Gay Republic Daily

Open Forum - Larry Craig

berto - Aug 28, 2007 - 03:53 AM
Post subject:
It ain't just Bob Allen...

Another GOP Lawmaker Busted In Washroom

Quote:
Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho pleaded guilty this month to misdemeanor disorderly conduct after being arrested at the Minneapolis airport.

A Hennepin County court docket showed Craig pleading guilty to the disorderly conduct charge Aug. 8, with the court dismissing a charge of gross misdemeanor interference to privacy.

The court docket said the Republican senator paid $575 in fines and fees. He was put on unsupervised probation for a year. A sentence of 10 days in the county workhouse was stayed.

Roll Call, a Capitol Hill newspaper, which first reported the case, said on its Web site Monday that Craig was arrested June 11 by a plainclothes officer investigating complaints of lewd conduct in a men's restroom at the airport.

Craig, a social conservative, supported both attempts to advance a proposed constitutional amendment banning gay marriage and opposes adding sexuality to the groups covered under hate crime laws and to a bill protecting LGBT workers.

Craig said in a statement issued by his office Monday that he was not involved in any inappropriate conduct.

"At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions," he said. "I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

Feral - Aug 28, 2007 - 09:39 AM
Post subject:
What's this?

Would this be the same Senator Larry Craig that Mike Rodgers has been going on about for some time now?

So it would appear.

From another source:

Quote:
We did receive this statement from Craig's office: "At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions. I was not involved in any inappropriate conduct. I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

Records show the veteran Republican senator was fined $1,000, plus $575 in fees. He was placed on unsupervised probation for a year. A sentence of 10 days in the county workhouse was stayed.


Ah... the "misconstruing my actions" gambit. A little old, a little tired, and definitely used before. I can hardly wait for the police report to surface. I'm frankly surprised it didn't some weeks ago. After all, the incident was in June.
Feral - Aug 28, 2007 - 09:46 AM
Post subject:
Romney Camp Removes Craig YouTube Video

Quote:
Today's news about Sen. Larry Craig's June arrest at an airport in Minnesota has prompted Mitt Romney's campaign to take down a YouTube video starring the senator, who has been a supporter of Romney. The Romney campaign named Craig a co-chair of the former governor's Idaho Leadership Team back in late May, but Craig has now distanced himself from the Romney camp.

"Senator Craig has stepped down from his role with the campaign. He did not want to be a distraction and we accept his decision," Romney spokesman Matt Rhoades told us tonight.

Rain - Aug 28, 2007 - 01:22 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho pleaded guilty this month to misdemeanor disorderly conduct after being arrested at the Minneapolis airport.


See, in NYC he'd get a misdemeanor public indecency or moralities charge. Even the sentence was political. Just so it doesn't look like he was sucking dick in a public toilet.
Feral - Aug 29, 2007 - 04:58 AM
Post subject:
Sen. Larry Craig: "I Did Nothing Wrong"

Quote:
(CBS/AP) Under fire from leaders of his own party, Idaho Sen. Larry Craig on Tuesday said the only thing he had done wrong was to plead guilty after a complaint of lewd conduct in a men's room. He declared, "I am not gay. I never have been gay."

"I did nothing wrong at the Minneapolis airport," he said at a news conference with his wife, Suzanne, at his side.

Craig's defiant news conference came as Senate Republican leaders in Washington called for an ethics committee review into his involvement in a police sting operation this summer in the airport men's room.


No? Nothing wrong at all?

There is another version of events... the police's version.
Rain - Aug 29, 2007 - 08:45 AM
Post subject:
Oh my, my, my...the local news here is having a BALL with this story. Pun totally intended! he he he...
berto - Aug 29, 2007 - 02:31 PM
Post subject:
Oh, the ignomy for a right-wing Republican... he's being compared to Bill Clinton!

Quote:
Mitt Romney late Tuesday distanced himself from one of his top Senate supporters, comparing his actions to President Clinton's affair with an intern and a former Republican congressman's overtures to male teenage pages.

