do you seriously think Craig would have gone on beyond foot tapping if the cop hadn’t responded? Give me a break!
Comment by candide
Thats what undercover cops do, act as a decoy.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:25 pm
Number 19–The operative word is “children.†We are all somebody’s children. The characteristic that makes something pedophilia is that it is with pre-adolescents.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 6:17 pm
It isn’t just the age, it is the age difference. What Foley was doing is predation. Frankly I find your rationalizations on this thread to be either bizarrely naive or rather creepy.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:28 pmCraig stood outside the officer’s bathroom stall for two minutes, repeatedly looked at the officer “through the crack in the door,â€
Wierd behavior??
October 6th, 2007 at 7:28 pmYup.
His replacement would be another Repubhypocritelican.
Comment by RUCerious — October 6, 2007 @ 7:20 pm
Repubhypocritelian??? WTF is that??? Let’s see… probably has the spine of a jellyfish, the hide of a rhino, the snout of a pig, the jaws of a great white, and definitely does all its thinkin’ w/ the South end while headin’ North… plus scales ‘n feathers, and a tail…
And in Rudi Giuliani’s case, lip stick and nail polish that matches, plus a string of pearls…
October 6th, 2007 at 7:29 pmGeez, where’d all the trolls go? They’re were makin’ such good points ‘n all.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:31 pmNumber 84 and number 69–You say if he is a U.S. Senator, he must meet a high standard, with exclamation points. That is what they said about Clinton. That is why I think the stink about Craig is overdone.
The man’s sexual peccadilloes are an embarrassment to him, but they don’t involve me or the general public. I “defend” him for this, because the harm done is something that is personal rather than public. I don’t hold our politicians to a higher standard than the average citizen for his sexual conduct. I hold him to a VERY high standard for his public conduct–by which I mean what he does as a politician, not in his personal life. If he abuses the public trust, I care! If he makes a pass at a man or woman, and doesn’t harm them, or doesn’t abuse their authority, I just find it hard to get enraged.
Sanctimony, high horses, feigned horror–Rush Limbaugh!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:31 pmOoops, I fergot, the stripes of a skunk…
October 6th, 2007 at 7:31 pmAccording to the report filed by the police officer who arrested Craig at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in June, Craig stood outside the officer’s bathroom stall for two minutes, repeatedly looked at the officer “through the crack in the door,â€
Comment by Xisithrus — October 6, 2007 @ 7:25 pm
Well, I certainly would be very bothered by this intrusion on my privacy in a bathroom stall, and I would feel forced to leave a bathroom in which someone was poking their foot into my stall, but it is probably useless to explain this to “candide”. He seems to think that disgusting sexual predation is somehow okay, and that people should feel comfortable when this bizarre conduct occurs in public bathrooms.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:32 pmI care! If he makes a pass at a man or woman, and doesn’t harm them, or doesn’t abuse their authority, I just find it hard to get enraged.
Sanctimony, high horses, feigned horror–Rush Limbaugh!
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 7:31 pm
Tehn we can trust you are condemning the Repub Congress taht tried to crucify Clinton, and the rightwing media that helped do it.
Tap… tap… waaaaitin’… tap… tap…
Oh, don’t fergit Li’l Ricky “Man-Dog Luv” Santorum while yer at it…
October 6th, 2007 at 7:34 pmcandide sez:
As the aforementioned “sexual peccadilloes” took place in a public restroom, your argument is invalid.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:34 pmthat people should feel comfortable when this bizarre conduct occurs in public bathrooms.
Comment by VerbalKint — October 6, 2007 @ 7:32 pm
That’s not ture, vk… Only when GOOPers are doin’ it, doin’ it, doin’ it!!!
Everybody else git’s punished!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:35 pmThe man’s sexual peccadilloes are an embarrassment to him, but they don’t involve me or the general public.
Oh sure they do, when the guy gets on HIS high horse and sponsors legislation that affects the lives of those in the gay community. His actions are highly relevant.
And, it’s against the law, whether we like it or not, and whether or not we might think cops should be doing something more useful with their time. That’s another argument. Hence, the guilty plea stands. The lawmaker broke the law.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:35 pmSanctimony, high horses, feigned horror–Rush Limbaugh!
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 7:31 pm
Tappy McWideStance is MY Senator.
I don’t give a shit if he’s gay, but I DO give a shit that he represents this state from a base of hypocrisy.
I never voted for the guy, but he does represent me. I say he needs to go sooner, rather than later.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:38 pmNumber 96 and 97–read the whole thread. I said I wouldn’t want him in control of my children and that 17-year-olds make bad choices. The distinction is between pedophilia and inappropriate adult behavior–neither of which I approve.
And 97, the police have a long history of using entrapment in cases such as these. I am very skeptical. Believe it if you wish.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:39 pmCandide is laying down a barrage of rationalizations for behavior that is both inexcusable and illegal. He seems to not realize that when a U.S. senator who engages in illegal conduct of such a scandalous nature can be blackmailed into misusing the enormous power wielded by a senator. Security clearances are denied for precisely this sort of thing. Do Craig and Foley have security clearances? As senators I would expect that they do have some level of security clearance.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:40 pmcandide, entrapment is a specific, narrow defense. It means you wouldn’t have committed the crime had the police not induced you to do it. The defense would have to show you wouldn’t have been a willing participant without the inducement first. It doesn’t fit in this case.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:43 pmCandyce–I agree with you about the hypocrisy, and God knows, as a gay man, I would never vote for the a**hole. But I wouldn’t vote for or against him on the basis of whether he taps his foot in an airport stall–or even because some cop interpreted his foot tapping as a come-on, or a judge said this was public indecency. There are many better reasons to vote against him.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:44 pmcandide, but we still have to recognize that there’s a public interest in keeping this activity out of a public airport restroom. Bottom line, he broke the law. That’s what is at issue here, not the toe tapping in and of itself. But the law, like it or not.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:48 pmNumber 109–yes, we have to be careful about being subjected to blackmail. The French have a better solution than we do. They anticipate sexual misconduct as the norm; thus, no one is ever driven from office for personal behavior. We do thing in America a bit differently. Stupidly, I would say, and make a mountain out of a molehill. So we shall suffer on in the stupidity of the Puritans.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:49 pmCandide,
Sex in a public restroom is somehow private? A Senator predating on 16 year old boys is somehow okay with you?
You disgust me.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:51 pmCandide,
Have you ever had sex with a man in a public restroom? Anywhere else in public?
October 6th, 2007 at 7:51 pmCandyce–It is a misdemeanor, and not a crime against his constituents. Fine him, punish him, embarrass him in front of the Christian Right idiots that put him in office. It just isn’t a big deal to me, and I think if the public had more perspective, it wouldn’t be a big deal to them. There are REAL crimes this man has committed in support of this war.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:52 pm115–No.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:52 pm…I hold him to a VERY high standard for his public conduct–by which I mean what he does as a politician, not in his personal life. If he abuses the public trust, I care! If he makes a pass at a man or woman, and doesn’t harm them, or doesn’t abuse their authority, I just find it hard to get enraged.
Sanctimony, high horses, feigned horror–Rush Limbaugh!
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 7:31 pm
In this instance, for me, it is definitely the hypocrisy. Craig is a consistent voter against human rights and equality for homosexuals. He helped pass the original DADT policy, among others. He actively denies fellow citizens their rights as equal citizens in this country. Then, in private, he engages in the behavior he, through his speeches and voting patterns, publicly indicates is reprehensible.
Why is the hypocrisy so vital an issue? Because it brings in to question any and all behavior the man has engaged in while in office. If he is willing to lie, and deny at all turns his own humanity, his own personal nature and attractions, in what other ways is he compromised? How else does his hypocrisy manifest itself?
How many times and ways has he violated his oath of office? We know, due to 15+ years of deception on this one issue, that he is in it for the long haul when it comes to maintaining a lie. How many more deceptions has he participated in or been privy to, but never publicly disclosed?
Anyone with a story such as this that becomes exposed, especially when it is apparent that this is a long-term pattern of lying about their very lifestyle, loses public trust. In a big way. Public trust is part of that whole “political capital” thing you hear about on the Hill. A politician with no political capital has no influence, no power. Such a politician has no place in the political arena. None. Even his fellow politicians on the Hill will shun him, if not actually, then for all intents and purposes. They may give him lip-service, they may act as though they are listening to him, but every proposal he presents, every word out of his mouth will be suspect. To even his PEERS.
Such a man in such a position of power is a dangerous liability to the entire Republic.
October 6th, 2007 at 7:53 pmDo Craig and Foley have security clearances? As senators I would expect that they do have some level of security clearance.
Comment by VerbalKint — October 6, 2007 @ 7:40 pm
Vk? A slight adjustment to yer comment?
DID Craig and Foley have clearances… “DID” works much bettr here, no?
“… I would expect that they DID have some level of security clearance.”
Hasn’t Craig been shorn of every committee seat he held in Congress, along w/ the last, tattered remnants of his dignity?
(Psst… “Candide”… while yer busy playin’ the “gay” card ta get leverage here, Craig’s fellow GOOpers are the ones who kicked him off the committees and are shunning him completely, jes’ EXACTLY the way Hastert forced Foley out) The GOOpers… throwin’ their own overboard!!!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:54 pmis a dangerous liability to the entire Republic.
Comment by Moderation — October 6, 2007 @ 7:53 pm
Whoa!!! A liability to The Republic? Say no more! Tha man must GO!!!
T’anks fer lookin’ out fer me, fellas!!!
