Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Kevin McCullough :: Townhall.com Columnist
Why Senator Craig is right
by Kevin McCullough
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
 
Poll
Do you feel the leaked information from a global warming alarmist organization is meaningful?



Senator Larry Craig is either incoherent or incompetent – or both. His press conference on Tuesday afternoon was exactly the wrong thing to do - on nearly every level. And I for one do not believe that most of his story holds.

Save this one item, when he stated clearly, "I am not gay!"

I'm sure there was no merriment whatsoever in his life the preceding number of hours up to the press conference.

If he meant that was "not homosexual" that too is also likely.

Homosexuality is not a state of defined being. Rather on the best science man has gathered we understand it to be a series of emotions, feelings, desires, choices, and most importantly behavior.

The fact that he has maintained a marriage for as long as he has demonstrates that he has chosen heterosexual behavior for most of his life.

In stating blatantly his non-gayness he took an adamant stand that he had not engaged in homosexual behavior, he reiterated his previous line of the police misconstruing his actions, and that he was only trying to "make it all go away" in pleading guilty to something he attempted to argue that he did not do.

Then there is also the matter of the police reports.

But what person ever agrees to guilt for something they didn't do?

Who doesn't have the foresight to call counsel and request representation especially in this day and age in which such allegations against a conservative will always be used as a whip to beat the living daylights out of the "moral values" section of the political right? Furthermore who doesn't even inform his wife of the nature of such allegations three months previous so that she is not "shocked and devastated" when the mainstream liberal media acts predictably and begins the assault on this person?

At this point and time Senator Craig is damaged beyond repairable good to his party, his constituents or to conservatives.

I was asked by the Lovely Bride Tuesday afternoon as I was preparing to discuss this on CNN that evening, "Why would he vote in favor of marriage all those times? Doesn't that perpetuate the blogosphere's claims that he is a self-hater?"

Perhaps but think about it like this...

The man represents a socially and morally conservative state. The expectations of the voters in Idaho were that he would vote to defend marriage. Surely this makes sense then that if he is only acting out on his homosexual inclinations in secret - he would raise no finger to stop the protection of marriage. Forget being a self-hating homosexual, his primary concern was to get re-elected.

The Senator's claim that the Idaho media or the Statesman in particular are out to get him falls flat. Every politician, particularly socially conservative politicians are targeted for every move they make. From reading the Statesman's expose, coupled with the police report it seems more unlikely that the Senator is telling the truth.

But… again… who pleads guilty to something they did not do?

On the rarest of occasions, like Jesus Christ on the cross for the sins of mankind, has someone taken the guilt for another but in the Senator's case what evidence of honor or valor did he exhibit. By his own verbal rationale it was to "keep things quiet."

If I were to be accused of anything close to this level of poor judgment/sin I would be shouting my innocence from the rafters. I would have demanded my attorney to be present. I would have made life so uncomfortable for the arresting officers and everyone else involved that hell would literally have frozen over before I copped to something I hadn't done.

I was asked on CNN if I felt this would rip the GOP apart. I said something similar to what I said concerning Mark Foley, "sexual deviants can't hurt the principles of the GOP."

Conservatives, particularly faith-based conservatives, expect the GOP to sheriff out the miscreants among its ranks. Liberals have no moral standards thus making it nearly impossible for a liberal to ever be accused of being a hypocrite. That also explains why they celebrate an adulterous President, push the most radical of sexual agendas upon the masses, and mock the aberrations of the other side.

Conservatives do have standards, expectations, and accountability.

Senator Larry Craig is certainly correct when stating that "he was not gay," but he is also proving to not be very smart either.

And the good people of Idaho and the nation deserve better.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Kevin McCullough is the nationally syndicated host of "'Xtreme' Radio and columnist based in New York. He blogs at www.muscleheadrevolution.com. His second book "The Kind Of MAN Every Man SHOULD Be" is in stores now.

Be the first to read Kevin McCullough's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com delivered each morning to your inbox.

the lady doeth protest too much...
Kevin seems to have his story all ready for when he gets caught soliciting gay sex in a bathroom. I doubt this is a coincidence.

KMC doesn't want the truth
I like how KMC is ADAMANT that Craig is not gay. ADAMANT.

Craig may have been "outed" many times before for this very behavior of tapping his shoes to entice strange men in public restrooms for the sole purpose of a gay liason - BUT HE IS NOT GAY (according to Kev - for he would know, yes?)

And why, pray-tell, would Kevin KNOW Craig's not gay? Because, dear wingnuts, to admit that the man is gay would mean having to admit to hypocrisy. There have been far, far too many GOPpers who have railed against gay marriage and gay lifestyles who been arrested for lewd, GAY behavior in public places.

You can't make this stuff up. Unbelievable.

Skinnywhiteboi values
Strange but Skinnywhiteboi uses the same argument that those who accuse the church of being full of hypocrites. I can guarantee it's not full but where else would you find a hypocrite but in church. Where there are values there can only be hypocrisy....but wait, how can they judge, when they have no values or maybe what they exhibit are anti-values. What's so strange, instead of pointing at cruising in a public restroom as reprehensible, they focus on those with family values. Conservatives never pretended that those in their party were perfect, they just believe that society, for it's own good, should follow certain mores' because it's right and therefore good for society. When we are in war time, when our elected leaders best judgment must be available at any given moment, we want adults occupying those offices, not cruisers sliming the office with their bad behaviors. What if Bill Clinton had been focusing on bin Laden like he said he was, instead of Monica? You never know what kind of world we might be in right now?

As I've said on another thread...
Ad hominem attacks aren't cool, whether levied by or against the left or the right. They shouldn't be levied against Mr. McC -- let's debate his columns on facts and ideas rather than innuendo and suggestion -- and they should be levied *by* KMC against his usual whipping boy, "the liberals".

To make a statement like "Liberals have no moral standards" is to believe in a fantasy world where the only good guys are the people who have the exact same worldview as you, and it also requires demonizing a vague, undefined straw man. As I've stated many times, I'm no fan of the left and I'm no fan of intrusive government (from a "conservative" or a "liberal" standpoint), but I do not believe in ad hominem attacks on either side.

Ultimately, we're best served by a true, intellectually-based, open, honest, genuine *debate* of *issues*, not finger-pointing, generalization, stereotyping, mass-blaming, ad hominem criticism, or demagoguery (have I covered everything?). We get enough of the bad stuff on Air America and Rush Limbaugh. Let's make this forum something a bit more substantive.

Kevin McCullough
has a tendency to go too far. I have never believed that homosexuality is a chosen lifestyle. Who would decide that they wanted to live a lifetime of being ridiculed and despised? Who would simply wake up one day and say "Oh, I know what I'll do. I'll be a homosexual".


That is nonsense. I have absolutely no use whatsoever for the political campaign of homosexuals to force acceptance of homosexuality as being as normal as heterosexuality. I detest their presence in the schools inducing children to accept homosexuality.


No, that lifestyle is not one that anyone would choose. It is a compulsion. I think it is sick. It is disgusting for homosexual men to go to public toilets to solicit sex with strangers. For Larry Craig to do that is insane. Especially since he had been accused of being homosexual in the past, and denied it.


No, this guy was operating compulsively. Now don't get me wrong. I am not excusing him. I think he is nuts, but my real problem with him has nothing to do with his perversion.

Cont.




pleading
I know that someone can plead gulity to something they did not do, as I did in order to stop the harassment and costs involved in fighting.

My attorney told me that you are guilty until proven innocent in this town, and I believed him, and I have suffered for fifteen years because of my choice.

I have been told that our judicial system is set up to plea bargin, so in essence it is made for people to say they are guilty to a lesser crime, and that this is normal, so I do not understand how the author arrives at his conclusion.

Kevin McCullough, continued.
Larry Craig tried to push amnesty on the American people. When that backfired on him and his turncoat buddies, including George Bush, he ran right out and started screaming about closing the borders.


While I think homosexuality is disgusting, it is no where near as disgusting as the flip flop he, and that idiot from South Carolina, Lindsay Graham have done since we forced them to back off of "Comprehensive Immigration Reform". (What a B.S. misnomer. It was about ILLEGAL immigration, and it has to be defeated, not reformed). They believe that the voters are dumb enough to forget what they did. I sure hope they are wrong.


I feel like throwing up when I see this mutt trying to lie his way out of this jackpot. I will be glad to see the creep go. That people like him govern the rest of us is frightening and outrageous.

who pleads guilty to something they did
I assume quite a few people plead guilty for something they did not do. When faced with a choice between fighting, taking a small penalty, and taking a huge penalty, many people weigh the odds and risks then choose the small penalty.

Did Craig plead guilty out of fear, or was he really guilty? It is hard to say. It is more likely that he was trying to hush things up and was guilty of something, because politicians are accustomed to confrontation and fighting.

Craig's life after politics?
Don't care. But he's done. As has been hashed out in these pages time and time again, Democrats are permitted this sort of behavior, and Republicans are not. When the former commit indiscretions, they advance to the leadership; when Republicans do it, they are dead to the rest of us. Craig is now dead. He's just forgotten to fall down.

Craig's term expires in 2009, but he must resign now, without any delay -- except maybe out of consideration for Idaho election laws. Idaho has a Republican governor who may or may not be permitted to appoint an acting senator to serve out the term. The Idaho electorate is reliably conservative, and will likely send some right-minded replacement to the US Senate next year or sooner if a by-election is required.

All this nonsense about who is gay and how you tell is completely beside the point. The only information that would be useful now would be from someone knowledgeable in the subject of Idaho politics and election law. Who is Craig's replacement, and how will he achieve that post?

Kevin McCullough, Cont.
Larry Craig is one of the turncoats who tried to force amnesty on the American people. I find the thought of men going into public toilets to engage in perverted sex disgusting. What really disgusts me is Larry Craig joining that other turncoat, lindsay Graham in trying to outdo each other in screeching about closing the borders.


They must have absolute contempt for the American people. They will be submitting bills one after the other. They will be making speeches on the floor from now until they have to run for office again. That they would try this kind of shabby, transparent crap is an insult to the voters.

The rest of the politicians are going to race each other in trying to throw Craig under the bus. It couldn't happen to a more deserving guy. He is guilty as charged, and he is an extremely bad liar. We certainly need better liars in Washington. Right?

Kevin McCullough continued error.
I think I just entered two continuations to my post. After the first part that I submitted the second half didn't come up. I thought it was lost so I did it again. I meant everything I said though.

Larry Craig's not-so-excellent adventure
Well, it sure didn't sound from Craig's press conference today that he was going to resign. It did sound as though he was dreaming, though, in expressing a wish to withdraw his plea, made in June.

Anyone who doubts his guilt should read the arresting officer's report. A slam dunk case, to quote another official

While they're at it, they should listen to Larry's comments when he denied affairs with House pages and the "outing" page that had him soliciting sex from strangers in bathrooms. He certainly is "a married man," much as were Reps. Michael Huffington and Ed Schrock and Governor Jim McGreevey.

After McCain's co-chair in Florida (state Rep. Bob Allen), Giuliani's southern states' rep., Sen. David Vitter are outed, and now Mitt's Idaho guy, it's starting to look like a pattern.

McCulloch - camper than a row of tents
Isn't it strange how many people who spend a large proportion of their time thinking and talking about what gay people get up to turn out to be homosexuals themselves? I think McCulloch should change the subject - he's totally obsessed with what homosexuals get up to. Personally I don't give a monkeys what they get up to, so long as they aren't breaking any laws - which Craig was. I think McCulloch should come out of the closet - he'd be much happier - living your life as a repressed, bitter, self-loathing homosexual can't be much fun. Come on Kev, not everyone on Townhall would hate you for it...

Skip,
Some people also do choose to be Jews, who are also ridiculed and worse.

Sillywhiteboi,
Yes, you've listed all Republicans.
But I also notice your list has only men named.
What conclusion, then, shall we draw about men?

Gentlemen,
Yes, it does start to look like a pattern..........all men.