Sen. Larry Craig, R-Idaho, has pleaded guilty to misdemeanor charges stemming from complaints of lewd conduct in a men's room. Craig held a prominent role with Romney's presidential campaign, serving as a Senate liaison for the campaign since February. He resigned from the post.

[...]

"Yeah, I think it reminds us of Mark Foley and Bill Clinton," Romney said on CNBC's "Kudlow & Company." "I think it reminds us of the fact that people who are elected to public office continue to disappoint, and they somehow think that if they vote the right way on issues of significance or they can speak a good game, that we'll just forgive and forget."

[...]

While Romney said Craig "disappointed the American people," he didn't call on Craig to resign from the Senate.

"I haven't seen the allegations yet, I just heard that there was a guilty plea and he submitted a resignation as my liaison in the Senate," Romney said.

[...]

Romney, a former Massachusetts governor, has suggested stripping the federal pensions from those convicted of using their office to abuse the public trust.

berto - Aug 29, 2007 - 03:10 PM
Post subject:
Ever at the forefront of titillation, ABC News discovers "cruising"...

Secret Signals: How Gay Men Cruise for Sex
berto - Aug 29, 2007 - 03:22 PM
Post subject:
Senate GOP leaders call for ethics probe of Craig

Chris Crain says:

Quote:
We should take no joy in the ruin of Larry Craig's marriage and reputation — even if it is well deserved and a long time in coming. The man has known for two years now he was under intense scrutiny for rumors that he's gay and has sex in public toilets. Not since Bill Clinton have we been treated to a public figure so compulsively unable to control the little head with the big one.

But you won't find me arguing that somehow Larry Craig's self-destruction is an argument for my own equality. I can think of about 533 more effective arguments we could make that don't require someone else's ruin or suggest we all share some general (im)moral equivalence. Gay Americans are entitled to equal treatment and protection against discrimination whether or not every member of Congress who voted against gay rights has an utterly umblemished sexual history.

If Larry Craig really does troll public toilets for sex, it doesn't prove his "family values" rhetoric is claptrap anymore than Bill Clinton's infidelity proved his support for gay rights was the product of his promiscuity. The case for gay rights is compelling enough on its own merits. Let's not jump in the mud and join in the muckraking.

Feral - Aug 29, 2007 - 04:48 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
If Larry Craig really does troll public toilets for sex, it doesn't prove his "family values" rhetoric is claptrap


No? I fail to see how.
Rain - Aug 30, 2007 - 05:15 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
While Romney said Craig "disappointed the American people," he didn't call on Craig to resign from the Senate.


Ah, but the "clever" forces of the Republican right have indeed called on Mr. Craig to resign tonight. So sayeth our local news reporter.

This has become THE leading news story in NYC. People in this town take unbridled glee over Republican faux pas. And this counts as something more than a mere faux pas. The local reporter actually gave us a litany of misdeeds, peccadillos, wrongdoings, shennanigans, and other acts of moral turpitude by this incumbent administration's minions and its allies in the christian right . He blithely pointed out that it's disingenous to publicly chastise certain groups for their lifestyles (didn't mention those "certain groups") while secretly partaking of the forbidden fruit.

Some nights it's just fun to sit and watch television in the United States.
Feral - Aug 30, 2007 - 05:57 AM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
Ah, but the "clever" forces of the Republican right have indeed called on Mr. Craig to resign tonight. So sayeth our local news reporter.


And so it begins.


Sens. Coleman And McCain Call For Craig To Resign


Quote:
Sens. Norm Coleman (R-MN) and John McCain (R-AZ) have become the first members of the Senate to call for Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) to resign over his arrest for alleged “lewd conduct” in an airport bathroom. Craig, who was arrested in June, pled guilty to “disorderly conduct” charges on August 8, though the plea was kept secret until Roll Call newspaper broke the story on Monday.

