Not Guilty? by Hero

I don't care if he's charged for this or not. I don't think police should be wasting time patrolling bathrooms, anyway. And I don't care who he wants to screw.

What is of interest to me is that this incident revealed Craig's level of hipocracy. And his attempt to use his position to get out of trouble.

That's enough to run him out of town. Though I do kinda wish he wouldn't resign, just to make things all that much more embarrasing for the GOP.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 8:06 AM

SCHOONER

My understanding is that the officer was there because there had been complaints of sexual activity going on in that particular bathroom. I don't think it was a patrol as much as a stakeout, and sex in a public place is a crime regardless of who and where, or what political parties are involved.

Also, I'm hard pressed to think of a worse police assignment than to spend hours in an airport men's room.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 10:20 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by NewOldBrownCoat:
Time for him to ask the Prez for the Scooter option...

I note for the record that the President's pardon powers cannot be used to overturn State crimes. He'll need to petition Minnesota Governor Tim Pawlenty (R)...but some states vary on what their governor's pardon powers.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 10:24 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by schooner:
sex in a public place is a crime regardless of who and where, or what political parties are involved.

He was not charged with sex in public. Its not against the law to ask someone for sex, to bump someone's foot, to ask for a date, etc. He is alleged to have been looking in the stalls to see if it was occupied, bumping his foot and reaching under the stall. None of that is illegal.

I'm as homophobic as the next guy, but this aint illegal.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 10:34 AM

SCHOONER

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by schooner:
sex in a public place is a crime regardless of who and where, or what political parties are involved.

He was not charged with sex in public. Its not against the law to ask someone for sex, to bump someone's foot, to ask for a date, etc. He is alleged to have been looking in the stalls to see if it was occupied, bumping his foot and reaching under the stall. None of that is illegal.

I'm as homophobic as the next guy, but this aint illegal.

H

I was not addressing the charges or validity of the charges against Senator Craig. I was addressing the reason for a plainclothes officer to be present in an airport restroom. There were apparantly prior complaints of "lewd behavior" occuring there, and lewd behavior in public is a crime regardless of the place or the persons involved.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Friday, September 7, 2007 10:44 AM

Yeah... he was just checkin the stall.

Riiiiiight.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 8, 2007 9:40 PM

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Damn, I have to agree with Hero.

Except Craig should be summarily executed for treason at Gitmo, for voting for amnesty for illegal aliens.

But was Craig actually traveling to or from a session of Congress? This is a common loophole for politicians. That's why Congressman Kennedy claimed he was "on his way to the capitol," when DC cops arrested him for DUI by drugs, and put him in the loony bin for 30 days.
www.chblue.com/Aug1999/081999/criminalclass4-081999.htm

Crooked legislators LOVE their diplomatic immunity, and plan their crime sprees for their roadtrips. TN state senator Carl "Coca" Koella was a crack cocaine kingpin, making all his drops when traveling to the capitol, according to eyewitness state reps in the car with him. "He knew every crack house between Alcoa and Nashville."

The cop sounded a LOT more gay than Craig, which explains why he loves working in fartgas.

Under Contract Law, and Constitutional Due Process, a guilty plea is "involuntary" if induced under threats (including promises to halt improper harassment), duress, mental coercion, fear, ignorance, incomprehension, coercion, gross misrepresentation or withholding evidence by the prosecutor.

A good defense lawyer could have negotiated a plea contract with several exceptions to revoke it, such as an appeal on a legal issue. Otherwise, it's a discretionary appeal "to correct manifest injustice". A "friendly" GOP judge would be required to accept the appeal...

A Motion to Withdraw Guilty Plea is filed with the trial judge (motion to reconsider), then can appealed up the chain.

BUT...