The GOP's Gay Problem....
What none of us want to talk about is that the GOP has a serious gay problem, and that over the past 30 years we have been seduced by a lot of people who have kept their true selves (not just sexualities) in the closet.

The amnestyscam is just part of it, spending like drunken sailors is just part of it, and pulling defeat from victory in '06 is just part of it. And all these gay sex scandals is just part of it.

We are led by false prophets. We need to remove them. And heaven forbid that we get Mitt Romney as a candidate as his minions are perhaps the most RINO of all RINOs.

Go Thompson/Gingrich 08!

If I had been busted in the boys' room
I am quite certain that I would be screaming for an internal affairs investigation of the officer and demanding legal counsel and probably filing federal civil rights charges and heaven knows what else.

If I was to be arrested in a bathroom for soliciting sex, I would be so shocked that I would probably do something truly stupid. Because I would have been using the bathroom for, as the arresting officer wrote in his report, "its intended purpose."

And I am quite certain that I am not gay.

Senator Craig Protests Innocence
My thoughts remain that I am an exclusive heterosexual, not because I engage in sexual relationships exclusively with women, but because my years of celibacy cannot and will not and do not change the fact that my imagination fails at any other efforts. I was born this way.

Likewise, my life experiences strongly suggest that homosexuals, especially men, are genetically disposed to this strange prediliction. Prior to puberty, how can children quite explicitly display sexual preferences? These "signals" might be rather subtle, but am I the only person on this continent who somehow recognized some of his gradeschool playmates were, "different?"

If anyone can refer me to some peer reviewed work, I would be grateful.

Seems to me
that while Conservatives might be the ones to bring up the subject of a prominent person's sexual peccadilloes it's always the liberals who have the most say about it and use the subject to "prove" how twisted conservatives are. It isn't long before the comments on columns here degenerate into an incoherent shout fest.
Shouldn't the issue here be how this affects Sen. Craig's ability to represent his constituency rather than is he- isn't he or who is more homophobic?
Personally I don't care if any given person is heterosexual, homosexual, celibate or any and every thing in between simultaneously. What I want to know is; can he/she/it get the job done. Any job, not just this one.

What a hypocrite
Craig deserves everything he gets. Man who has dedicated his public life and legistlative history to persecute those who dare to live openly as gay while himself leading miserable life in closet (place where republicans would love to put all gays). He knew that being openly gay republican is a political suicide in aprty that has been hijacked by religious right and hatemongers like McCullough. So this weasel goes into hiding, marries a "wife" who is a mere prop and continues gay bashing because it's what gets his elected.

Man without any decenecy or personal courage. Typical lying republican.

And about democrats: they wouldn't have used their position to gay bashing in order to hide who they are.

Never thought he would be caught
For every senator, football player, movie star and other public person, the real underlying belief of every one who is caught seems to be that “I will get away with it.” People who have lots of money and positions of power believe that evrything can be Fixed, Hushed Up, Made To Go Away. Just listen to Michael Vick, who threw away more money than any ten of us combined will make in a lifetime because he thought he would never be caught, and if caught he would never be convicted.

None of them are prepared for the day they are caught, and hence the stuttering, stumbling and rambling in public when they are.

Purplegimp...
I like this quote: "Personally I don't care if any given person is heterosexual, homosexual, celibate or any and every thing in between simultaneously. What I want to know is; can he/she/it get the job done. Any job, not just this one". If mos conservative voters thought this way, then perhaps fewer of their politicians would be in the closet; and such issues, while occurring with seeming regularity, would not come as such a shock.

Aren't we all just a little bit...
I'll bet he's not gay - he's about to lose his job!

Kev says it's ok to enjoy some man-love on the side, as long as you're "mostly" heterosexual you can still actively oppose gay rights.

I agree that one episode of consentual cottaging (hey, who hasn't) does not make a horse's hoof out of you, but Kev is trying to confuse being gay with being a hypocrite. Craig lied to his electorate and his wife (you know, the person who allowed him to give the impression that he is "mostly heterosexual"). It's the hypocracy that reflects so negatively on the GOP, not the gayness or lack thereof.

Kev's attitude raises questions about the morality of conservative gayness. Kev drives a distinction between being gay and engaging in homosexual acts. Which is better? I imagine living with a decorator is useful, and you're always both horny, but I don't see myself developing a taste for the rampant elephant-in-the-room anytime soon.

Kev seems to have the opposite view, that jumping the pizza delivery guy is fine as long you don't end up living together. Or would living together be fine as long as you never actually admitted that you were - you know - playing hide-and-seek mit der bratwurst (bitten sie nicht, sagen sie nicht).

I'm confused (but curious). Where does this strange duality come from? Admiration for the Spartans? Alexander the Great? The realization that there are probably many more "mostly heterosexual" GOP leaders who need pro-active damage control? I'd hate to think that illicit gay sex is something limited only to conservatives.

Duck writes:
If Craig were a democrat
none of this would matter. It would be swept under the rug and forgotten post haste.

No, if he were a dem he would be celebrated and wind up on the talk show circuit like McGreevey. The real hypocrites are dems who push this perversion on the rest of us then make an issue out of Craig. Unlike the lady killer Kennedy Craig won't be re-elected. He misrepresented himself to his voters and should resign now. Only dems see this type of behavior as career enhancing. Jerry Studds, Barney Frank, Gov McGreevey, Bill Clinton, Mel Hall, All Kennedy males; have I left anyone out. When Republicans do this they are gone. Who are the real hypocrites?

more dark liberal thinking...
from liberals who would rather curse the darkness than find the light...

One Version of Term Limits
Man, is this term limits thing working, or what? Craig has a swiss cheese story. And he pulled a card from up his sleeve; he flipped his "business" card, that identified him as a Senator, at the cop and said "What do you think about that?" A common practice among the elites, Don't you know Who I am? routine. Hopefully the cop replied something like -- Now you have made my day. Is the rumor true that Craig is switching parties from Repub into the one that "loves" homos? How about a live-in bi-sexual homo to participate in the education of every child? What is wrong with that?

UnderStan
Naturally Kevin favors the otion of married men having some dish, male or female in the side. it's the conservative style, it's all about appearances after all. Hop into prostitutes like Vitter is just fine, hunt for sex in mens' room is also fine if you're republican...

Kevin McCulloughs and other hatemongers like him hate openly gay people, well adjusted and succesfull because their life threatens their prejudices and fearmongering. That's wy theyattack specifically gays who seek permament relationship, who raise families and who are contributing citizens to their communities. McCullough hates them but praises vicious closet cases like Craig... after all he hated the same people too. people with personal courage and dignity, who dare to live openly and boldly instead of letting hatemongers like McCullough to bully them into silence or fear.

And bullies like McCullough hate nothing as much as courage.

Roadkill
None of the politicians you mentioned made a career as a gay basher and been gay themselves. None of them. They didn't gat themselves a wife that was a mere prop to disguise their gauness like Craig did. they didn't base their political career on demeaning and defiling gays while cruising for gay sex in restrooms...

No, they are not hypocrites of the magnitude of Craig.

skinnywhiteboi
"skinnywhiteboi writes: Wednesday, August, 29, 2007 12:41 AM
Why, Oh why couldnt it have been Dobson?
Remember when the Republican party stood for smaller government and fiscal responsibility?

Social conservatives need to leave the Republican party and form The Leviticus Party."

QFT! Couldn't agree more.


With each passing day....
the more we need someone with integrity to head up the greatest nation on earth.

http://www.ronpaul2008.com

Well said, Van!
"Kevin McCulloughs and other hatemongers like him hate openly gay people, well-adjusted and successful because their life threatens their prejudices and fear-mongering."

Well said, indeed!

Let me add to that the argument that gays should not marry because they indulge in one-night stands. Well, sure some do! There's no encouragement to form long-term relationships!

Or homosexuals are evil because they are "fornicators" and have sex outside of marriage--which is not available to them.

Or homosexuals are acceptable so long as they're not "shoving it down our throats." (Love that particular phraseology!) Said shoving appears to mean: wanting to adopt, walk down the street holding hands or maybe even have a parade. Do the Irish "shove [their ethnicity] in our faces" by having a St. Patrick's Day parade?

Or homosexuals only want to be married so they can gain financial benefits, even though gay people are paying taxes to educate their offspring?

And well said too, Critical Bill! Of course our Kev is in the closet, though I had thought he'd found a boyfriend. Haven't had a gay-bashing article for a WHOLE WEEK!


Well said, Van!
"Kevin McCulloughs and other hatemongers like him hate openly gay people, well-adjusted and successful because their life threatens their prejudices and fear-mongering."

Well said, indeed!

Let me add to that the argument that gays should not marry because they indulge in one-night stands. Well, sure some do! There's no encouragement to form long-term relationships!

Or homosexuals are evil because they are "fornicators" and have sex outside of marriage--which is not available to them.

Or homosexuals are acceptable so long as they're not "shoving it down our throats." (Love that particular phraseology!) Said shoving appears to mean: wanting to adopt, walk down the street holding hands or maybe even have a parade. Do the Irish "shove [their ethnicity] in our faces" by having a St. Patrick's Day parade?

Or homosexuals only want to be married so they can gain financial benefits, even though gay people are paying taxes to educate their offspring?

And well said too, Critical Bill! Of course our Kev is in the closet, though I had thought he'd found a boyfriend. Haven't had a gay-bashing article for a WHOLE WEEK!


First, it's not there...
...then it's there twice.

Sorry folks.

El Negro Pero
to a Republican president who was too busy chopping wood at his ranch to pay attention to bin Laden - 9/11 is a republican holiday! Please explain that one,I dont get it.

I say
wait and see how this shakes out. Both sides of this case raises questions. We don't know what happened yet. If he's guilty...throw him out. Live by the sword-die by the sword.

Depends on what "gay" means
It seems to me that many of the commenters here are missing the play on words that Mr. McCullough is using. You can disagree with what he says, but his point about Senator Craig not being gay was not to refute his homosexuality, if that is what he is, but rather to point out his unhappiness (the original meaning of GAY being "happy and carefree", or have you all forgotten?)

Another reason no one uses "Huckleberry Finn" or "Tom Saywer" in the classroom anymore. Huck and Tom were always being "gay." It's meaning has been hijacked.

Craig should resign NOW
for the good of Idaho and the Republican Party. Idaho has a Republican Governor and he can appoint a replacement. Maybe even one who is a true conservative that supports border enforcement. It will also give the replacement enough time to get "incumbency status" which is gold in D.C.

Marriage no guarantee one is "straight"
Former democratic New Jersey governor McCreevey was married and yet is homosexual. He admitted it.

Just because someone is married does not mean he is always "straight".

But I don't much care if Craig is gay or not.

What bothers me is the way he handled this episode.

I guess it is hard to be honest about being gay if representing a state like Idaho. I have nothing against the state, or its people. I am sure they are fine Americans. But our pal Barney Frank can openly operate as a gay congressman because he is from a very liberal state.

I don't even see any hypocrisy when a secretly gay senator votes against federal law permitting gay marriage, or civil unions. He may believe such unions are not in the best interest of the nation, or may believe each state should decide that issue.

This revelation cannot do the GOP any good in the national elections, but when Craig resigns(which I think he will), his replacement will still be a republican.

Some of you are repellent
Seriously. Some of you are the lowest of the low. No comment on the article itself, no comments regarding the situation. I suspect most of you are simply bitter homosexuals who get their jollies out of accusing someone of the lifestyle about which you apparently feel so much shame.

"Hey lets accuse a married writer of being gay because we don't like what he's saying".

Clearly, some of YOU fit the profile.

senator craig
Well ,,the way I see it ..screwing aroung with homosexuals in public toilets is the good senators forte..He just got caught..again...
now he is making matters worse for himself by comming up with all these transparent lies....
He needs to admit that he is bisexual, step down,
give his loyal wife the divorce she deserves and go live live in public toilets...that seems to be what he really likes..
Mogas

Senator Craig
Senator Craig obviously isn't gay or his partners would be coming out of the woodwork. One person claiming intimate contact years back smells all the way to Oklahoma but that's the way the ultra liberal homosexual gay crowd works. The sad part is the masses don't understand the mind games the left blogosphere play.