October 6th, 2007 at 7:55 pmCandyce–It is a misdemeanor, and not a crime against his constituents. Fine him, punish him, embarrass him in front of the Christian Right idiots that put him in office. It just isn’t a big deal to me, and I think if the public had more perspective, it wouldn’t be a big deal to them. There are REAL crimes this man has committed in support of this war.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 7:52 pm
Not a crime against his constituents because he didn’t do it in Idaho? I’m not sure what your points are here. You aren’t going to find too many people on this site who are opposed to him based on the fact that he’s gay. Please note, it IS his constituents and fellow GOP lawmakers who are going after him, not Democrats. He can’t be kicked out of Congress because of his conservative stance on the war. You’re right, that’s the voters’ prerogative. It’s not going to be his rank hypocrisy that gets him booted out, it’s going to be his own party’s opposition to gays. But I sure won’t defend him – whatever it takes, just get rid of the s.o.b.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:01 pmEvery republican running for the senate should be made to declare how wide their stance is case the information is needed at a later date.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:02 pmoops…is in case…
October 6th, 2007 at 8:03 pmNumber 118–I agree completely. His hypocrisy is the only issue, in my opinion, that makes this story relevant to the body politic. I do not think that is how it has been handled by the press or by many bloggers. It has most often been treated as sexual scandal, and that is as much nonsense as the Clinton scandal. That is all I really object to here.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:04 pmThis has nothing to do with being gay. If the conduct were heterosexual in nature the same issues would apply. Candide’s creepy rationalizations are a disservice to the gay community.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:09 pmFrankly, I don’t know of anyone here, except the conservatives, who thinks this is a sexual scandal. Sure, we make a lot of sexual innuendo jokes, but it’s fun to laugh at hypocrites. Speaking for myself, it’s a legal and betrayal of trust and hypocrisy scandal.
Are you a log cabin Republican, candide? I’m a little suspicious of your claim to be a gay man, yet you defend Craig and minimize his lawbreaking, just as you defend Foley’s betrayal of trust and custody. I just find it a little weird.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:14 pm#30 veritas
I would submit:
CRAIG’S CONDIGNED CATASTHOPHIC CLAUSTOPHOBIC CIRCUMSCRIBED (CIRCUMSCISED?) COMMODE CONGRESS CONFESSION.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:15 pmNumber 126–As spokesman for the “gay community,” thank you for your comments. If I am creepy, I find your response–well it wasn’t a response, just name calling. I guess I have a hard time arguing with that.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:15 pmNumber 118–I agree completely. His hypocrisy is the only issue, in my opinion, that makes this story relevant to the body politic.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 8:04 pm
Nah… it has to do w/ the astonishing hypocrisy of the conservative movement in this country. Homosexuality has been demonized to an incredible degree over the last 10 or 15 yrs by the righties in their endless pursuit of power, and Craig was part and parcel of that, and he had enablers in the Republican part of Congress. They’re all complicit in this mess.
The Republican Party and Homosexuality
Aired: Monday, April 28, 2003
Rick Santorum, Pennsylvania Republican and rising star in his party, is in the hot seat over comments that linked gay consensual sex with bigamy, polygamy, incest, and adultery.
*****
“…one of the primary goals of the homosexual rights movement is to abolish all age of consent laws and to eventually recognize pedophiles as the ‘prophets’ of a new sexual order.”
- “Homosexual Activists Work to Normalize Sex With Boys,” FRC publication, July 1999, http://www.frc.org/misc/bl057.pdf
*****
Friday, May 6, 2005
Gay sex scandal rocks Spokane
Mayor denies he abused boys in 1970s or misused his office
By CHRIS McGANN AND KATHY MULADY
SEATTLE POST-INTELLIGENCER REPORTERS
Spokane Mayor Jim West, who championed an anti-gay agenda during his tenure as one of the most powerful Republicans in the Legislature, yesterday admitted to using the trappings of his current office to entice what he thought was a young adult man but denied allegations that he molested two young boys more than 20 years ago.
West confirmed to The Spokesman-Review of Spokane that he offered gifts, favors and a City Hall internship during Internet chats with a man he believed was 18. The online pen pal was actually a forensic computer expert working for the newspaper. After the story hit the newsstands yesterday, West sent city staffers a remorseful e-mail.
“I want to sincerely apologize to you personally for the shame I have brought to the Mayor’s office and the city,” West wrote. “I stumbled and let you down.”
The accusations of child molestation stem from The Spokesman-Review’s three-year investigation and interviews with two felons who said West fondled them and forced them to perform sexual acts on him when they were Boy Scouts.
In more than 20 years in the Legislature, West had initiated legislation to outlaw sexual contact between consenting teenagers; supported a bill that would have barred gays and lesbians from working for schools, day care centers and some state agencies; voted to define marriage as a union between a man and a woman; and, as Senate majority leader, allowed a bill that would ban discrimination against gays and lesbians to die in committee without a hearing.
It’s just endless w/ these guys. Nothing but hatred, and all for political gain.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:19 pmName calling? Hardly. I am pointing out that you are rationalizing sexual predation of minors and lewd conduct in public places, then I am expressing a value judgement about that. Also, your posts seem to imply that you think it would be, or should be, legal for Foley to have sex with minors. For your information it would be VERY illegal in this country, and personally I think it should be illegal.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:19 pmAre you a log cabin Republican, candide? I’m a little suspicious of your claim to be a gay man, yet you defend Craig and minimize his lawbreaking, just as you defend Foley’s betrayal of trust and custody. I just find it a little weird.
Comment by Candyce — October 6, 2007 @ 8:14 pm
I wonder these things too. What the hell is candide’s angle here? Is this some kind of weird concern troll thing? Even if one is ambivalent about the entrapment issue, or whether there was enough evidence to convict Craig (I happen to think there wasn’t — until Craig pleaded guilty), this troll is on some kind of mission to normalize lewd conduct in public bathrooms, and sex between 50-something U.S. senators and minors.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:23 pm.
We’ve seen this with Mark Foley.
Hide… evade… deney… distance…
Why are we surprised?
.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:24 pmCandyce–I have a friend who committed a crime like Craig’s and was convicted for it. It was catastrophic to him in terms of his family and his public reputation. I think he used horrible judgment. Still, I feel very badly for him. I don’t believe these crimes are worth the public outrage shown. I don’t think the police should be wasting time with them, and I do believe in many cases there is an abuse of power in prosecuting these cases.
I think by showing the degree of opprobrium demonstrated against Craig, all we do is carry on what I believe in many ways can be a miscarriage of justice. Again, it is just my conviction that personal misconduct and public misconduct should be distinguished from one another, and that the scandalmongering of both conservatives and liberals is a disservice to running a well managed government.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:24 pmThe only thing obvious about the Bathroom Queen’s obstinance is that his ego trumps what he is doing to the reputation of his party. One side of me says: Let Craig stay until the 08 elections because, by then, there will be no GOP left whatsoever; another side of me is absolutely appalled that he is so twisted and amoral that he wouldn’t see the hypocrisy within him in his motives.
Either way it’s a lose/lose for Craig. His public days are over and have been since his guilty plea.
As for how long he remains, maybe the Repukes will trounce him out by the nuts? If not, he and Bush will take everyone down the toilet (you know the one in the airport) with them. … which could be a good thing for this country in a sad sort of way.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:25 pmIncidentally–I haven’t voted Republican since the ’70s. I am a progressive through and through, and cannot abide Log Cabin Republicans.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:29 pmThis situation bespeaks the necrotic level of behavior within the bush administration and this republican congress. The bickering about whether it’s a misdemeanor or something worse is totally irrelevant when you speak about a congressman – one whom we expect a higher level of conduct from in the first place.
The bottom line is that this guy was caught “red handed”or “open handed as the case may be” by an undercover cop. Big mistake this time for Craig. One has to wonder how many times this pig did this and succeeded and got away with it scott free. That’s the larger question here.
There was an individual when this story broke who admitted to having oral sex with Larry Craig in an airport restroom (Craig’s typical MO?) and I’m hoping that he and others will “sing” and provide testimony to put this guy behind bars.
When I look at Craig and watch his antics, all I can think is ewwwwwwwwwwww.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:29 pmLet the restroom whistleblowers sing and take down the Airport Bathroom Queen!
October 6th, 2007 at 8:31 pmI’m a little suspicious of your claim to be a gay man, yet you defend Craig and minimize his lawbreaking, just as you defend Foley’s betrayal of trust and custody. I just find it a little weird.
Comment by Candyce — October 6, 2007 @ 8:14 pm
… this troll is on some kind of mission to normalize lewd conduct in public bathrooms, and sex between 50-something U.S. senators and minors.
Comment by VerbalKint — October 6, 2007 @ 8:23 pm
I don’t believe “Candide” is gay either. I notice this wasn’t mentioned until well into the conversation, when this person was getting NOWHERE w/ this line of thought. Seems like an attempt to play the victim card.
Also, “Candide” claims to be 60-ish? And has never heard of gay sex in public restrooms? Having lived thru decades when gays really were a repressed minority in this country?
SORRY!! Ain’t buyin’ it. Talk about gittin’ outted…
October 6th, 2007 at 8:32 pmComment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 6:54 pm
I think you are missing the point a bit. Craig’s fellow Republicans in the Senate apparently knew of his activity and, through their silence, condoned it. Only after his perversion came to light did they distance themselves as much as possible. So were they lying about his activity being ok before or are they faking disgust now? Either way, hypocrites all.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:32 pmcandide,
I understand what you’re saying, and would rather that Tappy were gone because of his horrible voting record on…..everything. I hardly think that tapping on a bathroom floor is the worst thing he’s ever done — see voting record. But his hypocrisy is so staggering that I would just rather see him gone.
There are several pretty decent people in the wings who have shown interest in replacing Craig. That’s what my state needs — decent representation.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:33 pmTesting…. my last two posts haven’t gone through.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:36 pmOh I know why the posts didn’t go through.
I SAID Craig deserves everything that’s coming at him. He’s been a bad boy, a naughty boy. Karma’s a bltch.
hehe!
October 6th, 2007 at 8:37 pm139–No, I never said I hadn’t heard of bathroom sex. I said I never observed it. Furthermore, I wasn’t looking for it. My point was that, at least to a casual observer like myself who wasn’t looking for bathroom sex, it wasn’t something we noticed.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:38 pmZooey– I am entirely with you. Get rid of the hypocrites. I wish we could do that without feeding the bigotry of the Republicans, though.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:39 pm“…at least to a casual observer like myself who wasn’t looking for bathroom sex, it wasn’t something we noticed.”
Comment by candide
“we”
October 6th, 2007 at 8:40 pm(??)
it wasn’t something we noticed.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 8:38 pm
Whose “we”??? And, sorry, I don’t find you credible.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:40 pmI, forgive me.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:42 pmNumber 35 — I guess I am lucky. In 60 years, I have yet to observe sex occurring in a public bathroom. Furthermore, no one has ever hit on me in a bathroom that I noticed. Maybe I was missing the hints. I didn’t know about foot tapping and fingers under the dividers. I don’t think I would get too upset if someone tapped their foot in the next stall, but that is just me. Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 6:34
Sooo…having some cheeseball, nay, government cheeseball, illegally playing lookie-loo through the stall door crack is just dandy where you come from?