"Alford Pleas" are where an innocent person is routinely allowed to plead guilty, since slaves are always allowed to waiver their Constitutional rights in exchange for a slave contract. Nolo contendere ("no contest") is a type of Alford Plea, which has the advantage of not being used against a person in a 2nd civil case, such as a car crash. James Earl Ray pled guilty to shooting Dr Martin Luther King in Tennessee, after prosecution threats to jail his family, but Ray always maintained his innocence.

Quote:
"An admission of guilt is NOT required for a guilty plea."
-North Carolina vs Alford, 400 US25, 91 SCt 160 (1970)
http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/cgi-bin/getcase.pl?court=US&vol=400&invo
l=25

So a judge could still allow Craig to plead guilty, while claiming he was innocent.

Can you imagine working at the following company? It has a little over 500 employees with the following statistics:

29 have been accused of spousal abuse
7 have been arrested for fraud
19 have been accused of writing bad checks
117 have bankrupted at least two businesses
3 have been arrested for assault
71 cannot get a credit card due to bad credit
14 have been arrested on drug related charges
8 have been arrested for shoplifting
21 are current defendants in lawsuits

In 1998 alone:

217 traffic violations
Over 100 were stopped for drunk driving
3,000 unpaid parking tickets were issued

Can you guess which organization this is? Give up? Scroll down for the answer...

It's the 535 members of your United States Congress. The same group that perpetually cranks out hundreds upon hundreds of new laws designed to keep the rest of us in line. By claiming "Constitutional immunity" our political overseers avoid criminal prosecution for all traffic crimes. These are only statistics for Washington DC, Virginia and Maryland police files, and do not reflect traffic crimes committed in other jurisdictions.

Tennessee Congressman Zack Wamp is a convicted drug dealer. Tennessee's serial-killing heart-transplanter Dr. CanniBill Frist's family butcher business Hospital Corporation of America (HCA) was criminally convicted of Medicare/Medicaid fraud and paid an $840-Million fine, and its executives sent to prison, so Frist was promoted to Speaker of the US Senate in his freshman year.
www.geocities.com/idiotboxwars

PS: This is not a joke.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 9, 2007 7:03 AM

MALBADINLATIN

Whether or not the man intended to try to have gay sex in a public bathroom is only scratching the surface.

It is about yet another Gay Right Wing Republican being exposed as such, and who by way of repressed self loathing or outright deception lead a career filled with hipocritical pontification on the subject of conservative family values and thier disapproval of the gay lifestyle. I'm guessing that's why not a lot of democrats are defending him in his right to be gay. And the Republicans, they're just shaking thier heads, and can't seem to get that image of him "doing it" out of thier heads.

What the law says about what he did doesn't matter one tiny little bit.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Sunday, September 9, 2007 11:50 PM

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

CNN reported that Craig's lawyer will file a Motion to Withdraw Plea today, and Craig is virtually not resigning.

The lawyer refused to say what his argument was, but I presume "duress". Contract Law 101.

Senator Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter was quoted as saying, "there's no chance that Craig would have been convicted if he'd gone to trial."

www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/larrycraigmug1.html

Tom Delay mugshot:
www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/tomdelaymug1.html

Mike Niphong mugshot:
www.thesmokinggun.com/mugshots/mikenifongmug1.html

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 10, 2007 1:43 AM

JONGSSTRAW

How can any man not be just totally turned on at the sight & sounds of another man taking a dump? I certainly want my Congressmen having gay sex in restrooms. America is a Gay Country now..."My Country tis of thee, sweet land of homosexuality, of thee I thing."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 10, 2007 5:49 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by MalBadInLatin:
and who by way of repressed self loathing or outright deception lead a career filled with hipocritical pontification on the subject of conservative family values and thier disapproval of the gay lifestyle.

I note for the record that a fair number of gay folk seem to espouse family values (just not the ones involving same-sex couples). They want stable homes for their good children and all that comes with it. Good for them. It is also possible to be gay and not support some or all of the gay agenda. Log Cabin Republicans are a good example of politically conservative gay Republicans.