The AP reports, “Sen. Norm Coleman of Minnesota, where Craig was arrested, became the first Senate Republican to say Craig should leave office. ‘Senator Craig pled guilty to a crime involving conduct unbecoming a senator,’ he said in a statement. ‘He should resign.’”

In an interview with CNN’s John King this afternoon, McCain said he thinks Craig “should resign”

berto - Aug 30, 2007 - 08:38 AM
Post subject:
I say fuck the calls to resign.

Craig was right on two things: the guilty plea was a mistake, and he didn't do anything wrong.

He may EVEN be right on the last one: he isn't gay. (He'd just better not try to argue that he's heterosexual...)
vanrozenheim - Aug 30, 2007 - 11:29 AM
Post subject:
What is puzzling me is why all those closeted guys in the politics are married. We have had a couple of closeted conservative homosexuals here as well, but they were all "bachelours" and refrained from anti-Gay rhetorics. Non of them had the guts to come out early when it could spoil their career, but they mostly avoided publicity of this kind. Apparently, it seems quite impossible to make a political career in the US for an unmarried man - correct me if I am wrong. This would resemble very much the situation in the big business here.
Feral - Aug 30, 2007 - 09:10 PM
Post subject:
The Outing of Larry Craig?

Quote:
Like many gay people, I have mixed feelings about outing. Larry Craig has opposed legislation like the Employment Non-Discrimination Act, ENDA, that would benefit gay and lesbian people, and he has been a vocal supporter of several anti-gay bills. Craig voted for the Defense of Marriage Act. He supports a Constitutional amendment to ban same-sex marriage. If he’s gay, then he’s a shade of Roy Cohn, and I believe he should be exposed as a self-loathing hypocrite. If he’s had sex with other men, then he’s been playing a very nasty political game. He has attacked his own to advance his career within the fundamentalist, gay-bating GOP. If Larry Craig is a closeted homosexual, then I am in the awkward position of having no fellow feeling for him whatsoever. I’m a lesbian, and I was once closeted, but I can’t sympathize. Why? Because I didn’t toss rocks at other gays and lesbians from the safety of my closet. I didn’t hide behind closed doors in my glass house and do active harm to my GLBT brothers and sisters.

I feel no pity for Larry Craig. Like Mike Rogers, the blog writer who has theoretically and allegedly "outed" Craig, I would show the Senator no mercy. Craig has done nothing whatsoever to deserve it. On the contrary, he has courted our anger and our scorn. And yet outing is such an odd and unsettling thing. Why is it that being gay is still so shocking? Why is the private life of a boring, dull, workaday politician like Larry Craig suddenly front-page news? Does it really still surprise us that public figures lie about their private lives or that conservative Republicans really do come in all races, creeds, and sexual orientations -- they just hide it to get ahead in a homophobic and heterosexist world?

Feral - Aug 30, 2007 - 09:11 PM
Post subject:
GOP Leaders Strip Craig Of Committee Assignments

Quote:
BOISE, Idaho, Aug. 29 -- Sen. Larry Craig went on vacation with his wife Wednesday, according to aides, as calls for his resignation intensified, Republican leaders stripped him of his committee assignments, and support in his home state appeared to be eroding.

On the day after Craig dismissed having pleaded guilty to a charge of disorderly conduct in an airport restroom as an overreaction to a mistaken arrest, and insisted that he is not gay, even longtime supporters expressed disappointment.

...

Senate GOP leaders said that Craig "agreed to comply" with their request that he step down as the ranking Republican on the Veterans' Affairs Committee and two subcommittees while the ethics committee assesses his case. The move, they said, was for "the good of the Senate."

The intensity of the Republican leaders' assault on one of their own was stunning, if for no other reason than its unusual -- un-senatorial -- nature. Several ethics lawyers and experts could not provide an example in the past two decades of one senator calling for the ethics committee to investigate a colleague.

...

"You know, I don't understand if he just touched somebody's foot why he pleaded guilty," Anderson, the beautician, said as she prepared for her first customer. "We're a Republican state. We're Idaho. He's dishonored us."