I guess you have stricter moral standards than I. Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 6:34
Gosh, why would it bother me to have some predatory closet case sniffing around a men’s public bathroom for some down-low action? What’s to object to? Hell, why not post sexual positions posted in the bathroom and have interested parties just walk in and point? That’s not illegal either, right? Right?
You cite Clinton in your defense of Craig? That’s all you got?? That’s a fallacy known as “Tu Quoque” meaning you’re trying to excuse or justify by citing what you deem as similar behavior. Not only is that approach not even admissible in court, but it’s the bottom of the barrel, debate-wise. The two events bear few similarities….not even involving the opposite sex in Craig’s case.
The next time it will be a Democrat involved in a scandal and you will be more sympathetic, I am sure (although I doubt you will admit it). Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
Trying to project my reaction in advance to buoy an otherwise desperate and shaky defense of a tragically incompetent government official (who not only agreed to his guilt, lied, tried to use his status to squirm out of the charge, but then lied some more,) is revealing of your desperation. In other words, you suck at presenting a coherent argument, just reduced to rhetorical tricks like “poisoning the well” by lamely anticipating any disagreement I may have with your unsupported assertions.
No soup for you.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:44 pmAw, c’mon, throw us something a little more salacious than just
October 6th, 2007 at 8:45 pm“forgive me…”
Have you been bad?
Do you need a spanking?
and Mr. Stupidity, in what sense do I lack credibility? What don’t you believe? I can’t find sexual misconduct unworthy public outrage? I don’t. I don’t think public misconduct is more important than personal misconduct on the part of public officials? I do. I am not gay? Well, that will be a surprise tomy partner of 17 years.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:45 pmIt seems appropriate somehow to announce that the Cesspool Party is up at the Zoo. ;)
October 6th, 2007 at 8:47 pmThanks for answering the “we” question.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:49 pmI’m calling it a concern troll.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:50 pmI can’t find sexual misconduct unworthy public outrage? I don’t. Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 8:45 pm
If you lyingly claim to be about “family values” and bash and try to outlaw homosexuality while not only engaging in it yourself , but doing it publicly and illegally , I’d say that’s pretty outrageous , isn’t it ?
October 6th, 2007 at 8:51 pmYou who this troll reminds me of? Remember the one about a month and a half ago, claiming to be a retired military officer, that took the name of Jack Nicholson’s character from “A Few Good Men”?
Same patient, slightly paternalistic attitude. Same language. Even making similar claims for the sympathy value… w/ the “military officer” it was his 80 yr old mother. This guy even has a long term partner in waiting, when it’s worth rolling that fact out.
Sorry, “Candide”, ain’t buying it. I don’t believe a 60 yr old gay man, who lived thru decades of nasty repression, would talk about these things the way ya do. Yer a concern troll…
SOOOOORRY!!!! I’ve known lots of gays over the yrs, and I’ve NEVER met one who talks about stuff like this the way you do.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:52 pm155–Yes. Hypocrisy is the political issue. Sexual deviance or personal misconduct is not. If you look back in this blogger stream, that has been my point all along.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:54 pmI think you are missing the point a bit. Craig’s fellow Republicans in the Senate apparently knew of his activity and, through their silence, condoned it. Only after his perversion came to light did they distance themselves as much as possible. So were they lying about his activity being ok before or are they faking disgust now? Either way, hypocrites all.
Comment by erock — October 6, 2007 @ 8:32 pm
This, in turn, indicates a more horrible pattern of behavior. As with the hypocrisy of Craig himself, so does the hypocrisy and selective memory of the Republican party reflect poorly upon the Republican party as a whole. They knew what Craig was up to. They knew Foley, etc, etc, were doing as well. They didn’t report on it, didn’t attempt to confront Craig and friends on it, didn’t attempt to do ANYTHING about it, until the public got wind of it.
As it is with Craig, so it is with the Republican Party. If they have refused to report this, because Party is more important than Country, what else are they hiding? How many millions of incriminating e-mails are they sitting on? We know the WH used the RNC e-mail system, which bypasses the Hatch Act. They kept that information completely secret until the press revealed it. The Executive and RNC both still refuse to obey the law on that issue (among many others).
How many instances of the Executive breaking the law have they been privy too and kept silent? After all, we know that Republicans have gotten briefings that Democrats have not, even when involved in the same committees, and with the same levels of clearance. Perhaps even while members of the MINORITY party in the same committee have been briefed? Senator John D. Rockefeller, anyone?
Once such a person has been in such a position for so long, how compromised are they? How many bills has Craig voted against the wishes of his constituents? How many times was that due to blackmail from members of his own party, or even one or two individuals within his own party (which currently includes the PotUS and VPotUS)? How will we ever find out?
So yes, there are many, many reasons to not allow such hypocrites to hold a higher office. It actually IS a matter of national security. Unlike most of the crap the Republicans have CONFLATED with national security.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:54 pm155–Yes. Hypocrisy is the political issue. Sexual deviance or personal misconduct is not. If you look back in this blogger stream, that has been my point all along.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 8:54 pm
“Personal misconduct” if it is against the law , most assuredly is …..
I don’t give a damn about anyone’s sexual/personal preferrence ; but when you’re a lawmaker and believe you’re above the law , that is unacceptable…….
October 6th, 2007 at 8:59 pmStupidity–I don’t understand your unwillingness to recognize that I support the same issues you would. I am disgusted by the religious right for their hypocrisy about sex. It is okay if it is hidden (like the Log Cabin Republicans) and horrifying if it comes out in the open. They hate gays, and have millions of gays among their ranks. They are appalled by sexual impropriety like tapping a foot on a bathroom floor, but can ignore the deaths of thousands on the basis of a lie.
I want Idaho to get a Democratic Senator. I don’t want the Democrats t ostoop to the level of Limbaugh to do it.
October 6th, 2007 at 8:59 pmCandyce–I have a friend who committed a crime like Craig’s and was convicted for it. It was catastrophic to him in terms of his family and his public reputation. I think he used horrible judgment. Still, I feel very badly for him. I don’t believe these crimes are worth the public outrage shown. I don’t think the police should be wasting time with them, and I do believe in many cases there is an abuse of power in prosecuting these cases. Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 8:24 pm
Yeah, why the temptation to make passes at men in stalls in a public bathroom gets just overwhelming sometimes..that hint of essence of urinal cake…Y’know, sometimes I can’t buy Charmin without my little soldier snapping to attention….
Oh wait…better yet, here’s a thought: DON’T MAKE PASSES AT STRANGERS IN PUBLIC RESTROOMS! There are bars..dating services, mixers, parties, blind dates, clubs, etc. It’s really stretching the bounds of rationality to believe a public restroom is anyone’s, much less a Congressman’s, best option. Gay people are far smarter than that
October 6th, 2007 at 9:02 pmhanshiro–
Unfortunately, some gay people are not far smarter than that. That was the point.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:04 pm159–That was the baloney they spouted off about Clinton. I don’t want a saint in political office, I want someone who performs his job wisely. Go to church if you are looking for saints.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:07 pmI don’t believe these crimes are worth the public outrage shown. I don’t think the police should be wasting time with them, and I do believe in many cases there is an abuse of power in prosecuting these cases. Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 8:24 pm
You find the prosecution of these cases to be an “abuse of power” moreso than a dimwit who is a lawmaker that’s bashing homosexuals and trying to make the very act of homosexual sex illegal while engaging in it himself , and using illegal methods/acts , in which to get it ?
October 6th, 2007 at 9:07 pmI find hypocrisy of that nature to be repugnant and unforgivable……
Unfortunately, some gay people are not far smarter than that. That was the point.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 9:04 pm
I think the only people you’ll find soliciting or having sex in public bathrooms are deeply closeted people like Sen Craig. Who else would do something so desperate?
Besides freaks, of course.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:08 pmUnfortunately, some gay people are not far smarter than that. That was the point.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 9:04 pm
It still doesn’t give anyone a pass for engaging in that type of behavior ; especially in a PUBLIC PLACE , that children have access to…….
October 6th, 2007 at 9:10 pmConcern-for-Clinton troll.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:11 pmZooey–I don’t understand their motivation. You may call them freaks. I don’t pretend to understand them. Then again, many straight people don’t pretend to understand me.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:12 pmhanshiro– Unfortunately, some gay people are not far smarter than that. That was the point. Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 9:04 pm
There are many other people who aren’t far smarter either about, say, soliciting children online…should we lower the bar for them just for being slow learners? Now you’re claiming it’s impossible for a “not far smarter” gay person to simply use a public restroom for the intended purpose? That those who don’t get the concept should be given special dispensation?
That’s the best rationale you got?
October 6th, 2007 at 9:12 pmOh wait…better yet, here’s a thought: DON’T MAKE PASSES AT STRANGERS IN PUBLIC RESTROOMS! There are bars..dating services, mixers, parties, blind dates, clubs, etc. It’s really stretching the bounds of rationality to believe a public restroom is anyone’s, much less a Congressman’s, best option. Gay people are far smarter than that
Comment by hanshiro — October 6, 2007 @ 9:02 pm
Except, when you are part of a group that abhors gays, and are in the closet. It’s the whole repression thing that does it. Such a man cannot go on a gay date, lest he be outed. He cannot go to a dating service, lest he be outed. He cannot go to a mixer, a party, a bar, or a club, lest he be outed. Thus, the desperate need for these men to be involved in such obfuscation. Thus, the need for secret handshakes, calling up male hookers, or hooking up with the young, gay interns all around.
The sexual drive, especially when repressed, causes men (and women, to a lesser degree), to do engage in some incredibly stupid, thoughtless acts. All of these men (and women) would have their OWN RIGHTS expanded, would be welcomed, and would still be able to push a partially-conservative agenda in the modern Democratic party. Instead, he clings to his own preconceived notion of what the Republican party is SUPPOSED to stand for, and supports it even when it works directly against his own self-interests.
This particular closet can be more dangerous than the one from Poltergeist, tentacles and all.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:14 pmZooey–I don’t understand their motivation. You may call them freaks. I don’t pretend to understand them. Then again, many straight people don’t pretend to understand me.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
One doesn’t have to be closeted or gay to be a freak. Some people just like the sex in a public bathroom (or other inappropriate place) thing.
Craig disgraced himself, and is the poster boy for hypocrisy, but I don’t think what happened to him could be called “justice.”