And I note for the record that Senator Craig maintains he's not gay. He could be heterosexual or bi-sexual...at his age I think he ought to be allowed to be whatever he can be and good for him. And while some argue whether sexuality is a choice, certainly the decision to 'come out' is a matter of privacy that ought to be respected if not protected.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 10, 2007 10:37 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

Um...Craig weighed in on the Private life of Bill and Hillary.

He said bill was not just a "bad boy" but a "nasty bad boy"...maybe he thought somebody needed to give him a spanking

He's forfeited his right to hide behind his own right to privacy, in my opinion. That's the price of being a public figure, specifically the kind of asshole who wants to attack others for their private problems.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 10, 2007 3:21 PM

MALBADINLATIN

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
It is also possible to be gay and not support some or all of the gay agenda. Log Cabin Republicans are a good example of politically conservative gay Republicans.

what I can't get off of http://online.logcabin.org is how many members they have. I suspect that they'd be lucky to have a 5% share of the gay market, most likely not representative, but I got no evidence. Also, what parts of the "gay agenda" do you feel the Log Cabin boys have left out. Cuz I don't even know what the gay agenda is

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero: And I note for the record that Senator Craig maintains he's not gay. He could be heterosexual or bi-sexual...at his age I think he ought to be allowed to be whatever he can be and good for him. And while some argue whether sexuality is a choice, certainly the decision to 'come out' is a matter of privacy that ought to be respected if not protected.

I do too, but the media will never have that kind of respect for either side of the political fence, the American people through focus groups are shown to really get off on that kind of suffering stuff. Sick part of it is we do, sub consciously or otherwise.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 10, 2007 6:08 PM

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Hero, note that Craig did NOT plead guilty in front of a judge, so no judge was able to ask him verbally if he was under duress, as required for all guilty pleas. There was never a defense lawyer or judge involved in this case at any time, only a gay cop, and an unseen prosecutor. Craig mailed his fine to a court clerk, just like a traffic ticket. He left the airport on his scheduled flight, and never went to a jail.

This also means that 100s of millions of traffic fines are also invalid, for pleading guilty by mail. Class actions are now filed in such cases:
www.startribune.com/462/story/1414227.html

Quote:

Craig Asks Court to Let Him Withdraw His Plea of Guilty
www.nytimes.com/2007/09/11/washington/11craig.html?ref=us

Quote:
Senator Craig and his attorneys cite investigative reporting by the Idaho Statesman newspaper as one of the reasons to justify the withdrawal of his guilty plea.

His legal team argues that Craig “was panicked” that his “arrest stemming from an undercover operation targeting gay men in the public men’s restroom at the” Minnesota airport…would be made public and that they would provide the Idaho Statesman with an excuse to publish” an article alleging that Craig engaged in homosexual conduct.

Craig and his attorneys both allege that his June 11, 2007 Minnesota arrest came "shortly after” his May 14, 2007 interview with the Statesman.

Motion to Withdraw Plea (Minn. v. Craig)
http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/crim/craigmn91007mot.html

Guilty Plea (Minn. v. Craig)
http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/crim/larry-craig-guilty-plea-agre
ement.html

Criminal Complaint (Minn. v. Craig)
http://news.findlaw.com/nytimes/docs/crim/mn-larry-craig-70207cmp.html

The media had Craig under a full-court press, and he cracked under pressure. But why did the Idaho newspaper attack him? For his treasonous open-border votes, making all other issues fair game in love and war?

Or was Craig attacked by the homosexual pedophiles in the Jr Bush White House, because the blackmail wasn't working good enough?

Quote:

"I don't trust government. And neither should our citizens."
—US Senator Larry "Manho" Craig, United States Senate (R-Idaho), Committee on the Judiciary, "DOJ Oversight: Terrorism and Other Topics", testimony by US Attorney General John Ashcroft re President George Bush Jr.'s Executive Orders to "legalize torture" of US citizens and refusal to release that memo (felony Contempt of Congress), C-SPAN2, June 8, 2004
http://judiciary.senate.gov/hearing.cfm?id=1212

But if this guy is innocent of the "crime of being gay and not having sex", then he is guilty of being a spineless idiot to plead guilty to a crime he did not commit, just like 100-million other spineless idiots every year in US traffic slave courts.

