Senator Craig… For the Love of God… Shut Up!
So I’ve been traveling since 4am on Tuesday. So as I spent yesterday away from TV and the internet, the most I knew about the world was that both Sen. Larry Craig and QB Michael Vick had admitted guilt for respective crimes. End of story (for now), I assumed.
And then last night at a work event, I turned to a colleague who is also politically-connected and asked, “So what do you think about Larry Craig?” He just shook his head and said, “Wasn’t his press conference today unbelieveable?”
My jaw dropped.
“No he did NOT!”, I protested. My friend: “Oh yes he did. He must have said ‘I’m not gay’ three times.”
“No he did NOT!”, I said. This time I continued: “And let me guess, his wife was standing next to him?” Well, of course!
I just shook my head. “So by the end of the week, I bet he is an alcoholic, goes to rehab, and was molested by his priest,” I deduced. Unreal.
Mark Steyn has a similar reaction to Craig’s unending stupidity.
Yes, I feel sorry for Mrs Craig and the family, too, but come on, the Senator’s statement in Boise this afternoon invites only a wholly deserved contempt. What was all that stuff about there being a “cloud over Idaho”? There’s no cloud over Idaho, there’s a cloud over him. The State of Idaho wasn’t in the stall of the men’s room at Minneapolis Airport, and the State of Idaho didn’t choose to cop a plea. If you’re going to dissemble, at least try not to be so pompous and narcissistic when you’re doing it.
And what was all that business about blaming it all on the “strain” brought about by The Idaho Statesman? What kind of excuse is that? “I wouldn’t have wound up in that men’s room if you guys hadn’t been investigating my secret gay sex life.”
This was a ridiculous performance.
The funny thing was, not having even watched or known about the press conference last night, I concluded the same thing!
The other immediate thought I had was… don’t these Washington politicians understand that this isn’t the 1960s and 1970s where people were either scared or in awe of US Senators and Congressmen? Now, we have a collective borderline hate/disdain for them all…. so there ain’t no one gonna protect ‘em anymore.
My next revelation, along those same lines, was: “Hmmm… if Ted Kennedy drove home drunk, wrecked a car, and left a body at the scene of the crime in 2007…. he’d not only be out of the Senate, but most likely in jail.”
Ah, the 21st Century. Good times.
[Related Story: A great internal debate by the Slate editors over the Craig foot tapping revelation.]
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
42 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
Wow, GOP… just wow.
49 people out of 300,000,000. That’s what we have. And yet we still can’t get 49 who are not going to be caught cheating on their wives with strange dudes in restrooms or cybering with interns…
One positive note I guess… In some sense, the Republicans have a LOT more gay support than anyone realized.
Comment by DoDoGuRu — August 29, 2007 @ 9:52 am - August 29, 2007
Could there be any more stark contrast? Democrats talk about outlawing SUV’s, while Republicans like Larry Craig make sure every American is entitled to a Hummer.
Comment by V the K — August 29, 2007 @ 10:28 am - August 29, 2007
As Taranto reminded us yesterday, and supplied links for:
Weird. BTW, this was the scandal that eventually led to the censure of Dan Crane(R) and Gerry Studds(D).
Also BTW - How can Craig have possibly said (as he did), in his statement Monday,
What is that? Does a Congressperson with a memory of scandal stretching back to 1982 just… forget to hire or ask for a lawyer, for his Court date?
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 29, 2007 @ 10:35 am - August 29, 2007
“49 people out of 300,000,000. That’s what we have. And yet we still can’t get 49 who are not going to be caught cheating on their wives with strange dudes in restrooms or cybering with interns…”
Because Gerry Studds, Bill Clinton, Gary Condit, Mel Reynolds, Gary Hart, Ted Kennedy, Antonio Villaraigosa, Jim McGreevey, Neil Goldschmidt, Gavin Newsom, as Democrats, were/are all so much better.
Politics tends to attract some pretty creepy people. They don’t particularly care which party they join. (Though if they did, they’d be wise to become Democrats - Democrats tend to re-elect their creeps.)
Comment by Bubba — August 29, 2007 @ 10:37 am - August 29, 2007
GP, you might want to check the Slate link - for me, it just points to NR again.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 29, 2007 @ 10:49 am - August 29, 2007
As I understand it (from listening to a prosecutor on a talk show), if Craig really believes he is innocent, then he can withdraw his guilty plea and go to trial on the original charges. As it stands, he gets to have his cake and eat it too: cops a plea to a minor charge and gets to claim he never did anything wrong. Some reporter needs to put him on the spot and challenge him to withdraw his plea.