Rain - Aug 30, 2007 - 10:54 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
“The real question for Republicans in Washington is how low can you go, because we are approaching a level of ridiculousness,”said Mr. Reed, sounding exasperated in an interview on Tuesday morning. “You can’t make this stuff up. And the impact this is having on the grass-roots around the country is devastating. Republicans think the governing class in Washington are a bunch of buffoons who have total disregard for the principles of the party, the law of the land and the future of the country.”


I just love this opinion piece in the NY Times.

I'm still grinning like an idiot over this!!!
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:15 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
What is puzzling me is why all those closeted guys in the politics are married. We have had a couple of closeted conservative homosexuals here as well, but they were all "bachelours" and refrained from anti-Gay rhetorics.


This is a question that goes to the core of America's hypocritical, totally fictional, and ultimately emotionally damaging view of itself. This is a nation steeped in the idea of the morally irreprehensible, well-connected, well-bred, well-educated, impeccably attired, wife and 2.5 kids, one dog, two cars, Sunday worshiping, protestant christian, and preferably white, politician.

It's a Norman Rockwell image taken right out of the pages of the Saturday Evening Post and framed in misty, Courier & Ives tones. And it's the kind of society that the Reagan Republicans set about to "reestablish". As if it ever existed in the first place. But it's the myth of what constitutes being an American. It's the reason why the Boys Scouts will not allow homosexuals within their ranks. It's the picture painted by bible thumping preachers. And it's also the hallowed ideal every politician tries to impress upon the masses...obviously to their own farcical hubris.
Feral - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:49 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
Republicans think the governing class in Washington are a bunch of buffoons who have total disregard for the principles of the party, the law of the land and the future of the country.


What a bizarre allegation -- this claim that Republicans would think anything of the kind about their elected officials. Why, that would be tantamount to asserting that Republicans are sensible people. It has not been my experience that this is generally the case.

Quick -- someone do one of those polls to determine whether these allegedly sensible Republicans can find their own country on an unlabeled map of the world (yes, the entire world... no cheating with those Western Hemisphere maps).

vanrozenheim wrote:
Apparently, it seems quite impossible to make a political career in the US for an unmarried man - correct me if I am wrong. This would resemble very much the situation in the big business here.


I shall have to consult with more learned people, but I would agree that it is quite uncommon to have a political career as an unmarried man in the US. Married men are often thought to be more "settled." I don't know if this is a widespread view or not. Certainly it is an ill-informed view. Married men are by no means "settled" so far as I have witnessed. Hell -- take a peek at the behavior of married men in the Republican Party (no real need to spare the Democrats either). "Settled" my ass.
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 05:05 AM
Post subject:
vanrozenheim wrote:
Apparently, it seems quite impossible to make a political career in the US for an unmarried man - correct me if I am wrong. This would resemble very much the situation in the big business here.


It works just the same way on this side of the pond, Vicky. Generally, there is a glass ceiling in corporate America for unmarried men. Generally, they assume there is something wrong with you if you haven't married by the time you're 40. At the very least, they may think you're a philandering sot, at the very "worst", they may assume you're a fag. Either way, you will experience fewer and less substantial pay raises and may never get very far within your company. The rationale being that a married man with children needs the extra income and you do NOT. And that a married man embodies traditional ideas of responbility and trustworthiness and you do NOT.

But also, it is expected of you to bring your wife to company functions. More than a few Hollywood movies have satirized the bachelor coroporate go-getter desperate to find a woman to pass off as his wife to impress the higher ups.

Yes, there's a general western, indeed HETEROSEXUAL, belief that if you do not marry there is something somehow wrong with you.
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 05:20 AM
Post subject:
For those of you who are interested...a copy of Larry Craig's arrest report.

I'm sure inquiring minds want to know. BTW...the charge was LEWD CONDUCT. You will need a PDF reader to view it.

Now, was I right, or was I right?