This is why every red-blooded US citizen MUST fight every traffic ticket, just to learn how to survive in a REAL court case, in the current USSA Police State.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:53 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
He's forfeited his right to hide behind his own right to privacy, in my opinion.

I disagree. There are limitations to a right to privacy. It is generally accepted that a right to privacy exists when there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

By making the Clinton analogy you are comparing apples to oranges. By no measure did Senator Craig commit a crime (if for no other reason then the Constitution bars any arrest in this sort of case) and what he did was in an aiport restroom where he has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

President Clinton, on the other hand, committed several ethical and possibly criminal actions. At the time he had the affair with Monica adultery was a crime in Washington DC, I note it is not enforced and is considered a blue law. He lied under oath, which is contempt of court at best (for which he was punished) and obstruction of justice at worst (although that's a stretch). He also engaged in a conspiracy with his secretary to tamper and conceal evidence (when he asked her to get his 'gifts' to Monica back). Ethically the Federal govt had enacted strict workplace sexual harrassment laws in the early 1990s that Clinton violated by taking advatage of a subordinate. He also went on national television and said he "did not have sex with that woman."

Without comment on the right or wrong of the impeachment, Clinton's very public ethical and criminal violations that took place on government property and in almost every way made improper use of govt. resources invite public scrutiny, especially given the distraction that helped lead us into 9/11, which we rightfully mourn today.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 4:18 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:

By making the Clinton analogy you are comparing apples to oranges. By no measure did Senator Craig commit a crime (if for no other reason then the Constitution bars any arrest in this sort of case) and what he did was in an aiport restroom where he has a reasonable expectation of privacy.

Oh, please! Your defense of any conservative wrong-doing is pathetic.

It's only "not a crime" on a technicality. If you look at the morality of the situation - which guys like Craig like to swing like a goddamned battle-axe whenever they see an opproptunity - it was a violation of the moral code he claims to live by. He deserves to be called out on that hipocracy.

And there is a minor expectation for privacy in a public restroom, which last I heard, did not include propositioning sex in said public place.

Fuckin' appologists.....

At least you'r consistent.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 5:02 AM

SCHOONER

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by Righteous9:
He's forfeited his right to hide behind his own right to privacy, in my opinion.

I disagree. There are limitations to a right to privacy. It is generally accepted that a right to privacy exists when there is a reasonable expectation of privacy.

I would respectfully put forward that the Senator's right to privacy ended when his actions invaded another person's reasonable expectation of privacy.

Also, the term "breach of the peace" is a vaguely defined construct (I suspect deliberately made so). By tradition, speeding is not considered 'breach of the peace", so Congressmen are not cited for speeding to and from sessions. I would suggest that breaching the peace could be defined as taking action not directly related to getting to or from session that could be interpreted as criminal. If Senator Craig had stopped and robbed a Starbuck's on the way back from D.C., the reasonable expectation would be that he should be arrested. It would be considered breaching the peace, and I would argue the same applies here.

Edit: Looking over my post, I realize that robbery is a felony, and already addressed by the Constitutional article, so it is a poor example. I also found this definition of the term on the web site thefreedictionary.com :

breach of the peace - any act of molesting, interrupting, hindering, agitating, or arousing from a state of repose or otherwise depriving inhabitants of the peace and quiet to which they are entitled.

If this is the commonly held legal definition (not sure by any means), then I would have to say Senator Craig did in fact breach the peace in the restroom, and may be legally held accountable.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 5:45 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
And there is a minor expectation for privacy in a public restroom, which last I heard, did not include propositioning sex in said public place.