October 6th, 2007 at 9:16 pmZooey–I don’t understand their motivation. You may call them freaks. I don’t pretend to understand them. Then again, many straight people don’t pretend to understand me.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 9:12 pm
One doesn’t have to be closeted or gay to be a freak. Some people just like the sex in a public bathroom (or other inappropriate place) thing.
Craig disgraced himself, and is the poster boy for hypocrisy, but I don’t think what happened to him could be called “justice.â€
Comment by Zooey — October 6, 2007 @ 9:16 pm
Yeah
He should be kicked in his stupid ass by Elton John , George Michael and Boy George and called a ‘pansy’ for his hypocrisy and spinelessness………………….
October 6th, 2007 at 9:19 pmHanshiro–I am at a disadvantage trying to defend behavior that I don’t approve of.
I do distinguish between abuse of innocents, such as podophilia, and consensual sex among adults. I understand the need to keep decorum in public places and to protect the general public from public lewdness. That said, I return to my original argument that aside and apart from the hypocrisy issue involved in the Craig case, what you have is a misdemeanor. It is personal sexual misconduct and not public misconduct. It was not a violent crime.
If you want to get on a high horse like the Rethugs did about Clinton, so be it. I am not a troll, I simply believe there is the typical American tendency to make minor sexual crimes into something far more sinister than they really are.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:22 pmThis particular closet can be more dangerous than the one from Poltergeist, tentacles and all. Comment by Moderation — October 6, 2007 @ 9:14 pm
I agree, and there’s a certain ‘perverse’ ironic justice in Craig getting busted for such an offense. I also agree with your #158 post. Craig’s puritan front and his self-hatred in promoting 15th century exclusivity and ostracism by vilifying an entire segment of the population came back to bite him in the @ss. Hopefully, there will be more enlightened ‘representatives’ who will endevor to represent ALL the people…not just the puritan ones….
October 6th, 2007 at 9:26 pmMy instincts just keep sayin’ this guy’s a troll, and that seems ta be the consensus here… it’s… a… troll…
October 6th, 2007 at 9:37 pmIt is personal sexual misconduct and not public misconduct. It was not a violent crime.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 9:22 pm
Any such secret that opens up a politician to being blackmailed by members of THEIR OWN PARTY to vote in a manner contrary to the wishes of that politician’s constituents, has the potential to be far, far, FAR more damaging to the Republic than an otherwise more serious crime or breach of “the social contract”.
This is a secret the Democrats could have used to oust Craig from office, exposing his hypocrisy to the world, and potentially gaining a new seat in Congress. However, it’s a secret his OWN party has a more vested interest in not only protecting (to protect the seat from potentially being given by the public to another party), but in exploiting, to keep him toeing the party line.
Dangerous “games” indeed.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:37 pm2 thoughts on this…..
First, do we really need to listen to what the traitor Bob Novak has to say about ‘anything?’
Second, is Craig-gate the first instance of a repressed gay man being forced to come out of the water closet?
October 6th, 2007 at 9:40 pmThe man’s sexual peccadilloes are an embarrassment to him, but they don’t involve me or the general public. I “defend†him for this, because the harm done is something that is personal rather than public.
So what if the person in that stall was a 10 year old boy. And it did involve the “general public”. People came and went in the bathroom while Craig was doing his dirty. I really can’t believe you are defending this creep. It’s doesn’t speak very highly of you.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:45 pmAny such secret that opens up a politician to being blackmailed by members of THEIR OWN PARTY to vote in a manner contrary to the wishes of that politician’s constituents, has the potential to be far, far, FAR more damaging to the Republic than an otherwise more serious crime or breach of “the social contractâ€.
Good point. Isn’t that the reason why they gave for banning gays in the military? They said that if the enemy found out they were gay, they could blackmail the soldier into doing something they wouldn’t ordinarily do.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:47 pmI don’t believe these crimes are worth the public outrage shown. I don’t think the police should be wasting time with them, and I do believe in many cases there is an abuse of power in prosecuting these cases. Comment by candide
You think it is a waste of time? I don’t. One of the reasons why they set up these sting operations is to scare these guys away from public places where children may be like a public bathroom in an airport. You obviously are not a single mother who occasionally has to send her 10 year old son into an airport bathroom by himself. The mother can’t go with him. I’m quite sure that those mothers don’t think that these kind of sting operations are a waste of time.
And how is it an abuse of power prosecuting these kind of cases? If we arrest these guys, then say, oh well, now go on your way, they will be right back in that bathroom the next day. The reason why we prosecute crimes, besides the fact that that’s what the law is there for, is to be a deterrent from people committing the same crime again.
I am totally baffled at your need to defend Larry Craig’s behavior. It makes me wonder if you don’t have the same peccadillo he does.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:54 pmGood point. Isn’t that the reason why they gave for banning gays in the military? They said that if the enemy found out they were gay, they could blackmail the soldier into doing something they wouldn’t ordinarily do.
Comment by bilbobaggins — October 6, 2007 @ 9:47 pm
Now, think about that for a moment. Think about the psychology these people have been exhibiting, and the manner in which they seem to be classically projecting. They attempt to outlaw that which they are a part of. They argue from the perspective of attributing to their enemy what they are guilty of. The same modus operandi their “press” exhibits, such as O’Reilly and Limbaugh.
Do you think, perhaps, they came to the conclusion that a gay man in the military could be blackmailed by the enemy due to their sexual preference because THEY were being blackmailed because of their sexual preference? Do you think, perhaps, a man like Rep. Craig might have even been convinced that what he was going through could indeed also occur to a soldier on the battlefield? That, in combination with the coercion of the Republican party, a man like Larry Craig, was himself absolutely convinced that a gay in the military would crack just like he did, if interrogated by “the enemy”?
As you delve deeper and deeper in to the psychology of these people, and think about it how they perhaps thought about it themselves, the little tumblers keeping their secrets locked up fall slowly in to place. Eventually, when it all comes out, the whole of it will make far more sense, methinks.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:55 pmAnd the only reason that sexual behavior is still open to blackmail is because of people like Craig, who continue to demonize gays as immoral. There’s an irony for ya.
October 6th, 2007 at 9:56 pmAnd the only reason that sexual behavior is still open to blackmail is because of people like Craig, who continue to demonize gays as immoral. There’s an irony for ya.
Comment by Candyce — October 6, 2007 @ 9:56 pm
I’m quite certain the Republican party is aware of this. They NEED to keep homosexuality taboo. How else are they going to keep the country divided? They are, currently, the party of wedge issues, of keeping the country divided, of marginalizing entire segments of the populace based on color, religion (or lack thereof), sexual preference, or political, economic and social leanings.
So long as gays are demonized, so long as they are kept “separate but equal”, so long as they are a wedge able to be divided between the so-called “base” and everyone else, Authoritarians gain political power. Right now, the Republican party just so happens to be the party most firmly in the grip of Authoritarians.
Yeah, nice catch, Candyce.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:04 pmBilbo–It would not be a pecadillo if it was aimed at a 10-year-old, and I never said anything like that. Such distortions are hideously insulting. I am as disgusted by pedophilia as anyone, and your implications that I am not are revolting. You can wonder as much as you like. Your insult is beyond the pale.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:06 pmVendetta–Amen.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:10 pmWhat Craig did deserves to be investigated and he should step down. But had the people who had noticed strange behavior come forth you all would be railing against the homophobic, christofascist republicans.
Please do not use ‘you all’ in statements, it detracts from your point and makes your opinion seem projectionist.
I am a Christian and I did not rail against homophobic Republicans, I wrote about the hypocrisy of Craig and using that, homophobic Christofascist, excuse to not come forward is not a very good excuse as its not true.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:14 pmThey did not keep Foleys behavior a secret because of the blowback from the democrats, they kept it a secret, as we see, because of blowback by the Republicans who ran for office on anti-gay issues.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:18 pmI just think that is exactly how the left in general would have reacted.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
Fine, thats your opinion, but the Democrats are not against gay marriage, they are simply pointing out the hypocrisy of the anti-gay marriage party and the hypocrisy behind the ‘dont ask, dont tell policies’
October 6th, 2007 at 10:20 pmI just think that is exactly how the left in general would have reacted.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
I could care less if Craig is gay, as I have stated many times, the Republicans made a huge deal out of being the ‘moral majority’ and being ‘value voters’ and here I am speaking political parties and not the un-elected folsk such as yourself,, that these incidents, like Craig, Or Bob Allen, Or Haggard, or Glenn Murphy, or Vitter seriously undermine their talking points they have used over the years to garner votes.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:24 pmWhat Craig did deserves to be investigated and he should step down. But had the people who had noticed strange behavior come forth you all would be railing against the homophobic, christofascist republicans.
-Vendetta
So its ok to hide something that you consider wrong if you think you will be persecuted for exposing it?
October 6th, 2007 at 10:27 pmSo its ok to hide something that you consider wrong if you think you will be persecuted for exposing it?
Comment by erock — October 6, 2007
That, I say, is a political canard. Its far better to admit fault than to be caught lying about it later. Its, quite simply, the right thing to do.
When you screw up at work, and trust me I have, it always worked out far better when I immediately approached management and let them know exactly what happened and what I did and why.
Hiding the problem and blaming a co-worker for my screw up, I think, is cowardly.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:33 pmWhy should that be the case? Just because conservatives dont approve of certain behavior does not mean that they may not show compassion to those that exhibit that behavior. Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
But they hadn’t, politically, shown compassion, lets take Cheneys daughter for instance, politically she was a liability, not because of the democrats, but to the Republicans, it was decided, by them, that she should not be on stage with her family.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:35 pmRemember I did not make that the excuse for those who observed odd behavior from craig. I noted that if they had they exposed it they would have been persecuted. Basically they are damned if they did and damned if they did not.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 10:35 pm
But you must agree that by not exposing his behavior prior to its coming to light, they forfeit the opportunity to frown upon it later.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:37 pmSo what?
This is so what . . . Students being kicked out of military academies and having to pay back to the government hundreds of thousands of dollars for having admitting that they are gay;
Soldiers, willing to serve, and actually serving, being deprived the opportunity to pursue a livelihood in their chosen profession for having admitted that they are gay;
Condi Rice not being able to admit or to marry her long time lover, the Randy Bean, because she cannot admit that she’s gay;
The daughter of our Vice President not being able to pose for a portrait of herself and her partner, because they’re gay;
Gay Americans not being able to marry, despite the separation of Church and State, because they’re gay;
Basically, the right of every American citizens to enjoy free and equal rights, because a bunch of hypoctites in DC are too fearful to admit that they and their fellow law makers are bashing gays to apease a constituency to admit that they too are gay.