Comment by Ian S — August 29, 2007 @ 11:08 am - August 29, 2007
Bruce, this quote of yours raises an interesting point, perhaps somewhat OT:
Now, we have a collective borderline hate/disdain for them all…. so there ain’t no one gonna protect ‘em anymore.
I wonder if perhaps with the change in media (rise of blogs, etc.) we’re seeing a trend, or going to see a trend, of increased pressure on our representatives at all levels to conduct themselves with more integrity. I would think we could all agree that would be a good outcome?
BTW, VtheK at #2 - excellent double entendre that had me snickering this morning.
Comment by Mike — August 29, 2007 @ 11:14 am - August 29, 2007
Meanwhile, Hillary and Obama get the all-important Communist Dictator Endorsement.
Comment by V the K — August 29, 2007 @ 11:22 am - August 29, 2007
“he’d not only be out of the Senate, but most likely in jail.”
Is it too late for that? Cuz I’d still pay to see it.
Comment by Hogarth — August 29, 2007 @ 12:25 pm - August 29, 2007
if Ted Kennedy drove home drunk, wrecked a car, and left a body at the scene of the crime in 2007…. he’d not only be out of the Senate, but most likely in jail.”
Nope. He’s a Democrat. Democrats don’t have to leave when they’re found with a live boy (Studds, Frank) or a dead girl. Every time they vote for partial birth abortion or gay marriage, it’s a get-out-of -jail-free card.
Hillary Clinton could shoot her husband through the head on national TV, do the church lady dance over his body while screaming “Satan, I love you!” and she’d be re-elected with 65% of the vote.
Comment by Jensen — August 29, 2007 @ 12:36 pm - August 29, 2007
Do we really want a guy that demonstrates this degree of incompetence representing any U.S. citizens?
Resign, please. Larry.
Comment by Jon — August 29, 2007 @ 12:40 pm - August 29, 2007
I’d have claimed a different medical condition: Restless Leg Syndrome. Who knew it could have such a devastating effect on one’s life.
Comment by Ignorance is Bliss — August 29, 2007 @ 12:49 pm - August 29, 2007
‘Hillary Clinton could shoot her husband through the head on national TV, do the church lady dance over his body while screaming “Satan, I love you!” and she’d be re-elected with 65% of the vote.’…
Not if she shot Bill. Just about anyone else, but definitely not Bill.
Comment by Chris — August 29, 2007 @ 12:59 pm - August 29, 2007
Jensen, I live in New York. Your comment is said but true.
Comment by jdr — August 29, 2007 @ 1:08 pm - August 29, 2007
Re: Castro recommending a Clinton-Obama ticket… Reminds me of 2004, when I had a bumper sticker made up, saying “Saddam and Osama will vote for Kerry”. As it turned out, Osama gave us a tape the week before the election (I think) threatening reprisals if Bush were re-elected, and all-but-parroting DNC and Michael Moore talking points.
Good times!
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — August 29, 2007 @ 1:57 pm - August 29, 2007
the paty of family values and moral terpitude and I am not gay? then listen to this
http://media.idahostatesman.com/smedia/2007/08/28/12/craigsource_1-2.source.prod_affiliate.36.mp3
Comment by david still — August 29, 2007 @ 1:58 pm - August 29, 2007
Patrick Kennedy didn’t kill anyone, but he did crash his car into a barricade while drunk and lie to police officers. What happened to him?
Comment by JayC — August 29, 2007 @ 2:02 pm - August 29, 2007
I have observed the liberals’ biggest weakness seems to be that they have no idea who the conservatives are. They have this weird caricature that they truly believe represents us. In some bizarre paradigm shift, Craig has stepped into that belief of his constituents saying: Sure, I lied to the courts, but at least I’m not gay. Does he believe then that perjury isn’t more important than homosexuality in the eyes of his constituents? That his audience is so anti-gay that his only possible defense is to loudly proclaim his heterosexuality? If I were one of his constituents, I would be so angry to be painted with that brush. As a conservative (not a Republican, sorry), I am disgusted with this ugly sex police label that liberals are attempting to attach to us, and sadly, now the Craig is also trying that label on for size.
Comment by Carolynp — August 29, 2007 @ 2:07 pm - August 29, 2007
“Hillary Clinton could shoot her husband through the head on national TV, do the church lady dance over his body while screaming “Satan, I love you!” and she’d be re-elected with 65% of the vote.”
True, but half of those votes would come from Republicans who hated Bill Clinton to distraction.
Comment by Ardsgaine — August 29, 2007 @ 2:09 pm - August 29, 2007
if Ted Kennedy drove home drunk, wrecked a car, and left a body at the scene of the crime in 2007…. he’d not only be out of the Senate, but most likely in jail.
No, he wouldn’t. Unless he were a Republican.
DHIMMIcRATs always get away with it. That’s what makes them DHIMMIcRATs.