The Supreme Court has spoken on the issue of privacy in public restrooms, so its hardly minor.

And propositioning sex between adults in not illegal anywhere. It may be unwelcome, but not illegal. Actual sex in public is illegal, offering money for sex is illegal, exposing oneself is illegal, there's lots of potential illegal activities. Senator Craig was not accused of any of those things.

I wont disagree with your notion that Senator Craig's record on family values needs to be examined in light of this activity. We should schedule that debate right after we discuss Senator Bird's (D, WVa) clan membership, Senator Kennedy's (D, MA) drinking and driving, and Sen. David Vitter's (R, LA) "escort".

And a Constitutional protection against arrest is hardly a technicality, in fact it serves a very important purpose, both now and historically (especially given an evenly divided Senate). Although I suppose that explains why you've not been jailed for saying things I don't like. Your hiding behind a technicality...free speech.

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 6:46 AM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Jongsstraw:
How can any man not be just totally turned on at the sight & sounds of another man taking a dump? I certainly want my Congressmen having gay sex in restrooms. America is a Gay Country now..."My Country tis of thee, sweet land of homosexuality, of thee I thing."

OK, I may be a bit off topic, but this touches on something that has been making me absolutely nuts and I have to have my rant.

Getting a blow job in a bathroom stall is *not* the gay lifestyle. That's like saying that cheating on your spouse is the married lifestyle. What Craig tried to do - seedy anonymous sex - is the lifestyle of person who lives in denial of his own urges. That's not the basis of gay, that's the basis of messed up in the head.

The real issue behind all this is not breaking one silly little law, it's that Craig has been socially conversative and anti-gay because his own experiences with homosexuality have been shameful and disgusting, and he's not able to see that this is not universal. This moron, and several other right-wing conservative nut jobs who have also been found out in the past few years, think they need to make laws to control the lives of other people just because they themselves are so f**ked up.

Leave the healthy happy gay folks alone and go get yourself a therapist, Senator Craig. Mark Foley. Ted Haggert. Jim West.

/rant

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:13 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Although I suppose that explains why you've not been jailed for saying things I don't like. Your hiding behind a technicality...free speech.

H

Another moronic argument. What I'm saying isn't illegal except when on the way to work.

I've also never plead guily, and then backpedaled...

And as for your (sooooo old) quip over Kennedy - when was the last time he publicly critisized someone for their drinking? He may be a dick, but he's not the hipocrite Craig is.

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:

The real issue behind all this is not breaking one silly little law, it's that Craig has been socially conversative and anti-gay because his own experiences with homosexuality have been shameful and disgusting, and he's not able to see that this is not universal. This moron, and several other right-wing conservative nut jobs who have also been found out in the past few years, think they need to make laws to control the lives of other people just because they themselves are so f**ked up.

Well said!

"I thoroughly disapprove of duels. If a man should challenge me, I would take him kindly and forgivingly by the hand and lead him to a quiet place and kill him."

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:34 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
Getting a blow job in a bathroom stall is *not* the gay lifestyle. That's like saying that cheating on your spouse is the married lifestyle. What Craig tried to do - seedy anonymous sex - is the lifestyle of person who lives in denial of his own urges. That's not the basis of gay, that's the basis of messed up in the head.

I note for the record that if you eliminate the whole gay thing, your statement about "seedy abonymous sex" is actually something a lot of men and women in America would agree with (especially if between the ages of 15 and 40 and on Friday and Saturday nights).

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:41 AM

RIGHTEOUS9

Byrd harkens back from the time when republicans were dems. I'm sure the guys he runs against are so much better in that area. I'm also sure that state is a bastion of liberal virtue.

As to Kennedy's drinking and driving - I'm not sure he's ever promoted a hard line of one strike and your out politics on such issues. He is, after all, a liberal. In cases where people are not actively trying to promote absolute intolerance of mistakes in this world - punishment over rehabilitation - I leave it up to law enforcement to do their job, and then I accept the judgement, within reason.