Who knows what secrets they’re hiding. We don’t know who’s gay, who’s a pedofile and who enjoys cross dressing. These clowns lump them all into one basket and consider all of them, including themselves, dangerous. A gay person poses no threat, although if I were toe-tapped, I’d be creeped. . . .a pedofile is a different species. Due to the whole lack of rigorous intellectual and moral thinking (”really didn’t think about it” mentality), no distinction is drawn. A dog is a dog . . . a Pekenese is the equivalent of a Pit Bull.
Big suprise . . . this Administration can’t distinguish the value of a dollar spent on healthcare for children from $1 billion spent on murdering mercenaries.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:37 pmIt seems appropriate somehow to announce that the Cesspool Party is up at the Zoo. ;)
Comment by Zooey — October 6, 2007 @ 8:47 pm
that cracked me up… seemed to be a cesspool party right here!
…
but, for a concern troll, the conversation has been at least interesting,
October 6th, 2007 at 10:44 pmyes, a bit creepy, but not annoying at all… and funny…
i’ve enjoyed reading this thread… well, at the 180 mark, so far…
…
It seems appropriate somehow to announce that the Cesspool Party is up at the Zoo. ;)
Comment by Zooey — October 6, 2007
Zooey, I have tried everything to get a password for the TPZoo, the cesspool thinks I am too dirty perhaps? =P
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
I am sure that much love exists between the VP and his daughter.
I am sure of that as well, but he bowed to the political pressure, and thats sad, I think.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:50 pm[...]
Once such a person has been in such a position for so long, how compromised are they? How many bills has Craig voted against the wishes of his constituents? How many times was that due to blackmail from members of his own party, or even one or two individuals within his own party (which currently includes the PotUS and VPotUS)? How will we ever find out?
So yes, there are many, many reasons to not allow such hypocrites to hold a higher office. It actually IS a matter of national security. Unlike most of the crap the Republicans have CONFLATED with national security.
Comment by Moderation — October 6, 2007 @ 8:54 pm
i think this is THE most important point of all…
October 6th, 2007 at 10:51 pmthe hypocrisy is like the icing on that cake…
…
We dont yet know the specifics so that is hard to say.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 10:45 pm
I didn’t cite specifics so it should be easy to say. If someone sits by and is complicit in what people may consider appalling behavior, then that person loses any right to express disgust at said behavior in the future. This is a very general statement and should be easy to respond to regardless of the context of this thread.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:51 pmHere is my email zooey Xisithrus@hushmail.com [throwaway account] if you could send me a name and password, seeing as you have the triggerfunction, I would be more than happy to dive drunkenly into the cesspool and float like a turd.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:52 pmAnd Vendetta, thats actually what has happened here with Craig, they have bowed to political pressure, much of it their own because they dont want to be seen as a hypocrite.
The cure for hypocrisy? The Truth, and by my soul, it will set you free.
October 6th, 2007 at 10:54 pmVendetta–Amen.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 10:10 pm
wulp… there it goes…
October 6th, 2007 at 10:55 pm…
Comment by Xisithrus — October 6, 2007 @ 10:52 pm
I’ll see what I can do. ;)
October 6th, 2007 at 10:57 pmthis traitor is still rewriting history?? Not surprising in the least. CIA offilcials told him not to print her name…although, I suppose they didn’t strenuously object either…
October 6th, 2007 at 10:59 pmI’ll see what I can do. ;)
Comment by Zooey — October 6, 2007
WoooHoooo putting on my water wings and inflating my raft!
October 6th, 2007 at 11:01 pmWhat do you expect from a political party where the leading candidate for president, Rudy Giuliani, is a drag queen?
October 6th, 2007 at 11:03 pm#203 You’re right . . . I have no doubt the VP loves his daughter and that not all Republicans are social conservatives . . .
But what ever happened to the Republicans that believed in small government, in fiscal conservatism, states’ rights and staying out of citizens’ lives? They are as extinct as the dinasours (that apparently died 4(?) thousand years ago in the blitz second that Adam & Eve arrived.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:04 pmI think that your statement is overly simplistic. Should parking or traffic tickets cause one to have to step down? Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
Eh? Do you get fired from your job for traffic tickets? If your a deliveryman you probably will.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:07 pmExcuse . . . that would be “were born and died” the blitz second Adam and Eve arrived.
Wonder if that snake was gay? It would explain alot.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:07 pmNo I dont think it is that easy. Some may make choices that I dont agree with that are of themselves not immoral or unlawful. I may choose out of compassion not to bring those actions to light that does not make me complicit.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 10:59 pm
Yes, it does. If the act is indeed unlawful, then by law it makes you an accessory. Morally, at best, it makes you an enabler and hence partially responsible.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:08 pmThat was a qualifier you did not originally include.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
That’s true, you included it.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:14 pmComment by Xisithrus — October 6, 2007 @ 11:01 pm
No go, Zep. I can’t figure it out. All I get is a white screen after I put the info in. I’ve sent an email to support asking them what to do. I’ll keep the above email handy, and let you know what I hear back. Sorry! :(
October 6th, 2007 at 11:15 pmWhat Craig did deserves to be investigated and he should step down. But had the people who had noticed strange behavior come forth you all would be railing against the homophobic, christofascist republicans.
Comment by Vendetta
This is a bunch of BS and you know it. If Craig had come out and admitted that he was gay in a dignified manner, we would have been fine with it, as long as he didn’t continue to vote against the best interests of gays along the way. If he had been exposed as a weirdo who tries to pick up men in bathrooms, that’s another matter. The only “gays” who participate in behavior like that are gays that are afraid to admit what and who they are. If they were not afraid, they could have normal relationships in the light of day.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:16 pmThat was a qualifier you did not originally include.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 11:12 pm
Further, we can assert that the acts in question are deemed immoral by the parties that witnessed them by their willingness to condemn the acts once they have come to light. Your argument is invalid given this.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:17 pmVendetta–Amen.
Comment by candide — October 6, 2007 @ 10:10 pm
How about the two of you go meet each other in a bathroom somewhere. You are made for each other.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:18 pmThanks candide. A warning about bilbo he just likes to argue and will never concede.
Comment by Vendetta
So, exactly what am I supposed to concede to. That you are right in supporting Larry Craig? It ain’t gonna happen.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:19 pm“Wide Stance” Craig is a national humiliation. He doesn’t have the decency to remove himself from the spotlight and take his kinky lifestyle back to Idaho. This is especially troublesome right now because — thanks to Bush and his Crooks — we have serious overlapping crises and scandals.
The one redeeming feature of the Craig Scandal is the pressure it puts on Mitch McConnell, a man with no scruples or commitment to the common good. Mitch just had a really bad week, with many more to follow. If we’re lucky enough to survive the Bush admin until 2008, it will be very sweet to dump Mitch and send him packing.
http://www.ditchmitchky.com
October 6th, 2007 at 11:19 pm#229 Bilbo, you said it.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:19 pmNo go, Zep. I can’t figure it out. All I get is a white screen after I put the info in.
Yeh thats all I have been getting as well. It never sends any information to the email address. When I put in my moniker, to login, it says, incorrect password, and if I ask for a new password [lost pass], it says check your email, but nothing is ever in the email. I think Wordpress, not your site, is screwed up.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:21 pmComment by erock — October 6, 2007 @ 11:17 pm
No some acts are condemnable which are not immoral.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
Condemnable on what grounds.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:23 pmWhy should that be the case? Just because conservatives dont approve of certain behavior does not mean that they may not show compassion to those that exhibit that behavior.
Comment by Vendetta
But they don’t. And if you think otherwise, you are seriously deluded. The Right has a very strict moral code and if you violate it, you are vilified. Apparently the Right’s moral code is somewhat lax when it comes to Congressmen purchasing sex from a prostitute while wearing a diaper, but when it comes to someone even hinting at sex with someone of the same sex, that is a major sin to the Republicans.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:24 pmwe were discussing senators.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
Helloooo. =P
October 6th, 2007 at 11:24 pmI think Wordpress, not your site, is screwed up.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 6, 2007 @ 11:21 pm
I’m going to put a question about this on the forums as well. See if I can get more immediate results.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:25 pmI may choose out of compassion not to bring those actions to light that does not make me complicit.
Comment by Vendetta
Oh I see, all those Repukes felt compassion for Mark Foley so they kept quiet about his actions for years. How about a little compassion for the pages he was hitting on? Your values are seriously skewed. But, that’s what one would expect from a Right Wing Loon.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:28 pmBottom line is . . . we elect legislators and expect for them to uphold the Constitution, to obey the law and to change it as necessary. We expect for them to adhere to the Constitution, obey the law, and if they don’t see fit to change it before they abuse it.
We the people want to see the process. If we’ve got Congressmen, a President or an Attorney General flouting the law, we want to know. Immediately. It is the duty of every single elected or appointed official to immediately broadcast any known or suspected wrongdoing. To do less violates the public trust.
If I knew that you planned to molest your neice and did nothing, would I not be equally guilty when the bad act happened?
October 6th, 2007 at 11:28 pmCompassion does not mean overlooking the transgression.
Comment by Vendetta
I am baffled as to why you are talking about compassion towards a weirdo Senator. But you can’t seem to find any compassion for our soldiers being killed in Iraq or the people being killed in Iraq. You don’t seem to have any compassion towards the children in our country who may die because they can’t get health care or don’t have enough food to eat.
Your compassion is the typical Right Wing compassion. You have compassion for yourself and the others who are like you. Everyone else can go to hell for all you care.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:30 pmThanks Zoo.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:33 pm“No some acts are condemnable which are not immoral.”
October 6th, 2007 at 11:34 pmThats pseudo-philosophical wishy-washy hogwash. It either is immoral and therefore worthy of scorn, or not. You freaking relativist, you’re ruining this country.
No some acts are condemnable which are not immoral.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 11:22 pm
How so? If an act involves no immorality, why is it condemnable? If no party is harmed, how is the act condemnable?
