Larry Craig, Double Standards, Journalism

[joew]

First, let me make it perfectly clear that I think Larry Craig was right to resign.

Why didn't I think David Vitter should resign? Was it only because it would have delivered a Senate seat to the Democrats? Does being arrested make that much difference? Is consorting with female prostitutes that much less of an offense than soliciting homosexual encounters? Is it okay to make your arrangements by telephone but not in a rest room?

And why was the Idaho paper trying to out Larry Craig? Was it investigative journalism at its best, or pandering to readers' anti-homosexual feelings as a way of destroying Craig's career, or something else? Is this what serious newspapers should be doing?

[liriodendron]

joew said:

Is consorting with female prostitutes that much less of an offense than soliciting homosexual encounters?

That's an easy one. No. Both are equally offensive, especially when the person involved is a married man.

[qhperson]

The papers didn't go after him because of his gay behavior but because he has continued to lie about his behavior. He was outed several months ago, and reports of his having gay contacts for casual sex date back to sometime in the '80s.
I don't think he should have resigned, but what he should have done, which is tell the truth, seems to be beyond him.
As far-right conservative as Idaho is, he'd be out of office no matter what he did, tell the truth or continue to lie.

[doctork]

Not only was Craig arrested, but he pleaded guilty to a crime, one of the sort that he had railed against for many years. I think many were offended by the hypocrisy which compounded the crime.

Seems to me he was rushed off the stage by Republican operatives who wanted the whole sordid incident to go away, when perhaps that should have been left for the voters of Idaho to decide.

And you never know how Idahoans might have reacted - they are conservative, but they have a Libertarian tilt. The current governor, who will appoint Senator Craig's successor, has a rather checkered history himself.

[ptcaffey]

//JoeW: Is it okay to make your arrangements by telephone but not in a rest room?//

Senator Craig sought sex in an airport rest room. Senator Vitter admitted to sinning with prostitutes. I don't see anything keeping these men from continuing to represent Republican values in the U.S. Senate.

[edsfam]

It disturbs me greatly to watch Republicans behave like Democrats...

and for that alone they should be punished severly.

_E_

[Jane]

Gee,, why does this response not surprize me?

[joew]

As long as it delights, it need not surprise.

[Gracie]

"Delights" is hardly the word.....

I mean, it's hardly a Democrat/Republican issue, in my book. Lying is lying, hypocrisy is hypocrisy...no matter the party.

[doctork]

joew said:

Why didn't I think David Vitter should resign? Was it only because it would have delivered a Senate seat to the Democrats? Does being arrested make that much difference? Is consorting with female prostitutes that much less of an offense than soliciting homosexual encounters?

I forget which Louisiana politician (Leander Perez? or Huey Long?) made the comment to the effect: "The only thing that could force me out of office is being 1) found with a dead girl, or 2) found with a live boy."

Vitter is from Louisiana. Case closed.

[edsfam]

gracie said:

"Delights" is hardly the word.....

I mean, it's hardly a Democrat/Republican issue, in my book. Lying is lying, hypocrisy is hypocrisy...no matter the party.

On the contrary, I believe it does matter as to the party.

Lying and hypocrisy is rampant in the Democrat party and it's candidates and, not surprisingly, is fully excused and/or dismissed as "partisan attacks" by Party faithful and the Lame Stream Media.

Lying and hypocrisy is rampant in the Republican party and it's candidates and, not surprisingly, is trumpeted and is endlessly over-covered by the Lame Stream Media and the Party faithful are left to try to return the focus to the "policies not the people"

Does this response surprise anyone?

_E_

[ptcaffey]

Yes, it does matter as to the party. Republicans must serve two masters: their inner kinks and the Christianist Taliban elements under the GOP tent--two varieties of lip service. It's this marriage of matter versus anti-matter that ignites the scandal sheets. How could it not? It's entertainment. And that's what "news" these days is all about.

[hartlikeawheel]

Oh _E_ there is no "party" anymore. All of that stuff is just made up of people who are concentrated on power and control.

That's all it is. Like a football game. And whomever it is is no different than whomever it was. I hope you'll please read that again. Why do I feel like the only person in the US that has noticed?

I know that I'm not but everybody keeps trying so hard to pretend that it's still a good system. Is fear the motivator for us to keep standing up and trying to pretend that democracy is our god when it is really capitalism?

Remember the song from the Broadway play? "Money makes the world go 'round, the world go 'round, the world go 'round. . ." It's the only thing that I have ever agreed with Mr. Limbaugh about. He has always said look for the source of money and that will answer your question about why things are the way that they are.

You guys probably don't know this because I don't talk about it and it really doesn't make any difference about who I am. But I have three acquaintances who have held serious government offices.

I'm not naming names but most of you would know at least one of them, maybe all three. They are my people.

All of them have stepped down because they couldn't deal with the dishonesty. And they are "good people."

And why do we have to be so adversarial with each other? Aren't we all in the same boat? I suspect so. Best thing we could do is hold each other up instead of being so devisive.