I'm STILL grinning like an idiot! Rolling
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 05:23 AM
Post subject:
He didn't even FLUSH the toilet. Fer, I wanted to put this last link up because I KNEW YOU would appreciate it.
Feral - Aug 31, 2007 - 05:40 AM
Post subject:
Why would he flush the toilet? It's not like he was using it for it's intended purpose. At least, not according to the plain clothes cop.
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 05:44 AM
Post subject:
Don't really know for sure. He may have indeed done #2. The man had to sit down on it to give "the signal" under the bathroom stall divider.
Feral - Aug 31, 2007 - 06:12 AM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
Now, was I right, or was I right?


Oh, you were right, all right. For some as of yet unexplained reason he was able to plead guilty to a lesser charge than the two he was arrested for. It's odd, though nowhere near so odd as pleading guilty in the first place. I note, however, that nowhere in the arrest report is there any indication that the senator did not know what he was being arrested for... just an (entirely understandable) unwillingness to leave the restroom in the company of a police officer. I would have expected at least some curiosity on this score... if the senator's subsequent explanations of his behavior are accurate.
vanrozenheim - Aug 31, 2007 - 06:54 AM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
Yes, there's a general western, indeed HETEROSEXUAL, belief that if you do not marry there is something somehow wrong with you.

Uhm, time for me to look for a husband? Twisted Evil

It isvery unlikely for me prsonally to ever jump as high to meet the glas ceiling by myself, but I heard some friends complain, yes. I was confronted once with the argument that a single man does not "need" the same money as his married straight counterpart, that much can be certified. Ridiculously, the argumentation never worked the other way, e.g. when the wife of the straight colleague was well-employed.

In many, many medium-sized businesses here in Germany it is clearly expected that an employee in a leading position is married, a Christian and has 2 children (Germany is an over-populated country). They will never be as foolish to admit such things in larger public, but they are quitely observing the employees and making their conclusions and decisions.

How much someone must love money and power to twist his life into being a homophobic right-wing republican Senator?
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 01:39 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Editorial
Disowning Senator Craig

Published: August 31, 2007
The Republican Party is in quite a rush to keelhaul Senator Larry Craig for his run-in with the vice squad in an airport men’s room. Disclosure of the senator’s guilty plea to disorderly conduct set off a frenzy to demand an investigation by the Senate’s somnolent Ethics Committee and to strip Mr. Craig of his committee seniority. Some of the senator’s peers simply demanded that he resign.

[...]

Being stupid as a member of Congress is hardly a reason to be ridden on a rail from Washington. But Republican presidential campaigners are urging Mr. Craig to resign fast as a swift boat. One senator offered the ultimate rebuff between political pros by returning Mr. Craig’s campaign donation.

[...]

To the extent Senator Craig, a stalwart in the family values caucus, might morph into a blatant hypocrite before the voters’ eyes, he reflects on the party’s record in demonizing homosexuality. The rush to cast him out betrays the party’s intolerance, which is on display for the public in all of its ugliness. But it also betrays their political uneasiness as the next election approaches.



The Times weighs in editorially.
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 01:46 PM
Post subject:
vanrozenheim wrote:
Ridiculously, the argumentation never worked the other way, e.g. when the wife of the straight colleague was well-employed.


And raises and promotions have never been revoked because a married man has divorced his wife.

vanrozenheim wrote:
In many, many medium-sized businesses here in Germany it is clearly expected that an employee in a leading position is married, a Christian and has 2 children (Germany is an over-populated country).

Here the myth requires the arbitrary but statistically appealing 2.5 children. Although no one as of yet has ever seen that .5 child. Presumably, millions of heterosexual couples in America are hiding hideously deformed children. This may explain the need for those raises and promotions...not to mention the myriad financial perks that come with their legally sanctioned marriages.
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:07 PM
Post subject:
There was a new book coming out which ironically was going to out Craig.

READ
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:18 PM
Post subject:
Tape Released Of Senator's Police Interrogation

Quote:
The officer who arrested Sen. Larry Craig in a police undercover operation at an airport men's room accused the senator of lying to him during an interrogation afterward, according to an audiotape of the arrest.