Here’s a start. How about we stop moving backwards, and making a bunch of puritanical rhetoric into law? How about if an act consists of nothing but willing participants, it’s not illegal? How novel would that be? I encourage you to find a single example of a so-called “consensual crime” that deserves to be criminal. Just one. Remember, for an act to be “consensual”, all parties must consent. Thus, the ole “slavery was a consensual crime” argument that’s been pulled on here before is invalid, because the SLAVE, who is a HUMAN BEING is not consensual.
Drug laws? *snort* Don’t make me laugh. The drug laws are a racket, plain and simple. If drugs were legal, regulated, sold only to adult ala alcohol and tobacco, and TAXED, many of the problems, including many of the violent crime amongst minorities, would drop severely.
Prostitution? Same song and dance. Why a person is not allowed to be compensated monetarily for sexual favors is beyond me. It is his or her body, he or she should be able to have sex with whomever he or she wants, for whatever reason he or she wishes. Period. Again, legalize it, regulate it, tax it as per any other legitimate business. What’s more, it opens up whole new avenues of safe sex for those who most need that connection. For example, people with AIDS.
But seriously, name a single moral act (if it isn’t immoral, it must in turn be moral) that is condemnable. Just one.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:34 pmCompassion does not mean overlooking the transgression.
Comment by Vendetta
htttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Compassion
But the compasionate conservatives in congress did overlook his transgression until it became public.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:36 pmPoor judgement is a possibility.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 11:29 pm
Poor judgement in commiting what kind of act. We are discussing the nature of the act here, not the motivation or reasoning behind said act. Please re-verse your response.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:36 pmI understand your idea of compassion and transgression Vendetta, but that does not make it their [GOP] idea of it.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:38 pmSeriously OT, but when was the last time you heard about those buried US miners that we gave up for dead… Pray for them, their souls and their families…
New York Mining Disaster 1941 Lyrics (Bee Gees)
In the event of something happening to me
There is something I would like you all to see
It’s just a photograph of someone that I knew
Have you seen my wife, Mr. Jones?
Do you know what it’s like on the outside?
Don’t go talking too loud, you’ll cause a landslide,
Mr. Jones.
I keep straining my ears to hear a sound
Maybe someone is digging underground
Or have they given up and all gone home to bed?
Thinking those who aren’t so distant must be dead?
Have you seen my wife, Mr. Jones?
Do you know what it’s like on the outside?
Don’t go talking too loud, you’ll cause a landslide,
Mr. Jones
In the event of something happening to me
There is something I would like you all to see
It’s just a photograph of someone that I knew
Have you seen my wife, Mr. Jones?
Do you know what it’s like on the outside?
Don’t go talking too loud, you’ll cause a landslide,
Mr. Jo – o – o – o – ones
Pray for our lost souls… under US mines or in foreign rubble…
October 6th, 2007 at 11:39 pmwe were talking about craig. But you are aware that its a fine line that some of these perverts toy with between what is illegal and whats just nasty. And an accuser may end up in a slander lawsuit.
Comment by Vendetta
What in the world are you talking about. Was what Craig did just nasty? You are making no sense in your attempt to justify Craig’s behavior, but then that’s pretty much what one would expect from a right wing loon.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:42 pmAnd an accuser may end up in a slander lawsuit.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
I doubt that-didn’t you read this?
October 6th, 2007 at 11:45 pmWash. High Court: Campaign Lies Are Protected Speech
OLYMPIA, Wash. A sharply divided state Supreme Court ruled yesterday that a law which bars political candidates from deliberately making false statements about their opponents violates the First Amendment right of free speech.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003654541
cussing in front of kids.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 11:41 pm
Cussing in front of kids is a moral act?
You must be shitting us.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:45 pmBut the compasionate conservatives in congress did overlook his transgression until it became public.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 6, 2007 @ 11:36 pm
Because in their world, politics trumps everything else. It wasn’t politically healthy for the Republicans to have Yet Another Sex Scandal ™ exposed to the public. They couldn’t risk losing a seat to a *choke* Democratic candidate, or worse *dry heave* an INDEPENDENT! What’s more, hey, they’ve got something on this guy they KNOW he doesn’t want made public. Well, sh*t, that’s just one more crushing weight to dangle over the poor saps…err, the Gentleman from Idaho’s head!
The Democrats are completely guilty of this as well. It’s just, they aren’t really doing it on the social issues. Just the economic and political issues. Which is to say, they really are, at the moment, the lesser evil. This will not always be the case, but there is no way to truly progress as a people without first culling the most extremist from the herd.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:45 pmCompassion . . . ? I am continually frustrated by how easily bloggers on this site are distracted from the issue by a Repug penny.
The issue is not compassion, the issue is hypocrisy. Government policy is to condemn and prosecute gays, to shun them as deep into the closet as the closet is deep. To find that the Congress has a well-guarded gay secret community defies credulity. It is a wrong against every American family dealing with “stuff.”
“Being gay is bad,” “don’t ask, don’t tell”, . . . . when in fact, it is an acknowledged norm (even if secret) in our nation’s capital makes me sick. We deserve soooo much better. If you’re a bunch of tax cheating frauds, don’t sue us for tax evasion, if you all have dui’s but don’t have records, noone should, it you beat your spouses and don’t get arrested, noone should.
Good God. We need a little reform.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:46 pmThey are human like the rest of us but they have the added pressure of having to be on display.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
October 6th, 2007 at 11:46 pmYes, I posted that a bit ago about politicians, as Cheney, bowing to political pressure.
Not recommending bad behaviour be legalized, simply that Congress should not be immunized from laws protecting victims against it (that would be us, their constituents).
October 6th, 2007 at 11:49 pmcussing in front of kids.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007 @ 11:41 pm
Absolute rubbish. Kids are exposed to more cussing amongst their peers then they ever hear from their parents. I cussed as a kid, you cussed as a kid, everybody has cussed as a kid. It is a social faux pas, but certainly not CONDEMNABLE. No adult deserves to be punished for cussing in front of kids. What’s more, it leads children towards the acceptance of a double standard, doublethink, and cognitive dissonance.
No, we’ve not taught our kids not to cuss. Instead, we’ve EXPLAINED TO THE WHAT THE WORDS ACTUALLY MEAN. My four year old knows cursing in public is socially unacceptable, but when she has cursed, it was in the correct context, and the words were used properly.
Sorry, cussing is NOT a condemnable act.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:50 pmjohnny gosch.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:51 pmOh yes, and Zooey has a point. If you consider cussing worthy of condemnation, YOU consider cussing to be an immoral act.
immoral
October 6th, 2007 at 11:53 pm–adjective
1. violating moral principles; not conforming to the patterns of conduct usually accepted or established as consistent with principles of personal and social ethics.
2. licentious or lascivious.
#264 They are human like the rest of us but they have the added pressure of having to be on display.
Comment by Vendetta — October 6, 2007
Yes, I posted that a bit ago about politicians, as Cheney, bowing to political pressure.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 6, 2007 @ 11:46 pm
Please . . . If you can’t obey the law, adhere to the laws and standards that you promulgate due to the pressure – - – GET OUT – Americans need leadership, not you!
Ick . . I just puked.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:53 pmThe Repub Party is chock full of these toe tapping derelicts.
Here’s another one:
Republican “family values” Joey DiFatta:
In the second incident, Jefferson Parish deputies working an undercover detail in a men’s bathroom at Dillard’s at Lakeside Shopping Center in March 2000 stopped DiFatta after he indicated a desire to engage in sex with an undercover deputy in an adjoining bathroom stall, according to an interoffice memorandum written by Sgt. Keith Conley, one of the deputies involved in the investigation.
The report said DiFatta slid his foot into the deputy’s stall and tapped the deputy’s foot. In the report, Conley noted that such activity is common among men to indicate a willingness to participate in sex. The deputy inside the stall, Detective Wayne Couvillion, responded by tapping his foot, and DiFatta reached under the partition and began to rub the deputy’s leg, the report states.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:57 pmThe detective asked DiFatta, “What do you want?” according to the report, and he replied, “I want to play with you.”
I am sure that much love exists between the VP and his daughter.
Comment by Vendetta
I’m sure too. So much love that they haven’t published any pictures of themselves with their daughter and granddaughter. There are lots of pictures of the Dick and Lynn Chaney with their granddaughter. Strangely enough their own daughter is missing from all those pictures. That’s love for sure.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:58 pmOk, Ok, I think Vendetta/Mr. P has taken enough of a beating. Let’s let him pretend to walk away with an ounce of dignity.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:58 pmTroll Watch Notice!
Apparently, they’re taking a “softer kinder approach.”
Cheney’s daughter & pal, aka, Vendetta & Xisithrus.
Welcome! Nice to see you.
October 6th, 2007 at 11:59 pmI, on the other hand, only consider acts which actually harm others to be immoral. If noone is harmed, there is no way it should be illegal. Every law on the books with the exception of the consensual crime laws, deals with at least one party being harmed, be it physically, mentally, or socially.
Cussing is as immoral as praying in public, farting in public, or saying something someone else near you disagrees with. In other words, in my opinion, it simply ISN’T.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:00 amF*ck the little sh*ts, they should be in bed anyway.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:00 amBilbo you shift back and forth and always seem to have a comprehension problem which no one else has. You got ADHD or something?
Its late and I dont want to deal with you gnight.
Comment by Vendetta
I don’t know, from what I can tell no one here understands what in the hell you are saying. But, being a Right Wing Loon, your world view is always the one and only view. It’s a particular trait you all seem to have.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:01 amOk, Ok, I think Vendetta/Mr. P has taken enough of a beating. Let’s let him pretend to walk away with an ounce of dignity.
Comment by erock — October 6, 2007
I notice the Mr P’s and the MA’s dont much care for logical debate and its a far mor effective, and polite, way of defusing the pundit talking points they like to promote.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:01 amOk, Ok, I think Vendetta/Mr. P has taken enough of a beating. Let’s let him pretend to walk away with an ounce of dignity.
Comment by erock — October 6, 2007 @ 11:58 pm
Right? I hope he doesn’t think it isn’t quite apparent. But, this is the new, registration-required TP, so he gets his fair shake. If he gets too far out of line, and slips in to “HEYOOOoooOOOooo!!!” mode, super-rant-troll-mode 5000 ™ or simply resorts to ad hominems, strawmen, and other rhetorical bouts of laziness, then he gets the “Report Abuse” treatment and gets banned. If he re-registers under another name, he gets no fair shake and is flagged at every post until banned again, and again, and again, or until TP bans his IP.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:03 am#271 “Yeah, we love you honey. Could you just hand the baby to your mother? . . . That’s great . . . now, if the two of you could just move to the left a little bit . . . a little further . . . further . . . perfect!”