That begs the question is Senator stupid? Obviously he was smart enough to get elected. That doesn't make him worldly. Which is exactly what is wrong with the majority of our senators and congressmen. They never had to work for a living or live in the real world. Our whole country is being run by men and women who have never experienced any other life besides living in the rare air of politics.

Our nation is is trouble and has been since the fifties as more and more politicians were elected who never got their hands dirty doing a honest days work. Passing laws and spending other people's money is means nothing to these people. They have no concept of what those laws are actually doing or where money comes from when one has to work for it.

Is Senator Craig gay? I don't believe it. Is he ignorant? Probably no more than 99% of the people in congress.
always,
Barb

Purplegimp, bostguy112, el negro pero
Pero argues: :Liberals care about people - about dropping bombs on children - about citizens too poor to afford medical care or food - you know, all the stuff Republicans ridicule and/or ignore... When oh when are liberals going to stop making this argument? Liberals have hearts, Republicans don't. I don't see what this argument has to do with a person, Repub or Dem, soliciting gay sex in a bathroom. Apparently libs don't mind throwing the Repubs under the bus for this sort of behavior, so where's the love?
Purplegimp has made the best point on this post: does it affect Craig's ability to get his job done. I would argue that when Craig is living a lie, that his character is not suitable to hold a position of great power and responsiblity at this level of our government. Remember the campaign in our public schools, "Character counts". Well, it counts in politics as well.
Bostguy112 wants to know if this kind of behavior violates the law. Let me ask him the other question: Do you want this kind of behavior in public bathrooms to be acceptable? Is this what a public bathroom is for? Since the Senator was charged with disorderly conduct, I would say there is not a more specific statute, or else he plea bargained to a statutory crime that did not mention immoral acts in the title of the law. It gives him plausible deniability in his eyes. I agree with the poster who said he needs to resign now. This is disgusting behavior from one who purports to be a conservative, and his flipping his ID card at the police officer is infuriating (I'm above the law so leave me alone). Guys like him think we the people serve him. He needs to go home and contemplate the notion that as a public servant he is supposed to serve us, at our pleasure. And we no longer get any pleasure in his service. Goodbye Mr. Craig.

CONSERVATIVE V. REPUBLICAN
Conservative and Republican ARE NOT SYNONYMOUS!!!!

The Republican Party is made up of two very different species that have little in common:

1. Big business and big money Republicans. They may be for less regulation, lower taxes, and strong national defense, but are liberal on cultural issues. Many have attended top tier universities and have traveled outside the United States. They are likely to be enchanted with foreign cultures and want open borders. They are and have been known by terms such as blublood, country club, establishment, moderate, Rockefeller, and more recently RINO (Republican In Name Only). These people have the ability to buy control of the Republican Party. They are the people who give the Republican Party a bad name.

2. Conservative base, made up of people who are mostly not wealthy and believe in Judaeo-Christian values. They want more than just having more money in their pockets. They want smaller, less intrusive government, the right to choose, within their financial means, the house they live in, the kind of car they drive, the food they eat, and they want say-so as in their children's education. They believe that marriage is between a man and a woman and oppose abortion on demand. They value preserving American sovereignty and oppose amnesty for illegal aliens. The true blue conservatives are largely ineffective and ignored. Only when well-heeled RINOs go down to defeat, one after another, does anybody seem to notice.

Too many people who are hostile to the values of the conservative base have been joining the Republican Party because they want lower taxes and less regulation.

Look away now!
"What if Bill Clinton had been focusing on bin Laden like he said he was, instead of Monica? You never know what kind of world we might be in right now?"

Focused? What would he need to focus on exactly? I find it's best to clear one's mind... The way these things usually go down (c'mon!) is that the person with the genitalia in their mouth ends up managing (or at least dealing with) launch control and ballistics. The recipient generally has very little to do, though not being quite so liberal with the sauce would have been a good idea in hindsight.

Whatever, I'm quite glad he wasn't "focusing" on bin Laden. Can you imagine Ken Starr proudly brandishing a hank of beard? I can, but I wish I hadn't...

Nearly right, yavapaidiane
Your sentence "They are the people who give the Republican Party a bad name" is in the wrong section.

Also, there's a lot of folk who want smaller government who believe that should include whom one marries, and what a woman does with her body.

Smaller government
that focuses on people's bedrooms, women's right to decide about their own body, finding new innovative ways to discriminate against gays and restrict their freedoms and rights to liberty and pursuit of happiness, censorship of books, movies, television and written word, phonetapping in the name of national security. Small government that forces everyone to subject themselves uder the tyranny of judeo-christian beliefs and constant monitoring and cotrol of public behavior, speech and dress.

very small government, constantly in your home and in your bed.

That is what social conservatives want.

Rand"y
i didnt ask if it violates the law, clearly it does. i was asking if its ok or not. I was thinking the liberal / gay posters might mount (sorry) a defense of it due to it being consenting adults. Also due to it (seemingly) being engaged primarily by gay - bi or closeted men. Thats also why i said it would happen with only the 2 men in there. No kids or straight men etc. I am really curious to see if some would say its ok. If they want to be consistant with the 2 consenting adults mantra then they should say its ok , wouldnt you think?

GOP Married to Social Conservatives
Firstly, soliciting sex in a bathroom is reprehensible gay or straight. But it is curious how many Republican Conservatives with almost a rabid obsession with Sex in general and homosexuals in specific should themselves be gay if not gay dabble in things that they claim to be a moral abboration. That someone could be Gay and Conservative is is no contradition in fact I know many highly successful Gay individuals that identify with conservatives on so many issues from limited government, to personal responsibility, to a strong defense. But most of them are now members of the Blue party because they feel attacked and even threatened by Social Conservatives and their anti liberatarian view of the role of government.

So are people like Craig hypocrates. Yes and No. I am sure on most things positions and internal views are consistent. But when it comes to lifestyle issues he like every other politician takes positions that will allow him to get elected and to stay in office. The GOP has sold its sole to social conservatives and I believe that will ultimately relagate the party to permanent minority status. Republicans are correct when they say this is a slighlty right of center country. But is you break it down you will discover that the country is more right of center on traditional Goldwater type conservative values and maybe, but only slighly left of center on social values. We need a Republican tent that is wide encough to include liberatarian conservatives and fiscal conservatices with more socially liberal views.

Then maybe we would not get bashed again and again for being hypocrates.


Craig's Judgment
What legitimate journalistic purpose is served by the use of the word "liberal" in saying that Craig was "assaulted" by the "liberal mainstream press"? Any United States Senator who is found to have signed a guilty plea to a misdemeanor would be equally newsworthy. Is McCullough suggesting that the right-leaning media will tactfully ignore such news if it involves one of their own?

Craig is not my Senator and in any case I don't care whether a Senator is gay or not as long as he is a good Senator. But Craig showed shockingly poor judgment in 1) quickly signing the plea in the first place, and without legal counsel 2) assuming that pleading guilty to soliciting homosexual sex would "make [the charge, the publicity] go away" (for a US Senator?!) and 3) not consulting an attorney or even sharing this trouble with his wife.

Any Senator, red or blue, must have good judgment. Craig appears not to. And the thought does occur to me that such behavior as diddling in a public men's room and then agreeably signing a guilty plea could have been inspired by alcohol, notorious for impairing judgment.

Judaic-Christian values
are not tyrannical. They underpin The Dec. of Ind., the US Const., and the Eman. Proclamation.

Without them, there would be no such forums as TH. You don't have them in Muslim countries or China or Russia or Argentina (now).

Without them, there would be no 1st Amend. or civil rights legislation. Am. Jews in particular led the 20th mid-century civil rights movement in the North and South. They gave the lives of young men to back it. The churches of the US were centers of promoting the end of segregation in the South. Martin Luther King, Jr., was a minister. He campaigned from the pulpit.

Anti-Christians are also anti free speech and free expression, except for their own which they value extemely highly. Go to Cuba and see what your protest gets.

Roadkill58
Re "If Craig were a Democrat this would be forgotten...". Really? Every time Robert Byrd is mentioned on townhall somebody responds "Ku Klux Klan". Every time Ted Kenney is mentioned on townhall somebody responds "Chappaquiddick". Every time Bill Clinton is mentioned on townhall somebody responds "Monica Lewinsky". It's like Pavlovian slobbering. And when there hasn't been a scandal regarding a Democrat, one is thoughtfully invented by right-wing PR people, ie Dean is insane, Hillary is a lesbian, and Kerry is a (pick one) liar, coward, traitor.

The man is obviously
a nit wit! Who pleads guilty to a crime they did not commit? Especially a crime of this nature? I don't really care whether he is gay or not. He obviously lacks judgement though to be a Senator and is the poster boy for what is wrong with DC in general.

el negro pero
Since your brought up binLaden, and what it has to do with this topic is beyond me, just how much attention did clinton pay to binLaden? Was he not offered up to him at least twice?
If clinton was so fixed on binLaden and fighting terrorism why did he decimate our military.
But you know what, you sucked me in as only a lib can, let's stick to the topic at hand.

The left is the party of hypocrites, they profess to be forgiving, loving, accepting. That is for anyone except a fallen Republican. This guy will resign unlike studds and frank. Wasn't studds treated to a standing ovation by his party? Wasn't he the one who told the entire country to mind their own business? Was it known that he was gay or did he try to hide it?
Didn't frank run a male escort service out of his Washington office?
Both sides have a fair share of people like this, you accept and appalaud, while we count on ours to hopefully do the right thing.

McGreevy was a Dem.
In his list of "outed" people, a blogger here includes Jim McBreevy as a Rep. He was a Dem. I don't know or care about the other people. What sex practices anyone has is his/her own business, just don't make it mine. McGreevy was a corrupt, greedy, miserable governor. His "gayness" was his excuse.

Renny
Google Reverend Fred Phelps of Topeka, KS , another minister who campaigns from the pulpit. As the old song teaches us, "ever'body talkin' 'bout heaven ain't goin't there".

lilly, you forgot
studds & frank. I do believe the poster was pointing to the msm and the entire left in reference to "being forgotten."
Admit it, lil, the left get away with, well, with a lot.
Read other sites and you will see nothing but right wing, conservative bashing while there is not one story on any dem. Are we to really believe you guys are that good?
As for the list of players on the left, righeous mentions my dear.

This Is A Funnier Situation
than most conservatives are willing to admit.

The events clearly show that Republican power players have used social conservatives like a North Philly ho. But, even though they have been lied to and abused over and over by Republicans, they will still line up and vote the same folks every election, as long as the candidates repeat the key words. Commies. Gun Control. Gay Marriage.

Gay Schmay
Who cares what Craig's sexual conflicts are? He'll be voted out if he does not resign first.

Skip: You're correct--the real problem with Craig is his support of anmesty for illegal aliens. Good riddance to him.

Who pleads guilty to a
crime they didn't commit? A lot of people who don't have the money to fight it do. Our corrupt system has become a "plea bargain paradise". The DA is only interested in one thing, guilty pleas or convictions that can forward his career as a politician. Look at Nifong, he is a good example of the system, he just went a too far and his victims refused to "plea to a lesser crime". But then look what it cost them to fight what were clearly bogus charges. Some newspaper accounts have placed the price at over a million dollars. What would some other kid have done if their parents did not have the ability to raise that kind of money? Hey Hillary, why are you for nationalizing lawyer care?

And to those of you who are wondering what's wrong with this kind of activity, IT WAS A PUBLIC BATHROOM. Would you want your 7 year old child going in there to use the toilet why some guy is in the stall being "Monicaed"?

Ted Kennedy
lilly: Well, the bloated hustler AKA Ted Kennedy did KILL an innocent woman. Shouldn't it be brought up again and again since Ted got off scot-free? Killing someone is about as bad as it gets, isn't it?