On the tape, released Thursday by the Minneapolis Airport Police, the Idaho Republican senator, in turn, accuses the officer of soliciting him for sex.

"I'm not gay. I don't do these kinds of things," Craig told Sgt. Dave Karsnia minutes after the two men met in a men's room at the airport on June 11.

"You shouldn't be out to entrap people," Craig told the officer. "I don't want you to take me to jail."

Karsnia replied that Craig wouldn't be going to jail as long as he cooperated.

The two men disagreed about virtually everything that had occurred minutes earlier, including whether there was a piece of paper on the floor of the stall and the meaning of the senator's hand gestures. At no time did Craig admit doing anything wrong, although weeks later he pleaded guilty to a reduced misdemeanor charge of disorderly conduct.

"You're not being truthful with me. I'm kind of disappointed in you, senator," Karsnia told Craig during the interrogation.

[...]

On the tape, Craig and the arresting officer can be heard arguing over what happened in the men's room minutes earlier. Craig acknowledges that the men's feet bumped, but says nothing improper happened.

"Did we bump? Yes, I think we did. You said so. I don't disagree with that," Craig said.

But Craig disputes the officer's account that he swept his hand under the stall next to him in an apparent effort to advance the encounter. They even disagree whether Craig used his right hand or his left hand.

Craig said he was merely trying to pick up a piece of paper - an account the officer disputes.

"I'm telling you that I could see, so I know that's your left hand. Also I could see a gold ring on this finger, so that's obvious it was the left hand," Karsnia tells Craig.

"Well we can dispute that," Craig says. "I'm not going to fight you in court. I reached down with my right hand to pick up the paper."

Karsnia said in a police report that he recognized Craig's hand gesture as a signal aimed at initiating sex. "It should be noted that there was not a piece of paper on the bathroom floor, nor did Craig pick up a piece of paper," he said in the report.

Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:21 PM
Post subject:
Quote:

"Well we can dispute that," Craig says. "I'm not going to fight you in court. I reached down with my right hand to pick up the paper."


Depending on the toilets in question...this shouldn't be hard to prove.
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:23 PM
Post subject:
We should start a forum poll on who's next to get caught with his pants down. My vote goes for David Dreier, congressman from California's 26th congressional district.

Oh yeah, she's a screamer if I ever sawed one!
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:26 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
"I'm not gay. I don't do these kinds of things," Craig told Sgt. Dave Karsnia minutes after the two men met in a men's room at the airport on June 11. "You shouldn't be out to entrap people," Craig told the officer. "I don't want you to take me to jail."


What kinds of things? How Freudian of her! She must be worried about what could happen to middle-aged Senatorial booty in the clink!

I'm STILL grinning like an idiot! Rolling
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:39 PM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
We should start a forum poll on who's next to get caught with his pants down. My vote goes for David Dreier, congressman from California's 26th congressional district.

Oh yeah, she's a screamer if I ever sawed one!


Is his homosexuality still some sort of secret?!
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:46 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Is his homosexuality still some sort of secret?!


Only to his mummy!
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:53 PM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
Quote:
Is his homosexuality still some sort of secret?!


Only to his mummy!


[drift]"Mummy" ? Not Mommy? How very... British... of you. Smile Or Canadian... Wink [/drift]
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:53 PM
Post subject:
GOP Sources: Craig Mulls Resignation From Senate
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 03:55 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
"Mummy" ? Not Mommy? How very... British... of you. Or Canadian...


How very Canadian of you to notice! Speech patterns being what they are in NY, spelling is always drifting here between the two norms too. Theatre is almost always theatre here...not "theater". Likewise, center tends toward centre more than you would expect. And bobby for "cop" is not unheard of. You'd like my correspondence between me and the bloggers of a "polari" site in London on the strange similarities between NYC gay slang and London gay slang. It's almost the same gay dialect.
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:00 PM
Post subject:
Meh... I majored in English. I'm a word geek. *blush*

Quote:
Theatre is almost always theatre here...not "theater".