October 7th, 2007 at 12:07 amBut, being a Right Wing Loon, your world view is always the one and only view. It’s a particular trait you all seem to have.
Comment by bilbobaggins — October 7, 2007
Most especially with the younger generation, they seem to think bacuse they watch TV or are in College they KNOW what the world is about. From what I can ascertain from the trolling types they have very little work experience, have very little travel experience, and have very little dealings with people outside of a small click of like minded friends.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:15 am#15 and remaining posts of the like:
So wait, it’s his business: What if he wanted to marry this random guy in the bathroom? Still his business? Your party says it isn’t.
So wait, making advances towards children while you’re on the job (a government job even) shouldn’t get you fired?
So wait, screaming about how gays are evil, and then ending up being gay (and fighting every inch to basically deny it) shouldn’t get you fired, or at least very very much scolded and minimalized by your party?
What I did find stunning, however, is that your post didn’t mention Clinton. I guess you had a continuation later, but I can’t be bothered to ctrl-F it. I just got done standing up for 4 hours, and I’m in no mood to be correcting. Just thought I’d get something blatantly dumb corrected/.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:18 amSorry Xbot,
Vendetta can’t stand it when too many people make sense, he has to find somewhere else to go.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:21 amXisithrus,
Perhaps the reason that the college age citizens to which you refer were raised by one-mother families, have to work two jobs in order to go to work, have no health care and have little hope, the vision of such individuals has sharply narrowed in the past seven years.
There was a time when, “we had a dream . . .”, when we believed in the Peace Corps and that we could land a man on the moon…
There was a time before Katrina . . . there was a time before Bush.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:22 amVendetta can’t stand it when too many people make sense, he has to find somewhere else to go.
Comment by Zooey — October 7, 2007 @ 12:21 am
Yea, when the going gets tough, the Repugs slither away.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:26 amXsisithrus,
There was a day when all of these disenfranchised HAD A DREAM. They could realize it. The public, the government, the world supported their dreams.
Although not yet dead, dub’ya has all but squashed the dream. . . . but in some of our hearts, the dream survives.
Gulf Coast prayers go out.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:26 amYea, when the going gets tough, the Repugs slither away.
Comment by upside99 — October 7, 2007
When one realizes they operate on emotional rational the very worst thing to do is engage them with ‘your so stupid’ your
mother is so ugly’ type arguments, its what Oreilly and other Pundits depend on for ratings.
I know that I have been scolded here for being too nice, or not agressive enough, so be it, be the bigger person. Watch cops on TV, they defuse angry people with logic, not beating them with sticks.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:31 amYea, when the going gets tough, the Repugs slither away.
upside99 — October 7, 2007 @ 12:26 am
Problem is, he always leaves a trail… Yuck.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:32 amat least for the most part, if your stupid enough to run or try to hit an officer, well, good luck.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:32 amProblem is, he always leaves a trail… Yuck.
Comment by Zooey
Without a cesspool even! =P
October 7th, 2007 at 12:33 amWatch cops on TV, they defuse angry people with logic, not beating them with sticks.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 7, 2007 @ 12:31 am
Have you ever seen that video clip of the cop who pulled over a driver for speeding, and the guy goes completely nutzoid, and starts screaming at the cop and throws the ticket back at the cop? The cop is absolutely calm the whole time. Even says “Have a nice day” as the nutcase drives off. Heh.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:35 am“Report Abuse†treatment and gets banned. If he re-registers under another name, he gets no fair shake and is flagged at every post until banned again, and again, and again, or until TP bans his IP.
Comment by Moderation
I wonder if that’s what happened to Rory/Jake. Haven’t seen Sybil around today.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:35 amWithout a cesspool even! =P
Comment by Xisithrus — October 7, 2007 @ 12:33 am
He brings his own “cess.” :P
October 7th, 2007 at 12:37 amProblem Xisithrus is that you talk a nice game, but so far, no substance.
The only substantive phrase that you’ve written is, to paraphrase, Cheney loves his daughter. . . Aside from that, nothing.
Please, delight us with a thought.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:37 amComment by Zooey — October 7, 2007
Yeh, I saw that one, lol. One of these days Bill Oreilly will blow up like that.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:39 amOne of these days Bill Oreilly will blow up like that.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 7, 2007 @ 12:39 am
I just hope it happens on-air.
Is that just horrible of me?
October 7th, 2007 at 12:41 amI wonder if that’s what happened to Rory/Jake. Haven’t seen Sybil around today. Comment by bilbobaggins — October 7, 2007
His grandmother lost the keys to the basement and he hasn’t been able to get out or access his computer?
October 7th, 2007 at 12:43 amIs that just horrible of me?
Comment by Zooey — October 7, 2007
naw, it wont be your fault when he does a melanie morgan.
October 7th, 2007 at 12:46 amXisithrus,
Still waiting for a thought . . . for a topic: Craig?
October 7th, 2007 at 12:47 amnaw, it wont be your fault when he does a melanie morgan.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 7, 2007 @ 12:46 am
That witch (sorry witches). Has she imploded? How can you tell?
October 7th, 2007 at 12:50 amThat witch (sorry witches). Has she imploded? How can you tell?
Comment by Zooey — October 7, 2007
You mean thats normal for her? hrrrr.
Speaking of witches, got any good witch links?
October 7th, 2007 at 12:54 amStill waiting,
FYI, it’s “Bill O’Reilly.” (I always hate it when people misspell my name.)
October 7th, 2007 at 12:57 amWhy are you asking me about witch links, Zep? :D
Sharon Cox (now Witch1) is the witch for you. ;)
October 7th, 2007 at 12:58 amUgh,
Zooey, so glad that I logged on a website to discuss Senator Craig and it has now devolved into a discussion of witches.
Always elevating the level of discourse you are.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:01 amWhy are you asking me about witch links, Zep? :D
Sharon Cox (now Witch1) is the witch for you. ;)
No reason, I’m curious about alot of things, like astronomy, which many witches, and others, discuss. Heck even Jesus spoke of the Pisces constellation and the binary star Al Rischa. =)
October 7th, 2007 at 1:03 amAnd no, Zooey, I dont think your a witch, at least an evil one, that is =P
October 7th, 2007 at 1:05 amSharon has little things she does at various times related to the moon and seasons. I don’t understand them, but I find them fascinating.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:06 amThat’s good, cuz I’m not a witch. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. :) I’m a peacemaker.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:09 amSharon has little things she does at various times related to the moon and seasons. I don’t understand them, but I find them fascinating.
Comment by Zooey
Indeed. Tidal locking etc is interesting.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:14 amand if I ask for a new password [lost pass], it says check your email, but nothing is ever in the email. …
Comment by Xisithrus — October 6, 2007 @ 11:21 pm
zep – check your spam folder…
i’m off to beddy bye…
g’nite all…
oh – did anyone see SNL tonight?
a really great “REALLY???” sketch about craig… very funny…
and i just loved “rwolf and the swedish chef” skit… the rest of the band, with ANIMAL!… always a muppets fan…
nite!
October 7th, 2007 at 1:19 amGoodnight, katy!
I love the Muppets.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:20 amThat’s good, cuz I’m not a witch. Not that there’s anything wrong with that. :) I’m a peacemaker.
Comment by Zooey — October 7, 2007
That you are =) How can I say…our thought waves and frequencies of them are intimately tied to earths. That is our brain waves operate in the same range of earths natural resonance. To be a witch is not to be evil but to be in tune with our planet, which is living.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:20 amzep – check your spam folder
Thanks Katy, I have, but I get the same blank screen as Zooey did when registering. Thinkprogress, which uses wordpress works just fine and I had no problem logging in.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:22 amTo be a witch is not to be evil but to be in tune with our planet, which is living.
Comment by Xisithrus — October 7, 2007 @ 1:20 am
Absolutely.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:23 amZep, try using the same user name and password to log onto the Zoo. That might work.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:26 amAbsolutely. Comment by Zooey — October 7, 2007
October 7th, 2007 at 1:34 amActually, I am trying to get at a commonality that exists between Christianity, which has its roots in Chaldean/Zoroastrianism and the varied beliefs found here, which are, really, closely linked.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Zep, try using the same user name and password to log onto the Zoo. That might work. Comment by Zooey — October 7, 2007
Same as here@TP?
It couldn’t hurt to try.
You can always change your public name once you’re registered.
October 7th, 2007 at 1:36 amIt says wrong username Zoo..8^(
October 7th, 2007 at 1:38 amOy, how annoying. Why does something so simple have to be such a pian in the ass?
October 7th, 2007 at 1:39 amComment by Zooey — October 7, 2007 1:39 am
Kinda like life, eh? 8=] OooK OooK
October 7th, 2007 at 1:41 amHeh. Just like life. :)
I guess I better get to bed. Check your email, I sent you a hello. I’ll keep you posted on what I hear.
Goodnight, my friend. :)
October 7th, 2007 at 1:45 amGoodnight, my friend. :)
Comment by Zooey — October 7, 2007
October 7th, 2007 at 1:55 amGN ZOO, I got your Email and replied. =)
Since TP mods are lazy today, and aren’t keeping up with the news, here is a story about scientists creating new life form with artificial DNA:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,299857,00.html
Per the story, this organism was given dye tag markers, to easily identify it, which only means that we will see it when we piss, as it will assuredly get out.
Here in Florida, it takes two hands to count all the lifeforms that were transplanted here from elsewhere, when scientists / enthusiasts thought it would be good for the environment: armidillos and lovebugs being the most irritating. Just as in Jurassic Park, someone will release these things as a solution to some imagined problem, and wreak havoc on us all.
October 7th, 2007 at 2:25 amLet me ask you this question: who has caused more harm to the USA, Larry Craig and his bathroom stall antics or Pres. Bush and his war in Iraq? Keep you eyes on the ball, people!
October 7th, 2007 at 3:25 amI realize I’m late to the party, but unless we know what “weird conduct” Novak is talking about, I’m not ready to cast stones at the Repubs who knew about Larry Craig’s peccadillos.