I don't know what happened at chappaquitik?, but he was never prosecuted. even handed justcie? Probably not entirely. This is america, and you get the justice you pay for, but he is not now, nor was he ever actively trying to send people up the river for every mistake they make, even tragic mistakes.

which leaves room for redemption, both for them, and for him. My problem is not as much with people who make disasterous mistakes. Many have been a party to those, including Laura Bush, who was also not prosecuted.

My problem is with politicians that want to demonize and punish, when they themselves don't even choose to practice the code that they preach. George W. would be another goody there. He's for a hard-line on drugs, but we know pretty credibly, that he probably did cocaine.. talk about redemption...the man was able to clean his act up...supposedly...and become the President of the United States. Not bad for a coke-head.

.............

As to Clinton in the White HOuse...
half of what you brought up was only relevent because they decided to invade his privacy and get to the bottom of his sex scandal with of all things, a hearing.

I have heard the suppordinate thing brought up before, and it is valid, if there was any kind of coercion, or pressure. I think Lewinsky has made it clear she didn't feel any. I'd take her word for that. the money she could have sued for...

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:33 AM

SOUPCATCHER

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
He was not charged with sex in public. Its not against the law to ask someone for sex, to bump someone's foot, to ask for a date, etc. He is alleged to have been looking in the stalls to see if it was occupied, bumping his foot and reaching under the stall. None of that is illegal.

I'm as homophobic as the next guy, but this aint illegal.

Ah, you've touched on one of the broader issues that this case spotlights. The sting that Senator Craig walked into was not directed at him, was not a novel approach used only by that particular agency and was not an approach that is a recent tactic. So if you think that the tactic was wrong in this instance then you have to ask yourself if the thousands of applications of this very same tactic countrywide over the past few decades are also wrong. How many men have pled guilty to behavior identical to Senator Craig's? Behavior that you do not consider illegal.

So why would people plead guilty? Craig's vehement denial that he is gay provides the answer. For people who are so invested in denying that they are who they are, who are so filled with self-loathing about their own sexuality that it is preferable to engage in anonymous risky public bathroom sexual acts rather than simply come out of the closet, who may even be part of the decision making process that legislates the demonizing of others like themselves, the last thing in the world they want is a public trial.

As long as we live in a culture where fighting against teh gay is a viable political strategy (yes, I'm looking at you, Republican Party, and the crass exploitation of homophobia) we will have men who live in the closet. As long as we have men living in the closet this tearoom trade will continue.

Or - after rereading some of the posts I glossed over - what mal4prez said.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 3:53 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Quote:
Originally Posted by Pirate News:

Damn, I have to agree with Hero.

Except Craig should be summarily executed for treason at Gitmo, for voting for amnesty for illegal aliens.

Yep & Yep...

I can't believe it myself. I didn't find one single thing Hero said to be out of wack with my ideas.

This entire Craig scenario is complete and utter bullshit. Instead of going after our law breaking public officals and making them pay for their crimes against the people they are supposed to be serving, they scapegoat this man and dish out some sensationalistic bullshit for us sheep to talk about all week while the criminals can keep doing criminal things behind the scenes. It's misdirection that would make Houdini proud, pure and simple.

I wonder what bullshit they'll try to feed us next week. Anybody want to place bets on which party the newest scapegoat will be from and what level of government we're talking about?

Oh... wait.... I forgot. We're all going to be bashing Britney Spears for how fat and out of shape she's gotten for at least a week now. That poor girl. Everybody's turned on her. I saw that and she didn't look bad at all. Maybe a little less than enthused, but certainly not fat or out of shape. It's a wonder why all these thirteen year old girls are bulemic and aneorexic, and Brook Shields is telling new moms to pop pills.

Here's a good idea.... everybody turn off your damn TV and don't read the paper or the news on the internet. They haven't figured out a way to remotely implant thoughts in our heads yet, so if we all do this we can all go back to being relatively sane again.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 7:05 PM

RUE

I have a vote and I'm not afraid to use it!