Only barbarians mis-spell theatre... Razz
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:01 PM
Post subject:
berto wrote:
GOP Sources: Craig Mulls Resignation From Senate


Quote:
Craig has not made any public statements about his case since an appearance earlier this week in Boise, Idaho, in which he said he had done nothing wrong. "I am not gay. I never have been gay," he added emphatically.




I'm STILL grinning like an idiot! Rolling
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:06 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
I majored in English. I'm a word geek.


Ahh...I knew there was a reason why I liked you 'berty! I'm a word nerd too!
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:07 PM
Post subject:
A sympathetic homophobe?

Quote:
Sgt. Dave Karsnia shielded the men he arrested in the airport bathroom from embarrassment.

After he flashed a badge, he would point silently to the exit. When one man said his wife was waiting at a gate, Karsnia called for a citation book to spare the man a trip to the airport police station.

And when his bathroom stings netted a U.S. senator from Idaho, he even promised him, "I don't call media."

That promise - which Karsnia seems to have kept - didn't do Sen. Larry Craig much good.

Craig's arrest was surely the biggest of Karsnia's career, but it was only one of more than a dozen he made in the Minneapolis airport's restrooms this summer.

Just 29, his record has been that of a rising young officer. He joined the Minneapolis Airport Police in 2000 as a community services officer, just out of college. Three years later, he was named the department's Officer of the Year, and in 2005 he was promoted to sergeant. Last year, he finished his master's degree.

The last time Karsnia was in the media spotlight, it was because of his efforts to get speeding electric carts carrying passengers and luggage at the airport to slow down. The issue came to light last year when a young boy was run over and dragged by a cart and suffered a second-degree carpet burn.

Karsnia was in charge of cart enforcement at the time. That got him on ABC's "Good Morning America" earlier this year.

Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:11 PM
Post subject:
berto wrote:
Only barbarians mis-spell theatre... Razz


Come to think of it...NY'ers find the spelling "humor" rather strange. We were always taught to spell it "humour" in school. Same goes with rumour. But it's not all-inclusive of all "-our"/"-or" spelling variations between British and American standards. Some words still require us to use the Websterian "or" spelling reform.
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 04:39 PM
Post subject:
That's it... along with 'ganders, I'm gonna adopt y'all as honorary Canucks. Very Happy
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 05:04 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
GOP Sources: Craig Mulls Resignation From Senate


Funny, he's "mulling" resignation from the Senate...yet the Repugnicans wanted him to resign and were indeed pressuring him privately to do so even before he was caught attempting to suck cock in a toilet.

They feared his toilet habits would be made public. It seems these days the Republican Party doesn't have to fear the wrath of voters at the polls, they lose more seats by exposing theirs.
Feral - Aug 31, 2007 - 06:46 PM
Post subject:
berto wrote:
I'm gonna adopt y'all as honorary Canucks. Very Happy


I shall never say "zed."
berto - Aug 31, 2007 - 07:22 PM
Post subject:
That's why it's only honorary... Razz
Rain - Aug 31, 2007 - 07:42 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
I shall never say "zed."


Ditto! That's just too French.
Rain - Sep 01, 2007 - 05:06 AM
Post subject:
ABC News is reporting that Larry Craig will announce that he will resign from the Senate by tomorrow at the earliest. Apparently top Republican have prevailed on him to resign in keeping with their no fag policy...at least no publicly known fag.

Pity...the Larry Craig Show was a better laugh in the dead zone of August than any rerun.
Rain - Sep 01, 2007 - 05:06 PM
Post subject: Senator to Quit Over Sex Sting, Officials Say
Quote:

Senator to Quit Over Sex Sting, Officials Say

By CARL HULSE
Published: September 1, 2007
WASHINGTON, Aug. 31 — Senator Larry E. Craig, Republican of Idaho, under intense pressure from party leaders to step down in the aftermath of an undercover sex sting, plans to resign his seat on Saturday, Republican Party officials said Friday.