I object....
to the ideas in some of the posts that state that social conservatives want to impose on people's behavior in bedrooms. The issue being discussed is lewd and objectionable public behavior. Socliciting sex and performing the act whether for self-gratification among consenting adults in a public restroom or purchased from a prostitute on a street corner is morally objectionable and legally prosecutable.
Get a grip folks...social conservatives won't drag you out of your berooms, but brazenly hooking up in public like ally cats needs to stop!

I have a 9yr old son- Git this filth...

...out of public restrooms. THAT is the problem with the GAY CULTURE! They have no decency. They want their disgusting PUBLIC behavior to be allowed and 'respected' by Americans- Sorry not gonna happen with me.

OUT'EM ALL! I'm sick of this shi*!

JOHN GALT

.....Rush Limbaugh does not engage in Ad Hominum attacks ...he engages in satire ...

.....listen and see if you can detect the difference ...if you cannot then you must be a Liberal because Liberals do not have a sense of humor ...hence hate speech codes etc. .....COLOSSUS

FOREST GUMP SAYS

.....Homosexual is as homosexual does ...

.....I guess the beef against Craig is that he denies being a homosexual ...if he flaunted it like Barney Frank ...then he would be commended for it ...at least by the Democrats .....COLOSSUS

BBdoc


"Rush Limbaugh does not engage in Ad Hominum attacks ...he engages in satire"

Right....

Craig a Homosexual?
70% of the men who molest boys rated themselves as heterosexual in their adult sexual preferences. These men are married, divorced, widowed, or living with an adult partner. 9% of those molesters who molest boys are equally heterosexual and homosexual and only 8% reported themselves as being exclusively homosexual (Abel & Harlow, 2001).

lack of precision in theses posts
Should this be a crime? It is said it is a public bathroom, yet it is not allowed to have cameras in there. If someone masturbates in stall, it is private act not visible to the public. Urinating and defecating are private acts if the door is closed. And if hanky panky takes places between 2 in he privacy of the stall, it should be nobody's business. If it is visible, then a different story.

Is someone who is successfully married and who visits a prostitute here and there, a "prostitue sicko"(i could not coin an equiavlant word like "gay"

WE care complicated creatures. To define someone by some particular act is to reify an act into an entity.

There is a difference between somone who has a successful marriage and here and there visits a prostitue; and someone who is not able to form wholesome relationships and only can relate to postitutes. One can make the same arguments to those who are successfully married and feel a compuslion here and theree to have hand jobs furtively.

The hypocrisy arguement is a separate issue for another post.
One should feel compassion for the person. Just imagine some creep across from your house videoed you masturbating at 16 or older? It should be nobody's business.

Senator Craig is Not Gay
Of course, that depends on the meaning of the word "is".

Senator Craig's Lisp
"Homosexuality is not a state of defined being. Rather on the best science man has gathered we understand it to be a series of emotions, feelings, desires, choices, and most importantly behavior."

That quote, right there, exemplifies the stupefying empty rhetoric of the pseudo-intellectual Right. Basic Limbaugh 101. Sounds smart to the choir, but ----- oh, my.

So - Kevin - what does that mean, huh?

BTW I don't like Loopy Liberals, either.


osthode
Thank you for pointing out that "gay" DOES have another meaning--its original meaning, no less. After reading numerous comments that totally missed that point, I began to think no one would ever note it.

What a testament to how thoroughly homosexuals have co-opted the word "gay"!! And to how shallow is the thinking of those obsessed with homosexuality.

Skinnywhite who? aka Weak-eyed recluse
Find these people, seek them out. They're a danger to the community. So, who has all that time spend to unearth, then to list sexual crap done by past politicals. Where's the list for Democrats? Republican party is to be acknowledged for taking on these issues, as they crop up. Graigs life, right now, can't hold any mirth for him. Larry Craig is not gay, if he's pulling the "...depends on what your meaning of is, is." card. My trusty M.Webster dictionary says gay is still used as an adjective. Now, if he'd said there is not any gayness in his life, well,now, easier for me to say he was lying through his teeth. Dopey article, here... infantile to say that Liberals have no morals. That's jr. high school yapping. I think Craig is a creep, but this article was a waist of this reader's time.

Don't get it
"Social conservatives need to leave the Republican party and form The Leviticus Party."

I don't understand this statement. Could someone explain what it means?

I'm serious. It appears that the person who wrote this thinks that the only place in the Bible that condemns homosexuality is Leviticus. Since this is demonstrably not the case, the statement above looks like nonsense.

Senator Craig
Senator Craig,

Word of warning; if you have a stained blue shirt in your closet, burn it now!

From "I Did Not Have Sex With That Cop"

On http://www.lisa-richards.com

Click on Senate Idiots for the entire column

Lisa Richards
http://www.lisa-richards@lisa-richards.com

hyporcrisy? No
Hypocrisy? I assume he is against gay marriage. So, what there are gays against it. Many who post here or if not here in the country have tried joints and still do here and there; yet they may think it not a good idea to legalize it. During prohibition, people who were supposed to enforce law imbibed, including the president FDR.
Hypocrisy would come in if Craig were a law enforcement officer and tried to do what was done to him while at the same he engaged in such. This is what made Clinton a hypocrite not the sex per se; but his govt enforcing perjury and obstruction on others who were caught like he was and under a law he signed.



Somebody Get Craig Some Butter
Because HE IS TOAST! I know he is innocent until proven guilty, but his actions speak of someone who is caught red-handed and is scrambling to find an excuse.

Innocent or Guilty, he should resign NOW! Idaho doesn’t deserve to be represented by a political cripple.

Notice all the tolerant, inclusive, open-minded, LIBERALS are the ones posting gay slurs. I would think they would be applauding. After all, he was practicing on of the 3 most cherished LIBERAL VALUES:

1. Promiscuity
2. Intoxication
3. Perversion

should he resign
That is practical matter as to damaging he might be to the party and how effective he might be.

It is not a moral matter.

Liberal hate speech
Anyone note the irony of so many liberals pulling out the hate speech against McCollough. The worst thing they can think to call him is a closet homosexual.

Real compassionate there.

These same hate-mongers also level the straw man arguments one after another. When was the last time that conservatives promoted some ban on private sexual behavior?

Social conservatives want less intrusions into their lives. But they also are nuanced enough to realize that social order is formed around the nuclear family, the very foundation of civilization. The libertarian may say "anything goes" but that ultimately leads to the disintegration of a society and thus, makes it ripe for a totalitarian take-over.

I prefer the middle ground of protecting our civilization while trying to maintain as little government intrusion into our private lives as possible.

sex on the brain
It is noteworthy that anything to do with sex bring the equivalent of emotional arousal equivalent to sex arousal.

Yet, is a politician is driving intoxictated as recent Kennedy's son, there is no cry to resigning. And yet such behavior is grossly irrepsonsible which can lead to death. But it does not have the emotional impact(except for those who lost loved ones by this behavior). It could be that many here have also driven with maybe one drink; hence, it is only a matter of degree and hence given a pass.
Endangering the life of others is the most serious crime; what Craig did is equiqvlent to a kid stealing a hershey bar.

Who pleads guilty?
My guess would be quite a few people plead guilty, they even have a name for it, "copping a plea". Most traffic violations that end up in defensive driving class started this way, either because the defendant doesn't have the money or can't afford the time to prosecute his innocence Many juvenile defendants also go this way for the same reasons, and also (often wrongly) because they think it won't append to their permanent record. It's my guess that the majority of "minor" altercations involving "law enforcement" are "plead" rather than dragged out through the courts. The reasoning is always, you can't beat city hall, and in most cases, if you have the cash, and the time, you frequently can. Fines and fee's have become the silent tax upon citizens, allowing local governments to wrest the funds from tax payers that they could not get through referendum, or based on the merits of their need. The fact that hardly anything ever goes to trial should serve as guidance to the author of this piece. Indeed, most consider it remarkable when something does run it's course through our courts, rather than the most customary "plea bargain". They did after all waive confinement in this case, thereby qualifying the "plea bargain" aspect. I doubt Craig sitting in the jug for ten days for copping a feel or hitting up a cop for some loving would have been any less devastating. Certainly the fact that the more involved this case got diminished the chances of coming out unscathed played some role in Mr. Craig keeping mum. I'd be more interested in the motivations of those who finally exploded the story. The fact that Larry Craig identified himself as a U.S. Senator could go either way in this case, people do weird things when they panic, and I see nothing to indicate that Larry Craig, pandering, self serving reptile that he is, did anything that most "heterosexuals" wouldn't have done if falsely accused.

The real demographic
Someone pointed out Republican perverts... then someone else pointed out that they were all male...

nobody has pointed out that they are all under 100 years old. In fact, I think all of those named are under 75 years old.

Now there's a demographic for perversion I can believe; all MODERN people.

I can barely turn on my television anymore without being exposed to massive amounts of perversion and propaganda. In the 60s the liberals started preaching about doing away with bigotry and stereotypes, but all they wanted to do was replace our culturally healthy bigotries and stereotypes with their own twisted, even perverted bigotries and stereotypes.

Of course, the biggest issue will be made of Craig's "hypocrisy". He wasn't a hypocrite, he was a liar and a fraud. IF the allegations are true. But he won't be condemned for that in the mainstream media. He'll be called a hypocrite instead.

Meanwhile, Barney Frank still holds office, still takes part in deliberations, still continues to be a sexual pervert. Does anyone other than me recall the homosexual prostitution ring scandal?

He is a liar and a hypocrite.
Denial ain't just a river in Egypt, Lar'.

Now GTFO my party.

Come clean
How many posting here have cheated during their marriage or if HS in a committed relationship cheated? How many here while married or having a girl friend have masturbated? How many here have looked at porn? And how many would desire to have it made public.

come clean
how many here have cheated on their wives or if HS cheated on steady boyfriend? How many in a committed relationship have masturbated and maybe to images other than their loved ones?
How may here have looked at porn be it 1 minute a week of 5 hours a week?
And if not yourself, what about friends and relatives you know and who you still have relationships with; that is you have not ex-communicated them from your friendship or if family members from your family?

for all the christians
Remember what Jesus said to Mary Mag. I see none of that here in this victimless crimes as was the prostitution of Mary Mag.

From liberals one might expect "gottcha", but from Christians?

Good to know
Having spent almost 45 years as a professional musician, a drummer, having traveled the world and this nation extensively, and being a certified heterosexual, I admit that on occasion, I've found myself absent mindedly tapping my foot to a "jaunty" Kenny G selection while reading the paper or waiting for a plane. It's good to know that tapping one's foot is now a clear come on to all those trolling for sick sex. America, rise up and dispatch relentless hell on all these toe tapping Nancy's, lest you succumb to their invidious wiles, or those of police officers! Hey, has anyone checked into the background of the cop involved? I mean after all, if a Senator might be a fruit, who's to say a cop, perhaps many cops, aren't? You know, come to think of it cops lead most jobs in the number of divorces, suicides, alcoholism, issues with their father, and their mother, and what about dressing up in those uniforms?,,,,HMMmmmmm, kinda makes you think, don't it?

El negor pero
Do you live in a cloister? IF not, you must be aware of many liberals who use illegal drugs recreationally yet support draconian drugs laws that leave many black people(i assume you are black) in prison. That does not bother you or at least to put up your silly post.

Just want to be clear on what you mean
"he NEVER hid is gayness - it's a big difference.."

So the "hiding" is the sin? Ah, I see. So Clinton, because he hid his perversions, really should have been removed from office after all? Jefferson from NOLA hid the $90K in his freezer so he should be removed from office?

Oh, and as I recall, Frank hid the fact that he had an illegal homosexual sex business running out of his home. So I gather that you El Negro Dog, would advocate that he be removed from office as well?

If not, then the "hiding" aspect of this that you so proudly point out, is just so much baloney.