OK - I heard this on the radio - by report, this is a joke going around in Idaho -

Craig - born in Idaho, reared in Minneapolis.

***************************************************************
"Global warming - it's not just a fact, it's a choice."

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 8:26 PM

John Lee, conspiracy therapist at Hollywood award-winner History Channel-mocked SNL-spoofed PirateNew.org wooHOO!!!!!!

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
Quote:
Originally posted by Storymark:
And there is a minor expectation for privacy in a public restroom, which last I heard, did not include propositioning sex in said public place.

The Supreme Court has spoken on the issue of privacy in public restrooms, so its hardly minor.

And propositioning sex between adults in not illegal anywhere. It may be unwelcome, but not illegal. Actual sex in public is illegal, offering money for sex is illegal, exposing oneself is illegal, there's lots of potential illegal activities. Senator Craig was not accused of any of those things.

Hero of the gay bar.

Bush and Blair at the gay bar

Jeff Gannon toured the Jr Bush White House 200 times
inluding sleep-overs in the homosexual Lincoln Bedroom
www.johnnygosch.com

Vote for Ron Paul. Please.

NOTIFY: N | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, September 11, 2007 9:05 PM

PIRATECAT

And all this time I thought masons were giving me secret hand shakes in the mens room. Damn now I know that I am just a sexy and very attractive man. If I was a good liberal I wouldn't bash any homo pervert but since I am evil registered republican put him in jail so he can gets his hearts desire. Next time I'll tease these old bastards for a case of beer.

"Battle of Serenity, Mal. Besides Zoe here, how many-" "I'm talkin at you! How many men in your platoon came out of their alive".

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:15 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by SoupCatcher:
So if you think that the tactic was wrong in this instance then you have to ask yourself if the thousands of applications of this very same tactic countrywide over the past few decades are also wrong.

The tactic was correct, the execution was flawed. In this case the officer acted too soon and arrested the suspect before the crime was committed. In this case the crime is along the lines of lewd behaivor or indecent exposure. Sometimes it happens. In order to correct this mistake the officer tries to get a taped confession. That didn't happen either because the officer conducted an extremely poor interview in my opinion and based on the others I've heard or been involved in. This officer blew it, not Senator Craig (pun intended).

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 12, 2007 4:58 AM

Quote:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:
Oh... wait.... I forgot. We're all going to be bashing Britney Spears for how fat and out of shape she's gotten for at least a week now. That poor girl. Everybody's turned on her. I saw that and she didn't look bad at all.

The real question we all need to ask is...would you have sex with her if you could? My answer is the same now as its been since 1999...yes. Sure, I'd be thinking about her 1999-2004 body and trying not to look to closely (if you squint real hard she's hotter then ever)...

H

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, September 12, 2007 5:01 AM

MAL4PREZ

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
I note for the record that if you eliminate the whole gay thing, your statement about "seedy abonymous sex" is actually something a lot of men and women in America would agree with (especially if between the ages of 15 and 40 and on Friday and Saturday nights).

I'm not sure what you mean... they would agree with what? That they want anonymous sex?

Whatever. To get my point, imagine these that men and women you speak of, after taking their morning-after pills and sleeping off their hangovers, spent Monday through Friday actively trying to shut down all the local nightclubs and putting everyone sitting in a bar on Tuesday in jail for leading an immoral life.

And then, of course, the do-gooders would go out again on Friday, and when arrested for having drunken sex in an alley, would claim they were just tempted by Satan and use that as reason to try even harder to imprison the poor schmoe having 2 harmless beers midweek.

6string - the really sad thing is that the news folks aren't making an effort to sell us Britney Spears to distract us. This crap is all over because it's what sells. It's what viewers tune in to see. Until we, the people, pull our heads out, we deserve this rotten system we have. Sad truth. The aren't brainwashing us, we're brainwashing ourselves.

