Republican Senator pleads guilty to lewd conduct in a men's room

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Much as it pains me, I have to agree with my friend Peter here. Let's say the guy was indeed trying to solicit sex with another man. So what? And if Peter thinks that's OK, who wouldn't?

[/ QUOTE ]

I usually don't have a whole lot of use for Jonah Goldberg and his commentary, but I thought he made a blog post yesterday that was spot on:

National Review: The Corner

"The left doesn’t – as a matter of passion or strong principle – really mind gay cruising, they mind people who really disapprove of gay cruising. If Craig’s personal conduct really offended liberals, Jim McGreevey – a seedier man personally than Craig by any conventional standard – wouldn’t be a hero. But, no, it’s Craig’s political conduct, not his personal conduct, that offends the left."

Exactly. Count me as a leftist who fits the description Goldberg lays out: I don't give a whit if Craig wants to have an anonymous tryst with the guy in the next stall. It's not Craig's personal conduct that offends me. It's his long-time membership in the holier-than-thou-moralizing-windbag party, that demonstrates time and time again its leaderships' rhetoric about respecting family values is nothing more than a bunch hot air meant to exploit the Christian right.

So despite the claims of adios about what he hears on Air America, I think this is the vast majority of criticism Craig has faced from the left: it's not that he wants to hookup with random guys in the bathroom -- most leftists I know are more than happy to let Craig have at it, sans judgment, if he wants. I mean, I think most people, even the very liberal, might question the prudence of trolling the shitter next to you for action, but I don't think most on the left really care all that much about that, either.

No, the critics chide the fact that Craig spends his day job riding the moral high horse, exploiting his conservative Christian constituents and touting "traditional family values", which most everyone correctly notes is nothing more than right-wing code for "we don't like gays, single mothers, or sex education in public schools!", while simultaneously engaging in behavior he so ardently claims to oppose.

The head-scratching from the right about why Democrats don't face the same lasting disparagements in the popular culture as Republicans is laughable: if the Vitters and Craigs of the world didn't spend so much time lauding the importance, necessity, and sanctity of traditional heterosexual relationships, the level of schadenfraude when said gasbags get caught with prostitutes, or get arrested cruising for gay sex in airport bathrooms wouldn't be nearly as high.

[/ QUOTE ]

I've already stated that Craig deserves to be blasted for his hypocrisy. I think the response of the Democrats to McGreevy is illustrative when the Republicans started pilloring him. This to me was the prevailing sentitment among Democrats:

The Danger of The Closet
McGreevey's own flip flop on the issue of marriage rights for gay couples shows the danger of the closet. When he was governor he opposed marriage equality. Now that's he an openly gay American, he supports it. Sadly, that's not surprising. Closeted gays and lesbians are sometimes the most homophobic people on the planet because they operate out of so much fear of detection that they overcompensate with their homophobia.

Basically the attitude of the Democrats was we should only give McGreey a pass for his opposition to gay marriage but should try to understand the mindset and fear that people who are in the closet have. Apparently this is only if you're a Democrat to begin with.

[UnblinkingEye]

I think the real question is, how many times can one say he's not gay before being officially gay?

~Mike

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
LOL at comparing the hypocrisy of jackasses who claim moral superiority and who seek to deprive average Americans of their freedoms to someone driving an SUV or opposing a windmill project.

[/ QUOTE ]

So someone who's opposing gay marriage is seeking to deprive average Americans of their freedom while the hypocrit Democrat that drives an SUV (insert Al Gore here)that wants to basically have the taxpayers subsidize less usage of CO2 emitting energy is not depriving the average Americans of their freedom? Hmmm.....

Fits in perfectly with my point, it's ok for the Democrats to deny people freedom as long as it's a cause they support.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
I think the real question is, how many times can one say he's not gay before being officially gay?

~Mike

[/ QUOTE ]

Looks like Craig has probably exceeded this threshold.

[adios]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Maybe I'm wrong but Craig is being villified for not coming out of the closet.

[/ QUOTE ]

I think the married Senator is being vilified for consistently trumpeting "family values" while cruising public bathrooms for anonymous sexual encounters.

Hard for me to shed a tear when a married Senator trying to pick up the guy in the next stall for a quicky gets caught in a questionable sting by law enforcement while his political and ideological allies simultaneously make careers out of demonizing homosexuals for political gain.

[/ QUOTE ]

Have you been listening to Air America the last few days? He's being derided not only for being a hypocrit about his voting stances but he's also being derided for not being able to come out of the closet. The former seems to be legitimate, the latter seems very hateful to me. Maybe the latter is confined to Air America broadcasts only but I'm fairly certain it isn't.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't see what Air America has to do with the Craig issue? Air America is not what I'd call "mainstream" by any stretch.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hope you post the same thing when people blast right wing talk radio for being puppets of the Republican party.

[Jack of Arcades]

The sheer amount of right wingers throwing Craig under the bus is astonishing.

[DVaut1]

[ QUOTE ]
The sheer amount of right wingers throwing Craig under the bus is astonishing.

[/ QUOTE ]

For one, Craig has pissed off the right by not being hysterically anti-immigration, and he's been a quiet opponent of the Patriot Act, so he hasn't exactly endeared himself to the base lately. But much larger than that, he's getting thrown under the bus because he's a political liability, since he'll be a constant source of ridicule, late-night monologue fodder, talking-point-for-the-left-to-undermine-GOP-strength-in-activating-the-Christian-Right, etc. until he leaves office. The GOP doesn't want to have to go into 2008 with Craig being this election season's Mark Foley.

Unlike Sen. Vitter, who would have had his replacement nominated by a Democratic governor if he stepped down, Craig's replacement would be another member of the GOP, as Idaho has a Republican governor, so there's really no reason to keep this guy around. Even if there's merit to the point that Craig *could* be innocent, or that law enforcement is engaging in unfair entrapment, trying to fight that battle is political suicide. If I were a right-winger, I'd try to get this guy on the next train out of town, too.

[AzDesertRat]

He's supposedly gone now. Announcement tomorrow.

[natedogg]

[ QUOTE ]

I hope his political career is dead. On the immigration vote he defied the wishes of his voters and voted for amnesty....


[/ QUOTE ]

If you call yourself a conservative you should realize that mainstream conservatives are 100% wrong on immigration.

natedogg

[The Bandit Fish]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Did anyone listen to his press conference? "but I am not gay" "I'm not gay" "nope no gay here"


[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't catch his press conference. Did he deny being gay? Or did he deny he had ever engaged in any gay activities?

[/ QUOTE ]

He said he wasn't gay about four times from what I caught.