If it was just a matter of Craig’s sex life, that’s nobody’s business. UNLESS any of the following was going on:
1) If Craig was having sex with or soliciting sex from minors (illegal)
2) If Craig was sexually assaulting others against their will or if they were not in a position to give their consent (illegal)
3) If Craig was having sex with prostitutes (illegal)
4) If Craig was having sex with people in his workplace that he was in a position of authority over (inappropriate at best, sexual harrassment at worst)
5) If Craig was engaging in lewd conduct in public places (illegal)
If Craig (or ANY senator or representative) was engaging in any of the behaviors listed above and his fellow senators knew about it and said nothing, then the senators who kept quiet should also be held accountable.
On the other hand, if Craig’s fellow senators knew he was gay, but did NOT know he was doing the nasty in public places, they were correct in treating it as none of their business.
We really need to know some specifics on what “weird behavior” means in the context, and if this behavior was illegal.
October 7th, 2007 at 3:26 amSen. Craig’s behavior, was just that, behavior. Why does everyone have to attach denigrating labels to it?
And Sen. Craig was behaving that way out of the line of sight of the public. (Reminds me of the little lady who complained of her neighbor’s lewd behavior to the police. When the police came, they were unable to observe the behavior. The lady said, “But if you stand on your tip-toes on this stool, you can see it clearly!”)
What gives a lot of glee to some of us is that the senator’s behavior was condoned by the silence of some in his own party and that he screamed, ranted, and passed condeming judgement on those who (he claimed) behaved the same.
Most of us, though, didn’t need a thread like this, giving attention to Novak, and calling attention to NeoCon behavior. We’ve seen lots of it over the years!
October 7th, 2007 at 5:45 amhterrya: If what Craig did was simply “behavior”, then why are our jails filled with sexual offenders? If that were a youngster in the next stall, his so-called “behavior” would be labeled as sexual predator. So, there’s plenty to learn from the labels affixed to what is definitely “inappropriate or illegal behavior in public”.
I believe that you and your kind would LOVE to see people not react to this type of illicit behavior so your party wouldn’t be seen as one who condones such disgusting “behavior”. That’s proven not to be the case however. In fact, although there may have been behaviors such as this occurring in the past, why is it that so many Republicans are being caught red handed lately? It’s the law of averages I think. The more aberrant behavior in a group of individuals/the more they will be caught. Suffice it to say that the GOP is chock full of sickos – sexual and otherwise – and the people are realizing just how insidiously hypocritical this group of individuals actually is.
It’s true that Mark Foley’s “sick behavior” was known and condoned by his colleagues for years before he was caught attempting to seduce young men in the congressional page program; it’s true that Dennis Hastert and John Boehner knew all about it and perhaps participated in some of their own.
What’s also true is that Larry Craig has a “file” already dating back to the 80’s of this “illicit behavior” and was not stopped by his peers back then before it had the time to escalate to this public display of reprehensible and illegal “behavior”.
Sorry to dispute your claim but one’s “behavior” is precisely what garners them the “label” of “criminal” and often finds them behind bars or on death row for their so-called “behavior”.
Your attempt, albeit futile, to trivialize the criminal behavior of one whom, above all others as a Congressman, should be displaying absolutely impeccable “behavior” – particularly in public – doesn’t hold an ounce of water.
October 7th, 2007 at 8:06 amThere are stories posted on some websites suggesting that Senator Craig had relationship with Mike Jones, the guy who was having sexual relationship with Ted Huggard,the Colorado pastor who quit after being caught.
October 7th, 2007 at 9:06 amMike says he does not have recorded messages with Criag, but he has evidence to support his claim.
#314, tarazan,
By evidence, are you alluding to something “blue dress”-esque?
October 7th, 2007 at 9:11 amTarazan: Mike Jones gets around the circle of hypocritical repukes, doesn’t he? If he has evidence, then he should come forward with it. Of course, part of me wants this country to finally do what is right and moral; the other part of me believes that “we reap what we sow” and Craig is sowing the seeds for there never to be another Republican president in our lifetimes – the more protracted his delay in exiting stage right – the commensure amount of devastation he is wreaking on the GOP. Craig has become the “poster boy” for the GOP perverse behavior and the sheer hypocrisy that they all seem to have programmed into each and every one of them. The longer Craig is the public face for GOP perversion, the more people he’s taking down with him….it’s the Bush Syndrome all over again.
I’m sure his buddies up for re-election aren’t happy with his obstinancy right now because they will soon discover that they’ve been unseated already by the shenanigans of their buddies and really shouldn’t take the time, energy, and money to run a campaign. That’s why we’re seeing so many Repukes deciding to throw in the towel and exit politics right now….that and the fear of their wrongdoings being discovered and them being made a public spectacle of…just like Larry Craig.
Psst….Larry – you’re playing right into the hands of the democrats right now so keep up the good work! Besides, the longer you pout publicly, the greater number of your “encounterees” coming forward to tell their tales of sexual encounters with you. Craig is definitely a sad and hypocritical case of “he who doth protest too much”.
No doubt we need to begin looking into those who were so vocal during Clinton’s BJ hearings because it’s the very ones protesting the behavior who are indulging in it themselves – it’s the ‘mirror syndrome” at it’s finest. In fact, these fools have probably done worse…much worse.
October 7th, 2007 at 9:45 amIsn’t it also called “you spot it/you got it”??
October 7th, 2007 at 9:47 amTime for everyone to google “Mike Jones”. Later TP buddies!
October 7th, 2007 at 9:48 amYes — Bush’s War, the scary melting of Arctic ice, S-CHIP, and the historic drought over huge sections of the US absolutely overshadow “Wide Stance” Craig’s kinky behavior.
But it is Craig and his good friends in the Senate like Mitch McConnell who have our government tied in knots so that we can not deal with the overlapping crises, which we can no longer ignore.
End the War NOW. Redirect funds from Blackwater and other contractors to focus on real solutions to offset the disastrous impacts of climate change. Overturn Bush’s S-CHIP veto. Open a national discussion on the challenges of the historic drought (we all need water, people).
The time to act is now.
October 7th, 2007 at 10:07 amAnd Sen. Craig was behaving that way out of the line of sight of the public.
Comment by hterrya
What a crock. He was in a public restroom, one that could quite likely be used by 10 year old boys while their mothers wait outside. If he had done this in the privacy of someone’s home, which is what gay people out of the closet do in the course of a relationship, then that would have been an entirely different manner. The reason why the police have these kind of sting operations in airport bathrooms is to chase away predators and perverts. For all of you who think that the police shouldn’t be having these kind of sting operations, what would you want the airport to do? Perhaps they should have one bathroom with a sign on the door saying “Perverts only”. That way they could have their “out of the line of sight of the public” place to do their dirty.
October 7th, 2007 at 11:25 amunless we know what “weird conduct†Novak is talking about, I’m not ready to cast stones at the Repubs who knew about Larry Craig’s peccadillos.
Comment by missmolly — October 7, 2007 @ 3:26 am
This is not about legality or illegality, missmolly, but about hypocrisy.
This is the same party that has practically built their political platform on bashing gay people in one way or another.
But as they have shown time and again, they don’t really believe their own rhetoric about “moral values” and are more than happy to accept in one of their own the very same behavior they condemn in others.
It’s all about their double-standards.
October 7th, 2007 at 11:36 amI do not feel that Craig should resign.
Craig for his part will not resign because he feels that this would be tantamount to admitting that he is gay (a bit of very obvious self-loathing on his part).
I feel that it would be much more gratifying to defeat him (or his succesor) in an election, considering the homophobic nature of the republican party this could wound them for decades.
October 7th, 2007 at 3:08 pmNovak is now for the people and gives truth wow that’s new. It didn’t take a rocket scientist to figure out the GOP knows who’s light in the loafers and how are child molesters. Novak as an inside knew this along time ago. He is part of the Bush Administrations favorite Journalist but now that the Titanic is sinking he’s all about honesty. Novak did a great job leaking the covert CIA agents name as she was working on if Iran has WMDs. As all the Journalist like Chris Matthews, Katie Couric, Bill O’Reilly and others loyal to the White House see it’s coming to an end. We see how now they blames their stations or acting like all they say for 7 years never happen. Now their with the American people in hopes of keeping their jobs. We need honest Journalist no matter which party is in Office.
October 7th, 2007 at 5:20 pm“Novak did not elaborate on what ‘weird conduct’. “
I think the “weird conduct” Novak had in mind is evident from what Novak said:
And it was not just a homosexual relationship. It was this weird conduct.
“This weird conduct” is Craig’s repeated cruising for anonymous gay sex in public places, as opposed to having a steady relationship with someone.
Novak isn’t trying to be vague or to hide anything.
October 7th, 2007 at 6:45 pmHe’s just saying it was known for some time in Senate circles that Craig engaged in exactly the type of behaviour he was busted for.
This is not about legality or illegality, missmolly, but about hypocrisy.
Comment by Gregor Samsa — October 7, 2007 @ 11:36 am
True — and I find the double standard as loathesome as anyone. This is on a par with a politician railing against the evils of abortion but will pay for one for his mistress when she gets pregnant by him.
I was pointing out that if Craig’s fellow senators were aware of ILLEGAL activity on the part of Craig, and kept quiet about it, they should be held accountable as accessories to a crime.
It would also be nice if our elected officials blew the whistle on blatant hypocrisy, too. Unfortunately, there is no law that says they must do so, even if it’s the morally correct thing to do. Perhaps there should be an honor code among senators and representatives in their Code of Ethics — similar to what the U.S. military academies use. This would be an obligation to point out any behavior that runs contrary to the principles upon which a congressman is elected. Similar to cadets being obligated to rat out cheaters.
October 7th, 2007 at 6:49 pm“I feel that it would be much more gratifying to defeat him (or his succesor) in an election, considering the homophobic nature of the republican party this could wound them for decades.”
Comment by Rustle
Just picture the GOP contender for his spot, trying to distance himself from Craig’s actions in the minds of voters, while the dem. candidate points to all the GOPerverts who’ve been revealed lately. Making the case that he/she isn’t also a closeted gay republican like Craig will be hard to do, given the vociferous manner in which Craig bashed the gay lifestyle as a senator. The dem candidate merely has to point out that Craig also made the same noises about gays as the repub who wants to replace him. And if the repub candidate tries to make the case that Craig’s past personal pecadillioes shouldn’t prejudice voters against HIM, the gay-hating GOP voters of his state will work against his election, for not taking the issue as seriously as they believe it to be.
October 7th, 2007 at 8:54 pm