In fact, the suggestion that people who advocate one thing and then do another should disqualify them from holding office is laughable. I will guarantee you that every legislator in Congress who voted for the national 55 mile speed limit violated that law at least once or twice. In fact, the Dems routinely violate the laws they advocate (the aforementioned sexual harassment laws come to mind).

If this is now the Lib threshold for being removed from office then fine, I'll sign on to that view right now.

Ried first, then Murtha, then...

I can't believe no one commented ...
... on what talisman wrote:
"I like how KMC is ADAMANT that Craig is not gay. ADAMANT."

Kevin was using the "real" meaning of the word, dude. Not the meaning co-opted by the homosexual crowd. It was tongue in cheek.

Geez, what an idiot.

LOL
Get rid of ALL the politicians who advocate one thing and do another. I am flat amazed, we would finally have what we have been wanting, instant term limits.

How about also including ALL politicians who promise one thing and do another, isn't that the same thing?

Hahahaha...read my lips, wooops that could be intepreted the same a "toe tapping".

el negro pero
I mentioned studds. I am well aware that frank was openly gay and ran a male escort service from his Washington office. I cannot attest to what was or is on craig's mind as far as how he voted. Perhaps he listened to his public and voted the way they wanted him to. See, I do not profess to know what is in someones mind or heart.
I stand by my statement. The left takes some perverse pleasure in any conservative scandal.
Read beetlebrox's last post. He brings up a good point. Did clinton hide his perversion?
Now, was studds openly gay??

Practice what you preach
What all these arguments boil down too, and I paraphrase "Practice what you preach, even if this isn't the audience your preaching to"!

El Negro Pero vomits onto the forum:
"Craig was that special breed of Republican - the closeted fagg who votes against gay interests. If you find a liberal who votes for, say, affirmative action, but attends skin head meetings on the weekends, i can promise you, the left will not forgive OR forget. As to barny Frank - he NEVER hid is gayness - it's a big difference..."

For instance if a leftist wags his class warfare and elitist environmentalist finger but then lives in a 28k sf mansion that eats the energy of a 100 families, we'll see other leftists crawling over each other to be the first to condemn, just like we're seeing here, right?

(crickets chirping)

I won't hold my breath.

Admit it. When a leftist RAT gets caught doing something, you couldn't care less other than whatever it takes to ignore/cover it up. When a conservative gets caught doing something, the selective moral outrage comes out because your hatred and political opportunism cannot be restrained. Right?

Right.

Admit what you are. It's not like everyone else doesn't already know.

Who cares
So Craig "may" be gay or bisexual. Perhaps he is just "gay curious".

So what? What does his sexual preference have to do with any national or international issues he should be devoting his attention to as a senator? Life goes on whether he is gay or not.

Hopefully he and his constituents will think twice before engaging in "gay" bashing. Not saying they ever have, but we should not hear a peep out of them on this topic now.

No hope for KMC however.

Who cares?
I fail to see why people are so focused on whether some one is gay or not. Homosexuals are people with a genetic defect, like hemophilia, downs syndrome, or hermaphrodites, they are not normal in this regard, their particular mutation runs counter to the survival of our species. Having said that they should not be despised for their condition any more than some one with sickle cell anemia. They should be treated the same as the rest of us with polite indifference.

Craig...
should reign immediately. His alleged behavior (and I believe the allegations) were not only disgusting, but super-hypocritical.

Having said that, does anyone seriously believe that he wasn't set up? First of all the cops admit it was a sting. Secondly, consider the thousands of men who use the restrooms at that airport every day. Thirdly, consider how many senators we have (100 last time I checked). Fourthly, consider how many of the 100 might be gay (maybe 10?). Now, of the ten, how many of them will be in that airport restroom at precisely the moment in time the cops are pulling a sting? And, how many of them would be stupid enough to fall into the trap? It just exceeds the laws of probability that the cop "just happened" to be in the stall next to Craig. The cops were tipped off. No question in my mind.

Did Craig do anything wrong?
I have a question for the liberal posters in here: did Craig do anything wrong, according to your moral standards, when he attempted to solicit sex in a mens room? Forget about his voting record or his job, just look at his conduct in the mens room: does it violate your moral standard, and if so, why?

Also, I would be curious as to how many liberals think that police should be targetting gay men with sting operations like this. If Barney Frank was the one who got busted, would you be launching a civil rights case on his behalf? Even as a conservative, the idea of have cops in the bathroom watching me is a bit disturbing. If I shake it more than three times would that be considered indecent?

Craig is most certainly the textbook example of a hypocrite. But is it not also a form of hypocrisy to attack someone for doing something that you don't even think is wrong?

for Beeblebrox
Beeblebrox writes: "It appears that the person who wrote this thinks that the only place in the Bible that condemns homosexuality is Leviticus."

OK, bad choice of names then.

Instead, let's rename the Republican Party to the Christian Married Heterosexual White Male Party. Because that accurately describes the majority of Republican voters.

And, as the 2010 Census will clearly show, it also describes only a minority of American voters.

And therein lies your conundrum. A Christian Married Heterosexual White Male Party is going to find it harder and harder to win elections in the more diverse electorate that America is becoming.

Craig
Did he actually commit a sexual act with the officer,or was he simply looking for a beej?If the latter is true why didn't he find a prostitute?I guess that every man that goes to an adult store and sticks his willy thru the hole is a homosexual,or is he simply looking for something his wife or girlfriend won't give him.As a senator he assumed that the laws didn't apply to him.

len
Jesus delivered Mary Magdalene from seven demons. He would not have gone to the trouble if he believed her life of prostitution was good for her. He forgave her sins and delivered her from a life of torment being a sexual slave to men's obscene lusts and he freed her to become one of his loyal disciples. You must have missed a few Sunday School lessons there bud.

healthy cells in a leper
that's what you describe, SteveL. Christian married heterosexual white males are increasingly becoming a minority of healthy cells in an increasingly leprous body.

gwco2skeptic
If he had been soliciting sex from a female cop in that same bathroom he could have been charged and pled guilty to the same crime. LEWD behaviour in public.

Come on, the charge is public behaviour, not private. Personally I don't care if he is a PP or not. I know that he is NOT a true conservative.

In any case, he pled guilty, therefore he most likely is guilty, therefore he should resign AND do it now, not drag it out for 6 months and get it into the election cycle.

SteveL
Why did you bring race into the discussion? Do you think that the skin color of Republicans is important?

In general introducing race into a discussion where it is not relevant is, by definition, racist.

Everybody!
Back in the closet!

Boy, did I ever not want to know all this about men's restrooms. Others have made the salient points here, so there's no need to rehash them (much):

1. This incident has not proven Craig to be a "hypocrite" in the sense suggested by left-wing critics. He may in fact be one, but this isn't the proof.

2. It doesn't matter to the valid political debate on "gay issues" if he IS a hypocrite. His character matters to the voters of Idaho, not to abstract evaluations of right, wrong, socially appropriate, empirically demonstrated, and feasible. He should resign, because soliciting gay sex in a men's room and then lying about it when caught are not what the voters of Idaho thought they were getting, in a senator.

This event does ram home the reality that parents of boys have to be concerned with. I really, REALLY "feel" the worry of my sisters-in-law when they have to send their 8-, 9- and 11-year-old boys into a men's room by themselves.

for jdw
jdw writes: "Christian married heterosexual white males are increasingly becoming a minority of healthy cells in an increasingly leprous body."

So you think that Condoleeza Rice, a single woman who has never married but devoted herself to a successful career, is "morally leprous"? Do you really think that she is still a virgin? Does a single woman have to remain a virgin her entire life? And if not, you will consider her "morally leprous"?

That's your whole moral code right there, isn't it?

Stay straight.
Marry a woman.
Get her pregnant.
Make babies.
Propagate the species.
All else is leprous.

You're not going to win a lot of elections on that platform.

Do Liberals Support Sex Stings?
I will reiterate my question in a different way: do any of the liberals in here who are attacking Larry Craig apporve of the police engaging in sting operations to catch gay men looking for a partner in public places? I am not talking about acts in plain view, which are clearly illegal, but even men who are discrete about their mens room antics, like Senator Craig. Is that really something you approve of the police doing? Be honest.

Steve L
Condoleeza Rice and others like her represent a small fraction of the populace. The vast majority of people are straight, will marry (at least once), and have children. Your argument is convoluted at best.

for gwco2skeptic
gwgo2skeptic writes: "Why did you bring race into the discussion? Do you think that the skin color of Republicans is important? "

It is an accurate DESCRIPTION of the majority of GOP voters. They are not black, not Hispanic, and not Jewish. Only small percentages of Republicans are black, Hispanic or Jewish. There used to be more Hispanics in the GOP, but the GOP took care of that this year with their nativist rhetoric which has alarmed Hispanic voters.

And any objective demographic report on the American electorate will confirm all this.



for gwco2skeptic
gwco2skeptic writes: "Also, I would be curious as to how many liberals think that police should be targetting gay men with sting operations like this."

I haven't seen a poll, but I've read a number of left-wing columns and blogs and many don't think that cops should be targeting gays with sting operations in the first place. In fact, what little sympathy they have for Craig comes from that fact.

A more interesting question is whether SOCIAL CONSERVATIVES approve of targeting gays with sting operations, especially given that conservative public figures are being caught in such stings.



SteveL
I understand that "white" is a somewhat accurate description, but why do you think it is relevant? Is there something about white people that makes then somehow different from people of other pigmentations?

Nothing changes
Mr. Craig has shot himself in the foot, but so have many Demoncraps - with NO consequences. Seems like the hypocrisy title more befits them!

This set of posts has been nauseating! You conservatives - don't you know by now that pointing out ANY Demoncrap peccadillos is useless? They are perfect human beings. They said so. Their college "perfessers" and think tank cohorts have lauded their progressive "thinking". Tsk, tsk. Unfortunately, 9 out of 10 of them can't even spell, yet they think they can hold an intelligent conversation with a conservative.

I'd love to go through here and respond to each one of you lefty lugnut nitwits, but suffice it to say, it would be like trying to hold a conversation with a stump!

Why don't you all go over to the Daily Kook or Demoncrap Underground where you'll be appreciated and with your own kind?

jdw
"that's what you describe, SteveL. Christian married heterosexual white males are increasingly becoming a minority of healthy cells in an increasingly leprous body."

YOU PEGGED IT, PAL!!! GREAT INSIGHT!

SteveL
"Instead, let's rename the Republican Party to the Christian Married Heterosexual White Male Party. Because that accurately describes the majority of Republican voters."

Thanks for sharing your racist, bigoted views with us. We so appreciate it ;-)

At the risk of actually taking you seriously SteveL, why would you want to "rename" the party? This implies there has been some major change to the party in recent years requiring a name change. The Republican Party has always been about family values, personal responsibility, and minimal government intrusion. The fact that it sometimes fails to uphold these principles does not mean that it needs renaming. In fact, if it did need renaming it would be to something more like the "Get Along With Liberals at all Cost" party.

First, all major political parties in our history have always been dominated by white males. One need only look at the make up of the Congress and the presidency through history to verify this. Now, of the two parties, which is more diverse in its leadership? It's not the Democrat party, that's for sure.

As for your apparent confusion regarding the "leper" reference, I believe that JDW was pointing out that Christian principles, especially those related to the family and their role in the community, is the bedrock of the American experiment. As we deviate from those principles, the body politic begins to decay.

Now that I have explained the nuance of the metaphor, care to rephrase your bigotry in another way?

Republicans
All of the pubbies that committed their crimes were removed from their positions.Bill Clinton was the POTUS which makes his actions much more serious.I do not care that he was fooling around with those various woman,but I object to him using the White House as his private sexual playground and then lying to the people.The man had absolutely no respect for the office of the presidency or the people of this nation.

el negro pero
What is your IQ to ask me if any legislators use or have used illegal drugs.
I dont know what you do. I dont if they have a drink. The question is it a reasonable assumption that a good number of legislators have used alcohol? Is it a good assumption that many legislators growing in teens in 60's used a joint to say the least. You tell me.