We're in trouble. Every observant person knows that.

And it isn't just about politics.

Take a look around and see which way the wind blows.

Hold hands folks. Hold hands.

[edsfam]

ptcaffey said:

Yes, it does matter as to the party. Republicans must serve two masters: ...

As opposed to the Democrats who have no masters, no discernible standards, no guiding ethics, no foundational reasons for any of their actions or positions. An illogical, emotionally driven, unseemly rabble at the best of times.

... It's this marriage of matter versus anti-matter that ignites the scandal sheets. How could it not? It's entertainment. And that's what "news" these days is all about.

Much like public lynchings make some people feel good about themselves, this has become the current level of what passes as "news" to the masses.

The Washington Clowns and the MSM have become too inbred and dopey for my tastes.

_E_

[ptcaffey]

//An illogical, emotionally driven, unseemly rabble at the best of times.//

Note well: this is how authoritarian elites regard the nation's citizenry: "emotionally driven rabble."

Of the rabble, by the rabble, for the rabble--and proud of it!

[g0llum]

PT -- I'm hijacking this thread for a second, but I absolutely had to say hello -- and that I've missed you. How is life? Any new Harryhausen action figures added to your collection? Email me any time! [e-mail]!!!

[joew]

He only called the Democrats an emotionally driven rabble. Republicans and independents can be, and often are, thoughtful; and together they are the majority.

[Brit]

He only called the Democrats an emotionally driven rabble.

That's doubly rich.

I have not seen such an emotionally-driven remark, such as Edsfam made, for long while. Which is sad really. I sort of liked edsfam as we seemed to have an affiliation for unique vehicles.

I had really hoped we had moved on from the Redboy and Cap'n Billy's style of phraseology.

[joew]

With edsfam, ptcaffey, and me, the is often implicit.

It's sort of like the "yo' mama" jokes on the APHC joke shows, except it's "yo' party."

[Brit]

I am pleased you clarified that Joe.

I'll go back to sleep now.

[Jane]

There is certainly no dearth of hypocrisy on either side of the divide. What always amazes me is why the sinner always assumes that either 1) the rules don't apply to him/her and/or 2) that the sin will never be discovered.

I find it particularly offensive when the behavior is so utterly different from the rhetoic. That's why the Larry Craig seems more obnoxious to me. So too Jimmy Swaggert, Jim Baker, Henry Hyde, Newt Gingrich and, yes, even MLK.

[gailkate]

and, yes, even MLK.

I agree to an extent, Jane, except that - unlike the others - he didn't spend his time minding other people's business. His focus wasn't on expunging moral turpitude but bringing people to courage and right action and faith in redemption. He wasn't much of a finger-wagger, and he sure as hell wouldn't have signed on to the homophobia that Craig stoked with such zeal.

Come to think of it - though I hate his treatment of his wife or wives, however many he's had - Newt didn't make a career of hypocritical preaching either. Or have I forgotten?

Hart, we're together on this.

[g0llum]

Edsfam... JoeW... Jane... Brit... this is so cool!

[Jane]

Ol' Newt was very rightous in the Clinton impeachment mess. Right in there wagging his adulturous finger with the best of them.

[qhperson]

I seem to recall that Gingrich wasn't jumping all over Clinton, and that's how the evil news media people figured out that he must have a piece on the side. I remember hearing Cokie Roberts talking about this very thing in the midst of the impeachment goings-on, how odd it was that Gingrich was being so quiet about Clinton's adultery.
And it came to pass that Newt was up for his 2nd divorce, 3rd marriage.

[ptcaffey]

Now there's Q. Hi, Q!

And, hi, Grimm! Welcome back to the show that never ends. ;-) How's tricks? (No Larry Craig jokes please; hasn't the man suffered enough?)

[edsfam]

Time for a popularity poll!!
Which do you prefer?

1.) Knocking on heavens door ... the original by Bob Dylan

2.) Knockin' on heavens door ... the cover by Guns n Roses

3.) Tappin' on bathroom stalls ... the remix by Larry Craig

Vote early and vote often, operators are standing by.
Or text the word "ewwww" to the number at the bottom of your screen.

_E_

[gailkate]

Now apparently he's hinting that he might not quit. CNN is all abuzz. Since Craig speaks with the overblown rhetoric of most politicians, everyone interpreted "it is my intent to resign" to mean simply "I am going to resign." But no, not Mr. Craig. Emphasis on intent apparently leaves wiggle room for changing his mind if he can get a court to let him withdraw his guilty plea.

Is anyone in Washington actually working?

[Trusty]

joew said:

He only called the Democrats an emotionally driven rabble. Republicans and independents can be, and often are, thoughtful; and together they are the majority.

While I'm thinking about the poll, let me get one thing straight:
The Democrats are an emotionally driven rabble.
The Republicans are a thoughtful rabble.

OK. Works for me... ;D

[slb2]

No wonder I'm an Independent (I know, sort of a cop-out). I'm not driven by emotion or rational thinking. It's one of the other drives that steers my wheels.