Comment by Paul A'Barge — August 29, 2007 @ 3:03 pm - August 29, 2007
In NY, half those votes could not come from Republicans. The quote is “re-elected.”
Comment by MarkD — August 29, 2007 @ 3:06 pm - August 29, 2007
I’ve asked this question on numerous occasions but have, as yet, not received a satisfactory answer.
What, exactly, is so gay about homosexuals?
Comment by E. David Litvak — August 29, 2007 @ 3:07 pm - August 29, 2007
Patrick Kennedy didn’t kill anyone, but he did crash his car into a barricade while drunk and lie to police officers. What happened to him?
Well, one, you’re talking about a state full of voters who elected a man who has never held a job in his life other than political office to the US House of Representatives.
Two, you’re talking about a police department and a criminal-justice system that is completely dependent on the Federal teat arresting a person who sits on the House Appropriations Committee and can, with a wave of his hand, completely erase their funding.
The only thing that could really affect Patrick Kennedy is a Democrat reaction against privileged children with inherited wealth who drive drunk, cause immense damage, and then are treated with kid gloves and protected from any consequences.
ROFLMAO.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 29, 2007 @ 3:09 pm - August 29, 2007
“Sure, I lied to the courts, but at least I’m not gay”
His repsonse at the press conference forces one to recall the famous…. I did not have sex with that woman…
It gives me a funny image of Bill Clinton being the guy in the stall next to him.
Carolynp, I’m one of Larry’s constituents. In case you are wondering, he is politically dead in Idaho. I’m not sure that the Republican party has come to terms with that yet. But they are just deluding themselves. He’s DOA for many reasons but the biggest of which is that he that he voted against his constituents on the immigration issue. That was a HUGE deal here. And it was enough for a challenger to hope for a miracle in the next election. This is just the nail in his coffin.
Look, for a Democrat to even have a prayer of making Senator in this state, A Republican challenger would pretty much have to chop up live babies on TV.
Just for the record, when he actually voted against the immigration issue, I mentioned to my husband that Mike Roger’s allegations must be true and that there must be more. And now, look at the time line. He goes to a bathroom that, according to today’s paper, was a popular meeeing spot for an online website. Thus it is possible that a meeting was pre-arranged. That was June 11. He returned, June 22 and personally asked who his lawyer should speak to. (Hmmm…how hard would it be for your lawyer to call and find out himself?) On June 28 he voted against his constituents on the immigration issue, an act nothing short of political suicide.
I know that my inference of blackmail will not be well met in this site, but it certainly is a possiblity in Craig’s case. Look - it’s not about him being gay, but about him being a complete and total faimly values hypocrite. I’d be saying this same thing if the rumors had been about him cruising parks or truck stops for female hookers.
Comment by Becky — August 29, 2007 @ 3:11 pm - August 29, 2007
Frankly, I’m glad this is a big deal for Republicans. Nice to know at least one party has some standards.
Comment by V the K — August 29, 2007 @ 3:14 pm - August 29, 2007
Becky, I would not be surprised in the least to find out that it was blackmail. Mike Rogers has already publicly stated that he will blackmail Senators for votes, and he has direct connections to leftist Democrats like John Conyers and Louise Slaughter.
That being said, even if it IS blackmail, Craig needs to be gone, and it sounds like you, the voters, will take care of that if he doesn’t.
Comment by North Dallas Thirty — August 29, 2007 @ 3:42 pm - August 29, 2007
Let me get this straight, a Senator with a wedding ring worn so long that he can’t get it off without surgery, 3 kids out of the house and grown, numerous grandchildren, claims stringently in the most public and direct way imaginable that he isn’t - I’m sorry if that means the Senator is gay, then everyone of you people are flaming corksuckers.
Try and deny it.
Who the hell passes that litmus test?
Pull your heads out of your collective buttes and smell the coffee. You are handing the democrat/socialist party a veto on the Republican legislator of their choice by buying into another witchhunt.
Comment by papertiger — August 29, 2007 @ 4:34 pm - August 29, 2007
“Nice to know at least one party has some standards.”
Thus writes the first to abandon the GOP when it disappoints him.
Comment by HardHobbit — August 29, 2007 @ 5:12 pm - August 29, 2007
and was molested by his priest
Except that he’s Methodless.
Not if she shot Bill. Just about anyone else, but definitely not Bill.
If she did, I would bet money on a spike in necrophilia.
I am disgusted with this ugly sex police label that liberals are attempting to attach to us,
If you can’t beat ‘em, smear ‘em. Or register the dead.