@Badboy
Succinct and to the point. Thanks.

I generally ignore the moral relativists when they get on their high moral hobbyhorses. They don't even realize that they are the annoying do-gooders of the 21st century, chattering about other people's behavior while all the time, excusing their own. What makes them more irritating than the Victorians of old is that, at least the Victorians knew there were moral absolutes.




in defense of SteveL
It has been my experience living in Phila and the suburbs which usually vote rep and contiain middle and upper middle class people who vote that social conservatives can be a turnoff. i witnessed this in the loss of Santorum in his re-election bid against a non-entity. Snatorum's out spokeness on abortion; his suggestion to criminalize HS behavior; and his involvement in Terry Schiavo matter turned off many such voters who would have otherwise voted for him. I voted for him because those are not important matters to me: What counts for me is national security and improper redist of wealth thru not well thought out entitlement programs. Those affect my life and that of my progeny. The other stuff has no effect on the quality of my life or those of my progeny. However, I am not typical.

What is the great big deal?
So what if Larry Craig is gay? According to the dems, homosexuality is a perfectly fine, normal alternative lifestyle. It is so great in fact, that we should be teaching it to our kids in kindergarten. Gotta love the left.

gwco2skeptic
I basically asked your question several hours ago. I even framed it as saying 2 adults in a mens room alone , no kids , no straights is that an ok to happen. If it is why is it? if it isnt why not. Consenting adults and all that. I , like you are still waiting for an answer. Also as to weather the cops should be doing stings in mens rooms , as most have mentioned thats where the kids come in. I'm sure they didnt just decide one day to do a sting. Most likely someone went to them and told them men were having sex in a public mens room. Perhaps with kids using the place as well.

Liberals and values
It would appear that the accusation of liberals lacking any morals has struck a nerve here, as they protest to the ends of the world that they actually stand for something, at least till the end of the Craig news-cycle. Liberals believe in nothing but their own aggrandizement and acquisition of power over others.

Furthermore, most all of the ills that we face in America today were created by the liberal mindset. Heck, Craig should switch parties, then he would be he could be the poster child of liberal ideals of "free love", that is unless he paid for it, then he could be the poster child of supporting sex workers AND "free love".

I would love to expound upon the ills comment, but do not have the time presently nor the space here to catalog the devastating effects of modern liberal ideals upon America, but must agree that one must have some values to be a hypocrite.

IT'S VERY SIMPLE--WHY MAKE IT DIFFICULT?
For some, homosexuality perhaps is a life-style, for some is a choice and for some others...well, perhaps by nature.

Given that, and given that the Senator has maintained his heterosexuality for decades, it is probably safe to say that his interest in men, if that's true, is more to the life-style type of homosexuality. And, in that regards, I think he is right when he said that he is not a gay. Perhaps he is a bisexual.

Then the question is, is it wrong or is it hypocrite to be against homosexuality when you in fact practice it?

Well, why?

Is it wrong or hypocrite when one says that smoking is bad while in fact he is a smoker?

The fact is, although he realizes the negative effect of smoking, he is a weak individual on that matter. He cannot quit smoking.

For some people to judge and condemn the Senator for his stance on homosexuality because he allegedly practices it is telling. It just shows how low their mentality is.



Secret Squirrel 2
"What is the great big deal?
So what if Larry Craig is gay? According to the dems, homosexuality is a perfectly fine, normal alternative lifestyle. It is so great in fact, that we should be teaching it to our kids in kindergarten. Gotta love the left."

Gotta love the right -- continually missing the point.

Being gay is fine.

Soliciting sex in a public bathroom is not. In fact, it's against the law.

NEXT?

Petrovian
This is getting sillier...we'll skip over the "homosexuality is a choice" absurdity for now...

"Given that, and given that the Senator has maintained his heterosexuality for decades, it is probably safe to say that his interest in men, if that's true, is more to the life-style type of homosexuality. And, in that regards, I think he is right when he said that he is not a gay. Perhaps he is a bisexual."

OK, so a totally straight man, married with kids, in a Minneapolis airport restroom, decides on a whim to try that "gay" thing he's heard so much about? Are you really suggesting that?

Why is this so difficult? The man is gay. Stop. Check, please.

As for your smoking/hypocricy analogy: smoking is a choice, followed by an addiction. Homosexuality is not. Also, soliciting sex in a public restroom is against the law. Smoking is not.




gwco2skeptic
"I have a question for the liberal posters in here: did Craig do anything wrong, according to your moral standards, when he attempted to solicit sex in a mens room? Forget about his voting record or his job, just look at his conduct in the mens room: does it violate your moral standard, and if so, why?"

My moral standard for myself and my family? Yes. I would be ashamed of myself if I went cruising for random sex with strangers. I would be disappointed if my son or daughter did. Why? Because I think it cheapens the act of sex, invites STDs, and is generally very low-class behavior.

My moral standard for the guy next door, for my mailman, for my senator? No. He's not harming anyone if he goes to these hookup bathrooms.

"Also, I would be curious as to how many liberals think that police should be targetting gay men with sting operations like this. If Barney Frank was the one who got busted, would you be launching a civil rights case on his behalf? Even as a conservative, the idea of have cops in the bathroom watching me is a bit disturbing. If I shake it more than three times would that be considered indecent?"

Absolutely there should not be such stings, against anyone gay or straight, for two reasons:

1. It's arguably a violation of civil rights. People should have the right to ask each other out on dates in public - even if this is an extremely crude way to set up an even more crude date.

2. It's an outrageous waste of manpower. When every single murder or burglary in the state has been solved, then I might CONSIDER sitting a police officer on a freaking toilet to stop public hookups. Until then it should be out of the QUESTION.

gwco2skeptic (cont)
"Craig is most certainly the textbook example of a hypocrite. But is it not also a form of hypocrisy to attack someone for doing something that you don't even think is wrong?"

We are NOT ATTACKING CRAIG for the act in particular. If my local senators/representative (two Democrats and a moderate Republican) did this I would tut-tut at him for being low-class and for being carelessly indescreet. But if I liked his performance as a politician I would happily vote for him again (and I am happy, with all 3).

We are attacking Craig for BUILDING HIS CAREER ON INCREDIBLE, FLAMING HYPOCRISY. He SOLD HIMSELF as the "values politician" who would put those hummersexuals in their place, who presented the idea of homosexuality as a choice and a wrong choice, all while practicing the same things he decried in public, the same things he GOT HIMSELF ELECTED TO FIGHT AGAINST.

answer to a question
These same hate-mongers also level the straw man arguments one after another. When was the last time that conservatives promoted some ban on private sexual behavior?
___________________________________________

I believe a recent example was all the conservatives that thought it was perfectly acceptable and preferable that anti-sodomy laws were still on the books and occassionally enforced in Texas. Perhaps we should go look at the TH archives to answer your question.

What a disgrace!
All of the posters who have been coming out of the woodwork blasting us on the right because of are Judeo-Christian values are a disgrace. The vast majority of conservatives do not hate homosexuals, do not want them injured or killed. We hate the sin of homosexuality but we still love the sinner. We still care about you.

All of these accusations that Kevin McCullough is a self-hating homosexual is a bunch of crap. Obviously these posters argue and debate based on how they feel instead of looking at the issues and the facts to base their argument on. How childish!

Lux Interior
Oh, so it is just the soliciting that is a problem,huh? Is that a felony or a misdemeanor? I'm not up on sex crimes.

Stings to catch sexual devients OK by Me
I can't believe the number of posters above that actually believe the police should not set up stings to stop this unwanted sexual behavior! The PUBLIC restrooms are available to the PUBLIC to provide a particular function and it does NOT include strangers making unwanted sexual advances to other occupants of said restroom or any other public facility. My spouse is a truckdriver and he absolutely will not stop at any public reststop along our nation's highways because of this devient behavior not to mention the prostitutes. Many reststops have been shut down because of this kind of sexual harassment and even violent behavior. The senator should apologize and resign and his wife should have herself tested for AIDS and other STD
s immediately. The idea that this behavior doesn't have any harmful effect on society is lame-brained to say the least!

Libs and Demos love all Que*rs,
I just glanced at the comments, but I'll bet there are no Libs or Demos here today, complaining about this former Rep Que*r Senator.

After all, Libs and Demos love all Que*rs, of whatever stripe. They have just gained another.

As far as I know the only known Que*rs in Congress are all demos, as the reps get run out of office, the Demos Que*rs get promoted.

Kahryl
IS Craig a hypocrit?
I say no. The fact that he was not able to control his impulses for a handjob does not make him a hypocrit. I might be more apt to call him a hypocrite if had a sustained loving relationship with another man for a long period of time,

I am not sure even if serious HS want to equate furitive 1 minute sex with the essence of being a HS.


One might have the impulse to be kleptomaniac and het support laws against stealing.

gwco2skeptic
I am a most definitely a "liberal" compared to most posters so I'll answer your questions. I'll make the assumption he did what he is accused of though he claims not guilty now.

Q. Did Craig do anything wrong according to your moral standards, when he attempted to solicit sex in a mens room?

A. Yes.
As a married man soliciting sex from anyone other than his wife and covering it up is wrong. He considered it wrong too, oherwise he would not have pled guilty just to "make it go away". It is "morally wrong" to violate the marriage vows he made to his wife. However, this is between him and his family. Not our business.

Q. Should the police be targetting gay men with sting operations like this.
A. Not unless they have legitimate complaints from people who have been hassled by people seeking sex in that location. If they do, its no different than "sting" operations against hookers at the airport.

Q. If Barney Frank was the one who got busted, would you be launching a civil rights case on his behalf?
A. No. Barney Frank is an avowed openly gay man who has plenty of outlets for gay sex. I'd have zero sympathy for him if he was stupid enough to get caught in sting at an airport mens room.

Q. Is it a form of hypocrisy to attack someone for doing something that you don't even think is wrong?
A. Yes

I never would have thought this possible
Lux Interior, at 4:03 PM, said something so bizarre I would not have thought it possible.

He wrote: "Gotta love the right -- continually missing the point. Being gay is fine. Soliciting sex in a public bathroom is not. In fact, it's against the law."

I'm just curious, Lux... are you so completely unacquainted with the behavior of the average gay that you don't realize this IS ordinary gay behavior?

Peer-reviewed research has revealed that as many as half of gays acknowledge having had sex with a complete stranger at least once within the last year. How, precisely, do you think they find partners for that?

Surely you're not asking us to believe that the Left actually advocates policing the bathrooms at gay bars to make sure there's no soliciting going on in there, are you?

Personally, I don't have any problem with the guy getting busted and run out of the Senate. But for Leftists to pretend they're concerned about it because SOLICITING IN A PUBLIC BATHROOM IS AGAINST THE LAW is just too silly to be imagined.

I'm keeping this one for the record books.

Conservatives in jams, and hypocricy
The Left has majored in calling anybody "hypocrite" who 1) advocates what pundits like to call "traditional values", and 2) has serious personal flaws. The basis for the claim seems to be the bizarre notion that in order to advocate moral standards, one must first be perfect.

This claim comes from people who either have no western education, or who deliberately ignore what they know of humankind. It's laughably wrong, and it's destructive.

No major source of moral reasoning has ever claimed perfection or anything close to it. Every self-aware human being is aware he is morally flawed, and those who read widely, know that we're ALL morally flawed. Advocating strong public morals is for setting goals; we need to know what we're supposed to be before we can make a serious attempt to better ourselves, otherwise we're just flailing in the dark.

Every person can be caught in a moral failing at some time or other; some can be caught more readily in greater failings. That fact does not excuse us for a nanosecond from the attempt to perfect ourselves, or (for Christians) the commitment to let the Holy Spirit perfect us. Though we fail a thousand times, our goals must remain high, or civilization comes unraveled.

The accusations of hypocrisy come from those who have given up the fight and surrendered their own souls to perpetual imperfection. Having embraced their own evil, they then try to act as though their surrender was a COURAGEOUS act, and to tear down any who exhibit the true courage to maintain the fight for improvement. It's a cowardly accusation from moral deadbeats hoping to find companionship in their cravenness.