And this Craig thing isn't just fodder for the sheep like the latest Paris Hilton crap. Senator Craig's story is yet another way that our freedoms are being limited - hypocrits in power getting preachy. I know gay rights are less important to you than your right to smoke, 6string, but it falls in the same class. I would argue that the empowerment of the people and the improvement of our country won't happen without empathy. Here's your chance...

-----------------------------------------------
hmm-burble-blah, blah-blah-blah, take a left

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:25 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Quote:
Originally posted by Hero:
The real question we all need to ask is...would you have sex with her if you could? My answer is the same now as its been since 1999...yes. Sure, I'd be thinking about her 1999-2004 body and trying not to look to closely (if you squint real hard she's hotter then ever)...

H

You don't even have to squint, my man. I doubt any guy on this board has a better looking woman at home with them. I thought she looked great when I watched it on YouTube the next morning. Bunch of judgemental bastards turning on her. One more reason I say Hollywood can kiss my ass. In short, that's a big hell yes.

I would have said yes to that question even back in 1997 because as I didn't make a video of it and live in Georgia, it would have been legal for me to do so.

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Saturday, September 15, 2007 10:41 PM

6IXSTRINGJACK

Quote:
Originally posted by mal4prez:
And this Craig thing isn't just fodder for the sheep like the latest Paris Hilton crap. Senator Craig's story is yet another way that our freedoms are being limited - hypocrits in power getting preachy. I know gay rights are less important to you than your right to smoke, 6string, but it falls in the same class. I would argue that the empowerment of the people and the improvement of our country won't happen without empathy. Here's your chance...

Craig certainly is nothing more than fodder for the sheep like Paris Hilton. Only he's fodder for the gay sheep-folk and gay sheep-sympatizers, rather than the entire pool of sheeple. Just nother victory for the gay community to hail as another stake in the big bad republican religious evil judgemental heart.

What are you suggesting I empathize with? You bet your ass that gay rights mean very little to me in my personal life compared to smoking, but both sides of the gay rights coin do matter to me because both sides are being handled in a very unconstitutional way. Here are my stances on homosexuality, which I'm not afraid to say, and have stated more than several times on this board:

1). No homosexual should be denied the right to marriage recognized by the Government, and shall be denied any of the tax breaks or benefits that traditional marriages bring.

2) No Government agency has any right to tell a Church or an organization, such as the Boy Scouts, that they must allow homosexuals in their club. Homosexuals can come together and do the American thing, which would be to form their own club or church instead of further using the Government to piss on our freedom. (Are you seeing the parallells here to allowing a business to decide if it wants to allow smoking or not? That's the free market baby... THAT, is freedom)

3) No Government agency shall, through witholding of money normally granted the above organizations, hold them "hostage" via cutting off their funds, or denying them the ability to use property which they have used for years prior until they comply with allowing homosexuals in their group. (All things which the Government has already done to the Boy Scouts)

4) No Government agency shall apply any pressure to any group whatsoever to get rid of their anti-homosexuality practices unless they cross the line and start to physically abuse homosexuals. (Which almost NEVER happens anymore)

The only part of that statement that I do happen to agree with is that, regardless of which issue I feel more strongly about, the smoking issue and the gay issue are actually very, very similar. Identical even.... right down to the part where we both like sticking things in our mouths that a majority of the other people don't care much for.... and, for whatever reason, those that take the "moral high ground" can't seem to keep their fucking mouths shut about either.

Let's see a homosexual non-smoker say that? Where's my empathy? Hard to give it to me when my smoke tax goes to giving kids health care. Maybe they should make a gay tax and a fat tax and give kids health care with that too?

Oh, do I pity the poor, fat, gay smoker on that day....

"A government is a body of people, usually notably ungoverned." http://www.myspace.com/6ixstringjack

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Monday, September 17, 2007 4:53 AM