BTW, if Hillary did shoot Bill, how many states do you suppose he’d vote in during the following election?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 29, 2007 @ 6:27 pm - August 29, 2007
“Mike Rogers has already publicly stated that he will blackmail Senators for votes, and he has direct connections to leftist Democrats like John Conyers and Louise Slaughter”
- interesting, weren’t the two Johns, (McCain and Conyer) the first to come out and say Craig should resign? I could be wrong about Conyers, but I’m pretty sure I heard that on the radio today.
The reason I find that interesting was that McCain, like Craig took a stance ont the immigration bill that was poison for them politically. It has been written and said that McCain’s stance on immigration ruined his chances to get the Republican nomination for President.
Additionally, I was, before this hoopla, listening to a local show here in Boise, and they had an aide ..or staffer..can’t remember .. of Craigs and they asked him what the hardest thing had been in his job to date, and he responded that it was “explaining” to the good people Idaho the nuance of the immigration bill and why they were just too stupid to realize that it was good for them. Ok, I’m paraphrasing a bit. But what amused me about his comment at that time was that he was using EXACTLY the same talking points I heard McCain use in a TV interview shortly before that.
I’m not making any claims that McCain is gay. I’m just saying that it is interesting that Roger’s named connections to Conyers and McCain and they were the FIRST to come out and ask for Craig to resign. May be it’s something, maybe it’s nothing. I’m just musing online.
Comment by Becky — August 29, 2007 @ 6:58 pm - August 29, 2007
Unless Mike Rogers has a thing for getting his burrito stuffed with beans (so to speak) like the cop in that Gore Vidal novel, I can’t see why he’d blackmail Larry “Wide Stance” Craig into voting left on an immigration bill. No, that was probably just a sop to big business contributors dressed up in faux-tolerant anti-bigtory drag; just like all the other Amnestistas.
Comment by V the K — August 29, 2007 @ 7:16 pm - August 29, 2007
“No, that was probably just a sop to big business contributors dressed up in faux-tolerant anti-bigtory drag; just like all the other Amnestistas.”
No amount of money - not a gazillion dollars - would change the fact that Craig’s vote on immigration was political suicide in this state.
Comment by Becky — August 29, 2007 @ 7:24 pm - August 29, 2007
That is true. And as John McCain shows, it’s not just suicide in Idaho. Considering Hillary and Obama both voted to extend amnesty to illegal alien felons and gang members, if the Republicans can’t make hay out of that, they deserve to be beaten.
Comment by V the K — August 29, 2007 @ 8:46 pm - August 29, 2007
Everytime I see “Larry Craig” on my computer screen now, I have this strange visualization of that kooky neighbor/sex fiend from “Three’s Company.”
We really need to start talking about a new subject…..
Comment by Bruce (GayPatriot) — August 29, 2007 @ 9:28 pm - August 29, 2007
We need to purge him and pretend he was never a republican.
Or he could switch parties and the be opened with welcome arms from the democrats.
Comment by stew — August 29, 2007 @ 11:10 pm - August 29, 2007
#34
You mean Larry or Mr. Furley?
TGCPartner told me that “Larry” was in I Now Pronounce You Chuck & Larry, but I wasn’t paying that close attention.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 29, 2007 @ 11:24 pm - August 29, 2007
[...] since October, when people like Instapundit were defending him. Meanwhile, Gay Patriot has an appropriate reaction. And The Malcontent, as always, has a big smirk on its collective [...]
Pingback by A Second Hand Conjecture » News Brief, What's A Sober Edition? — August 30, 2007 @ 12:30 am - August 30, 2007
[...] Gay Patriot blog: And then last night at a work event, I turned to a colleague who is also politically-connected and [...]
Pingback by Republicans Flushed With Anger Over Craig Men’s Room Scandal » The Moderate Voice — August 30, 2007 @ 4:16 am - August 30, 2007
*Chandra Levy and Mary Jo Kopechne could not be reached for comment.
Comment by Will (American Elephant) — August 30, 2007 @ 5:57 am - August 30, 2007
#38
“One of us, one of us! Gooble gobble, gooble gobble!”
Comment by ThatGayConservative — August 30, 2007 @ 12:46 pm - August 30, 2007
So I guess he’ll be heading to “The Ted Haggard Academy Towards Heterosexuality in 3 Weeks”!!
‘With courses like:
Reverse Penis Envy 101
Bearded Clams: Yummy
How to Love the Hotdog Roll, While Avoiding the Hotdog
Holding Rolling Pins,while Hating the Feeling
Vagina,Why Not?
Comment by Disgusted American — August 30, 2007 @ 4:23 pm - August 30, 2007
This is hilarious. I can’t wait to see what Craig can do to make a bad situation even worse. He is incredibly resourceful in that regard.
Oh the Schadefreude of it all!
Comment by Houndentenor — September 5, 2007 @ 3:55 pm - September 5, 2007