Craig may deserve to be ousted; but my hat's off to him for defending the right, though he himself failed to overcome his own wrong.

Mirror in the Bathroom
Let's get this straight (bad pun, I know!).
He is aruing that Craig is not gay because he is married to a woman, even though he solicited an undercover male cop for sex? No, he is a self-loathing closeted gay man! This article makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

What's up with all these Republican pervert guys lately? There have been so many, and their excuses keep getting lamer and lamer. (I am sure he will come out with a press conference that he is an alcoholic any day now, since that is standard operating procedures for any scandal these days).

Although I find his hypocrisy reprehensible, in a way I feel kind of sorry for them. It must be terrible to have such self-hatred as to lower
yourself to these antics.

Mary Carrick

Jim: Yes, the only known "queers" in Congress are Democrats, because the Republican ones are all in the closet, which leads to this kind of sick behavior. I have not seen the report of Barney Frank getting busted for this.

@ca
"I believe a recent example was all the conservatives that thought it was perfectly acceptable and preferable that anti-sodomy laws were still on the books and occassionally enforced in Texas. "

My recollection was that conservatives opposed Lawrence v. Texas on the grounds of its judicial activism.

Personally, I don't want private sexual behavior between consenting adults to be ruled on from the bench. I would rather not see legislatures get into that fray either although at one time many legislatures di (which is why there are still anti-sodomy laws on the books).

Meanwhile, the whole bru-haha behind Lawrence v. Texas is case was one that homosexual advocates saw as an opportunity to advance their cause nation wide by judicial fiat.

By the way, what Lawrence and Garner were doing WAS against the law, just like Craig doing something against the law. One poster above had no problem with Craig's supposed "gayness" but DID have a problem with his alleged solicitation because it was "against the law".

Well fine, sodomy in Texas was against the law too. Conservatives took the position that it was the legislatures duty to change the law, not the judge's.



Call Out for inkling_revival
"The Left has majored in calling anybody "hypocrite" who 1) advocates what pundits like to call "traditional values", and 2) has serious personal flaws. The basis for the claim seems to be the bizarre notion that in order to advocate moral standards, one must first be perfect"

It’s funny how someone from the Right calls it a "moral failing" when a Republican is carrying on like this. Whatever happened to the cries for personal responsibility? Oh right, that is for the welfare folks only.

What a load of sanctimonious hypocrisy!

Mary C.

Cal Out for inkling revival
"The Left has majored in calling anybody "hypocrite" who 1) advocates what pundits like to call "traditional values", and 2) has serious personal flaws. The basis for the claim seems to be the bizarre notion that in order to advocate moral standards, one must first be perfect"

It’s funny how someone from the Right calls it a "moral failing" when a Republican is carrying on like this. Whatever happened to the cries for personal responsibility? Oh right, that is for the welfare folks only.

What a load of sanctimonious hypocrisy!

Mary C.

Senator Craig
As I look around at what's going on in this country (witness the two junior high school boys in Oregon charged and hauled into court in handcuffs for horseplay), it's obvious to me that we are a society that is rapidly consuming itself. Of course Craig is a severe hypocrit. But if I were a Minneapolis police officer who was asked to sit around in a public men's room stall to catch gays, I don't there think there would be enough room in my boss' body to shove the job as far up as I would describe in my reaction.

There simply is no leadership or common sense left in my country. The Islamic nuts don't have to do anything but wait. We'll take care of destroying our own culture and society.

N/A, just grow up, will you?
I'm just completely speechless.

Seriously, FOOL, can you explain to me how calling something a "moral failing" avoids personal responsibility? I'm saying he IS personally responsible!!!!!!

Are you genuinely that stupid, or are you deliberately attempting to pretend I said the exact opposite of what I actually said?

Jackass.

Senator Craig's LGBT...........
or whatever euphemism or acronym neurotic individuals like to call themselves. For those fiscal conservatives with short memories, the Republican Party was not hijacked by social liberals (Rockefeller Republicans)until after the revision of the ALIMPC in 1955. Does "stare decisis" not apply to laws based on fraudulent and fallacious science? Whether the senator was out or in the closet, the act of soliciting for sex in restrooms (lesbians do it, too)is found to be quite repugnant among a majority of the population. Quite frankly, with the advent of the internet and other avenues which promote anonymous sex, I cannot fathom why neurotic adults continue to engage in the impulsive behaviors associated with BPD.

Defined State of Being
"Homosexuality is not a state of defined being. Rather on the best science man has gathered we understand it to be a series of emotions, feelings, desires, choices, and most importantly behavior."

That could also describe Christianity, duh!

el negro pero, take 2
I don''t see an answer to my question, was studds openly gay??
You seem to twist things to suit yourself. You come off as a typical, smug, self righteous liberal. You profess love, understanding and tolerance as LONG as that person is "beneath you". What I mean by that is, you do not tolerate anyone who strives to live under a moral compass. To you, the perverse the better.
I feel that if craig came out and admitted his homosexuality, that would be fine by me. See, what PO's most conservatives is the lying. Something the left can never understand.
Wasn't it the NY times that did an article during the clinton administration about the benefits of being able to lie?
No other adminstration has lied more, been more corrupt than the clinton. What we have now from the left is payback.
So, enjoy the owner of your party, george soros. God help us all.
Now, was studds openly gay??

Mary C doesn't know history
Mary C (N/A) wrote: "I have not seen the report of Barney Frank getting busted for this."

No, he just got questioned for having a roommate run a gay escort service out of his home. And, of course, Rep Frank knew absolutely nothing about his roommate's full-scale business.

Also, not that it particularly matters, but I'm a little curious about the full-throated pronouncement "he's a closeted GAY" because he solicited a handjob. Tell me, MC, how many times must a gay man engage in sex acts with a woman before he's not gay anymore? What's the saturation point that turns a straight into a gay, or a gay into a straight? Or, does it only go one way, any interest at all in same-sex makes you instantly gay, but no amount of opposite sex interest makes you straight? Does Heloise write social rules about discerning this? Should I write to Dear Abby?

You sound so authoritative on the subject, I figured you had to be the expert...

Hypocrisy
I heard something on the news today that for me really takes the cake. Jim McGreevy, former Gov of NJ is now teaching ETHICS at a college in that fair state!! And we KNOW that that institute of higher learning can NOT be a conservative entity.

N/A
Sorry, don't hear anyone on this site not holding craig morally responsible. What's your problem?? Can't read or do you need it spelled out for you.
Maybe you can answer me, was studds openly gay??
Other libs won't answer a simple question.

The perspective from Mpls
Maybe my take on this is different because I am a mom who has actually sent boys in my care into the bathrooms at the airport in question. Mpls manages to be both very religious and very pro-gay, and our police force is pretty decent. My problem is that this guy could be signalling some poor kid. Some poor kid whose two dads can't marry due the efforts of creeps like that. And then he thinks being a Senator is a get-out-of-this free card. Sorry, mister, we don't care who or what you are, you can't do that here. Kids use these bathrooms. There are special bars and nightclubs for this. Keep it where it belongs, among consenting adults.

Show a little
compassion. The guy is a fellow human being, after all, who's life just imploded. I see all the phony Christians here don't even have the decency to show compassion for a fellow human.

The way Romney immediately threw Craig under the bus just reinforces the idea that Mitt's just another glib opportunist, ready to change any opinion at any time if it furthers his political goals, and ready to thrown friends under the bus in a second's notice.

Romney and Rudy and Fred aren't actual conservatives, so don't nominate any of them. If you do, you're dooming the Republican Party forever, due to the changing demographics in this country. This is our last chance for conservatism to flourish under competent people, but we have to nominate/elect them first.

And Rudy and Mitt and Fred aren't conservatives by any means. They're globalist liberals who want to go play war games in the ME. That isn't a conservative value, and never will be.

Romney disgusts actual conservatives with his makeup and changing opinions on anything and everything - all the while trumpeting how healthy his sons are, while America's sons and daughters are dying in a war the neocons took the country into.

Run them all out of our party, and start over, and get it right this time.

If you elect true conservatives, your country will be forever grateful.
Thank you

You're nuts
This guy does all the right things to solicit sex from a male in a toilet, and he's not gay? You might qualify him as bi-sexual, but he's got it in him nonetheless. I'd put him with Ted Haggard and Paul Crouch - perhaps not habitually homosexual, having a wife, but the inclination is there.

Who really cares about this
when Mrs. Bill Clinton has just been caught taking dirty money from the Chinese? The reason this Craig story is being played up in the MSM is to divert attention from the biggest scandal of this campaign. Norman Hsu makes Jack Abramhoff look like a choirboy. Will Mrs. Clinton withdraw from the race now that we know she has been bought off by the Chinese? Will she be hounded out of office like DeLay was?

Of course not!

She'll give back the dirty campaign money and all will be forgiven.

Either a.) Mrs. Clinton knew that Hsu was dirty and that his money was buying her future favors or b.) she was unaware that this shadowy figure had no outstanding felony arrest warrants or was funneling Chinese money to her campaign. If the former she should ultimately go to jail and if the latter, then she is too dumb to be the leader of the free world.

In any case, her now giving the dirty money to charity does not make the problem go away. If she were a Republican she would be toast. Being a Dem, her followers expect her to be corrupt and the rest of us accept that reality as a given. Therefore, her campaign will continue while we debate whether touching someone else's foot in a bathroom stall makes you gay and therefore, you should be removed from the Senate.

I'm glad we all have our priorities straight.

Craig's behavior not victimless
I have listened to Republican's offer lame defenses for Senator Craig's alleged bad behavior, suggesting his behavior is no worse than many democrats. I am a conservative and a Republican and I'm irritated that anyone would defend this sort of behavior. Although I appretiate Senator Craig's past pro family voting record, it doesn't excuse the seriousness of this behavior. I'm not in the least bothered by the fact that he might live differently than he votes. If the allegations are true, I suspect he is a man who is voting his conscience but unable to wvercome his inner demons. No matter. I am a mother and I have young sons. There isn't a mother in America who is worth her salt who hasn't taken her young boys into the women's restroom out of fear they would/could be exposed to some predator or be a witness to this sort of behavior. No decent mother wants to risk her young sons walking in on two men having or attempting to have sex in a public bathroom. This is not a victim less crime. This is not a private matter between consenting adults. This is indifference to the innocence of any person not a party to this sort of behavior. Every mother and father in the country--Democrat or Republican should be outraged that this behavior could happen in a public bathroom where their sons innocence could be violated by what they witness.

Thanks Liberals
I appreciate the liberals who took time to answer my questions. I think that examining the issues involved is a lot more interesting than piling on a sick man at his lowest point.

That said, I do think that when a Republican steps out of line like this, Democratic strategists rely on the general revulsion and moral outrage toward the act itself, not just the obvious hypocrisy. So the left hates him because he's a hypocrite, and the right is angry with him because they think his behavior was immoral and a betrayal of our values.

Oh, and to conservatives who don't think that Craig is hypocritical, remember that the word comes from the Greek word for "actor"; basically, hypocrisy is putting on a show making people believe you are something you are not.

Simply failing to live up to the moral code you espouse is not necessarily hypocrisy, it is human. But if you just deny the problem, and bash others who have the same problem, you are a capital "H" hypocrite.

Liberals should realize that Craig is the textbook "ego-dystonic homosexual", which is a clinical diagnosis, although I am not certain whether it is still in the DSM. So, even if you don't think that homosexuality is a mental illness, Craig is most likely mentally ill, and a certain amount of compassion is called for.

Tedious
McCullough is seriously confused:

"Homosexuality is not a state of defined being. Rather on the best science man has gathered we understand it to be a series of emotions, feelings, desires, choices, and most importantly behavior."

Says who? Which "scientist" claims that human sexuality is mostly about choices and behavior? What nonsense. Who really believes this?

Why do we have this little phrase in our language: "practicing homosexual?"

Gee. Could it be that EVERYONE understands that homosexuality doesn't refer to a behavior? Of course that's why that phrase exists. We all know this. All of us - including McCullough. There's no way around that. To deny this simple fact is to lie.

As McCullough - and the rest of the planet knows - sexuality can and often leads to a behavior, but it is absolutely not dependent on behavior.

One has to wonder why McCullough keeps this up week after week. Why is denying reality so necessary for this man? Could it be that he doesn't like what he sees when he pulls his head out of the sand? Absolutely. And everyone knows it.

Craig's behavior not victimless
I have listened to Republican's offer lame defenses for Senator Craig's alleged bad behavior, suggesting his behavior is no worse than many democrats. I am a conservative and a Republican and I'm irritated that anyone would defend this sort of behavior. Although I appretiate Senator Craig's past pro family voting record, it doesn't excuse the seriousness of this behavior. I'm not in the least bothered by the fact that he might live differently than he votes. If the allegations are true, I suspect he is a man who is voting his conscience but unable to wvercome his inner demons. No matter. I am a mother and I have young sons. There isn't a mother in America who is worth her salt who hasn't taken her young boys into the women's restroom out of fear they would/could be exposed to some predator or be a witness to this sort of behavior. No decent mother wants to risk her young sons walking in on two men having or attempting to have sex in a public bathroom. This is not a victim less crime. This is not a private matter between consenting adults. This is indifference to the innocence of any person not a party to this sort of behavior. Every mother and father in the country--Democrat or Republican should be outraged that this behavior could happen in a public bathroom where their sons innocence could be violated by what they witness.

inkling_revival
yes we all have moral failings but a key component in the attempt to be a moral person is taking responsibility for one's actions. You refer to Christianity, one of its' major tenets is testifying to one's moral lapses. Craig has vehemently avoided this to th point of subjecting his poor wife to incredible indignity of learning about his arrest from media reports.

Your argument does not lack merit, it simply does not apply to this situation.

John Galt is too sophisticated for...
John Galt says: "To make a statement like "Liberals have no moral standards" is to believe in a fantasy world where the only good guys are the people who have the exact same worldview as you, and it also requires demonizing a vague, undefined straw man. As I've stated many times, I'm no fan of the left and I'm no fan of intrusive government (from a "conservative" or a "liberal" standpoint), but I do not believe in ad hominem attacks on either side."

...his own good.

You are entirely too sophisticated, Mr Galt: YOU KNOW PERFECTLY WELL THAT THE LIBS/LEFTIES TOADIE, KOWTOW, HOW ELSE CAN I PUT IT? TO THE PERVERTS. To them it is part of their sophistication, their advanced intellectual thinking. Nonsense. Everyone in the world except Mr Galt knows this.

Critical Bill, you are wrong about Kev
Critical Bill says: "...he's totally obsessed with what homosexuals get up to..."

Nope, Kev is not obsessed with what homosexuals get up to, whatever that means. He is obsessed, if you insist on using that word, with preventing the homosexuals from turning this great nation on its head, he is obsessed with stopping the push for special rights for homosexuals, he is obsessed with stopping the whining from homosexuals and homosexualists. Me too.

Obsession is a mental disorder...
...isn't it, Luis?

Nice work, Allen!
"This hypocrite got caught doing something sleazy that even most gay people wouldn't do and we are delighting in the embarrassment it's brought to you wacky right wingnuts."

Exactly.

Newsflash! TownHall not Conservative!
Trojan140 writes: "All of the posters who have been coming out of the woodwork blasting us on the right because of are Judeo-Christian values are a disgrace. The vast majority of conservatives do not hate homosexuals, do not want them injured or killed. We hate the sin of homosexuality but we still love the sinner. We still care about you."

Yet vast numbers of posters here DO hate homosexuals. Starting with KMC. Then we have Luis, Kathy (who seems to have gone missing), mick, and so on. The list is long--all posting on TownHall.

The only conclusion we can draw is that TownHall is not a conservative site.

Or perhaps, trojan410, you might be wrong....


EUPHEMISM I
Euphemism, a word or phrase used in place of a term that might be considered too direct, harsh, unpleasant, or offensive, is the trademark of the homosexual community. For their own selfish reasons they have collectively usurped a term of the English language and purposely misapplied it to suit their own agenda. Following World Was One American doughboys returned to an America ensconced in Prohibition Laws making drinking alcohol and having booze related fun activities illegal. During the early 1920’s – before the Roaring Twenties Era – these many former doughboys immigrated back to France, back to “Gai Paree” where they left many pretty demoiselles behind crying dans les chamber du lit. Known as the “Lost Generation” these young men returned to a Paris known for its gaiety; ergo gay atmosphere, to have sex with the women they knew during the war. Also, never forget the wonderful film “Gay Divorcee” (1934) with Fred Astaire and Ginger Rogers which had nothing to do with homosexuality.





EUPHEMISM II
The Idaho senator said “I am not gay!” which is truthful because at that moment he was emotionally miserable so his words in the clear said nothing as to his personal sexual interests. As a Conservative I could not care less how he conducts his personal affairs. If he has led a schizoid lifestyle before his family it is his family’s business. If he has deceived the voters of Idaho then it is their business to reject or retain his services; but, for him to use the gay euphemism to conceal further his emotional secrets leaves this person vacuous with contempt. Stealing language is theft of my “free speech” so that when I want to employ the adjective “Gay” I must search out a euphemistic expression instead as opposed to expressing my thoughts in the simplest and clearest terms. On this point I am determined to fight the Barney Franks and the rest of the Homosexual Mafia who typically use a term synonymous with happy while they politically feign to be miserable and feign to be impoverished when their personal obligations are limited to themselves or a similar small grouping of adults communally collecting fortunes.

all the closets in the world
The usual suspects and KMC couldn't wait to get their teeth into yet another gay related scandal in the GOP. When it comes to that, the gay guys have to go, but the Vitters and Allens of the world will hang on tenaciously to their jobs-and hope for the typical short memories of their constituents.
Craig, at this point, seems to have only made telling gestures. There was no money exchanged or solicited. It sounds more like a pickup attempt. The fact that Craig has had the political power to vilify and create laws against gay people is what makes him the 'family values' hypocrite.
As are Vitter and Allen.

This is a non partisan issue. This isn't about liberals or Dems...this is about how the stone throwing from a glass house.
When a gay person is open, has the option of being themselves...there is no opportunity for someone to blackmail them, or make them act out in ways that are damaging and risky.
How double edged is the closet.
On the one hand so many of you say you want gay people to stay discreet and not 'put their lives in the street', but how quick you are to forget the kicking in of the closet door and gay people being dragged out against their will.
What exactly did Craig did that was illegal?

MellorSJ2, you are trying too hard
MellorSJ2 writes: Thursday, August, 30, 2007 4:36 AM
Obsession is a mental disorder...
...isn't it, Luis?

No, it is not a mental disorder. If anything it is the correct thinking regarding homosexualism, a disease that wants to make wrong right, bad good, up down, down up, black white, etc. We are 'obsessed,' used loosely, with stopping this nonsense. No more, no less.

for the record, much to many's dismay
Accusing one of closeted sexuality, referring to the appearance of one's eyes or looks in general, insulting the sanctity of one's marriage and home on nothing but your own speculation that has no merit nor basis in reality, and all other possible forms of what you think are vengeful reactions against the author...

(YAWN....)

...has nothing to do with the substance of the argument.

1. No genetic/biological cause known for homosexual behavior - thus is SO until proven otherwise.
2. Craig's behavior, attempted behavior, and most importantly his guilty plea - disqualify his judgment as being sound...
3. We all stand responsible before God for our actions - not our desires, cravings, or inclinations. (Should adulterers act on their impulse because they "feel" it?)
4. To have no better defense for your viewpoint than to lash out at the one commentator that desires truth to be known so much so that he endures the same "blah, blah, closet so and so, must not get it up for his wife, swollen eyes, ugly bald guy, blah, blah, blah" demonstrates your inability to deal with biblical truth, but equally demonstrates the author's concern (NOT HATE) for those who are otherwise fooled by the lie of the HUMAN RIGHTS CAMPAIGN and other groups who falsify truth for their own twisted purposes.

There is but ONE God, revealed in scripture, whose words and instructions are given for our benefit.

Yes, KMC
"There is but ONE God, revealed in scripture, whose words and instructions are given for our benefit."

And He says that homosexuality is an "abomination" and any who practice it "will not gain Heaven". I think that is pretty plain and direct. Of course, we all know the lefty lunatic lugnuts just don't "get it". Either they're atheists; humanists; easily fooled; or just plain ignorant - there they are in all their "glory", defending the indefensible, which is typical of the entire left-wing lunatic Demoncrap party - following the pied-piper Soros - and trying their dam-dest to take us with them!

Maybe seperate restrooms for that???
I don't think it is appropriate for that type of thing to be going on in public restrooms. Maybe they should have a seperate restroom for 'activities' such as that! Wouldn't want to send a young boy into a restroom with such as THAT going on,would you?
You might want to be careful about any 'foot tapping' in a restroom stall! Who else besides me didn't have any idea that tapping feet could be so incriminating?

KMC
I, for one, have never accused you of being a closeted gay. You, however, have called gays deviants and perverts quite often the last couple of weeks. Do you really think you know anything about the lives of the gay people that read TH? We know far more about you than you know about us as individuals yet we are not allowed to comment or speculate about your life while you continue to insult us? Go right ahead insulting us all you want. I personally don't care.

By the way, you can't point to the lack of scientific evidence of a genetic or biological cause of homosexuality to prove your theory that homosexuality is a choice. The lack of proof for one theory does not prove the other. And on top of it, you can't then say that "There is but ONE God, revealed in scripture..." as if that is proof enough that god exists. Well, you can do that but it makes for a bad argument.

PS. Do you really believe liberals have no moral standards? Do most of your readers actually believe that?


Ca... you misquote me...
Homosexual behavior - is ALWAYS a choice.

As is adultery...

As is any activity that involves "behavior"...

And while I may not know anything about the specific readers of TH who engage in sexual activity. I DO know a great deal about what the homosexual activists are attempting to do to distort U.S. law and change about the traditional view of the family.

I also see the dramatic effects of what homosexual behavior has done to close family members. I've seen the destruction their choices have brought to their mental, emotional, spiritual, and unfortunately physical health.

Many have accused the author of this column as being hateful and uncaring about the plight of homosexuals. What none of them realize is the tremendous love I DO have for two homosexuals specifically, and what I pray for them on a daily basis.

Society has been hoodwinked by the radical homosexual activists (not all gays - merely the activists.) And in the midst of that millions of lives have been shattered by the lies those activists have sold them...

I don't care what names I am called... I CARE too much to not tell those I love THE TRUTH.

Homosexuals have a standard line
they follow, which declares that homosexuality is not a choice. Perhaps not. Who am I to say? I, for instance, love dogs. It is not a choice, I just do.
But were I to engage in deviant sex with them, that would be of my choosing. The same goes with homosexuals. They love others of their own gender. Fine. But when they engage in deviant sexual behavior, that is a choice they make. Simple.

Gay?

There is definitely no carefree, lighthearted merriment in the Craig household.

Does anyone have the 'color-me-gone' crayon? I used the rest of mine up on Mark Foley.

Come on you Liberals, you never use yours when your buys screw up (pardon the pun). Share with the rest of us.

Correction

'your buys' SB 'your guys'. But that Freudian could be true since Craig bought it.

Speaking of 'color-me-gone', I tried to get to animalgirlisback's blog and it is gone. I looked back 2 weeks and scanned articles that I know she post on and every reference to her and her posts are gone.

Boy the cleanup crew is effective and fast. She was truly 'colored-gone'.

Anyone know what happened?

Craig is not gay
No, he is just a Lavatory Lothario who cheats on his wife with gay men in public bathrooms. No, Craig is not gay, he just is in deep denial.