[...]

The disclosure of Mr. Craig’s guilty plea to a misdemeanor charge resulting from his arrest in the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport in early June was not the only political setback for Republicans this week. On Friday, Senator John W. Warner of Virginia, the former Navy secretary and an influential party voice on military policy, announced in Charlottesville that he would not seek a sixth term in 2008, giving Democrats a better chance at that seat.

[...]

For four days, Republican officials engaged in an almost unheard of campaign to persuade Mr. Craig to step down. Speaking to reporters in his home state of Kentucky, Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican leader, on Thursday called Mr. Craig’s conduct “unforgivable.” Senator John Ensign of Nevada, chairman of the National Republican Senatorial Committee, raised the prospect of public ethics hearings should Mr. Craig remain in office. Senators also discussed the idea of withholding support for Mr. Craig should he try to run for re-election, according to aides.

[...]

Despite such unusual steps against a Senate colleague, Republicans took no punitive action against Senator David Vitter, Republican of Louisiana, after his acknowledgment this summer of involvement with an escort service that the police described as a prostitution front.

Party officials said Mr. Vitter’s case was different in that he faced no criminal charges and was not in the Senate but was serving in the House at the time. In the case of Mr. Craig, they said experience from a recent string of misconduct cases, including the House page scandal that hurt Republicans last year, had shown there was no time to waste if the political fallout was to be minimized.

“We have learned we have to move quickly,” said a senior Senate official who did not want to be identified discussing the political ramifications of Mr. Craig’s case.


Yes, the do have to move quickly. Considering how promiscuous Republican gays are there's no telling how many men's rooms they could hit before they're stopped.

NY Times Article
Feral - Sep 02, 2007 - 05:38 AM
Post subject: RE: Senator to Quit Over Sex Sting, Officials Say
Move more quickly? More quickly that what? If memory serves, Mr Foley resigned at once -- almost before anyone knew what it was he was resigning for. The haste there did not appear to have done much good. Senior Senate officials may claim they "have learned to move more quickly," but thus far they appear to be moving more slowly -- by something like four days. That just doesn't seen all that "quick" to me. Four hours after the story hit the wires... that would have demonstrated a certain initiative.
Feral - Sep 02, 2007 - 05:39 AM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
Quote:
I shall never say "zed."


Ditto! That's just too French.


Hear that Berto? It's just too French.

Down with 'zed.'
berto - Sep 02, 2007 - 01:31 PM
Post subject:
Feral wrote:
Rain wrote:
Quote:
I shall never say "zed."


Ditto! That's just too French.


Hear that Berto? It's just too French.

Down with 'zed.'


Pfffft! What, you sink zee French, zey say "zed"? "Zee" is a LOT more French-sounding, my dears...
berto - Sep 02, 2007 - 01:32 PM
Post subject:
The Nation

Quote:
I didn't stress this in my last post on Craig--because I didn't think I'd have to--but such dragnets are not only motivated by homophobia, but are practically, if not technically, police entrapment. They're a legacy of a pre-Lawrence legal order that criminalized sodomy, and they endure to this day because gay sex, even and perhaps especially the suggestion of its solicitation, is still seen as violation of the norms of public life.

Heterosexuals routinely use public space and the internet to solicit sex from each other; sometimes this sex is among perfect strangers or in public (or quasi-public) itself. Unless they involve minors, none of these practices are the subject of undercover busts. Instead they're romanticized (teenage makeout sites), tolerated as nuisances (bad pickup lines, whistles, Lindsay Lohan) or generally treated as vital, sexy aspects of modern social life and economy.

Just once I'd like to see the script flipped. Why don't the Minneapolis police post undercover female cops at airport bars who gesture provocatively towards the bathroom and then arrest any man who follows? Using newfound, post-9/11 surveillance powers, law enforcement should determine the identities of everyone who posts details of their sexcapades on www.milehighclub.com. These are dangerous, lewd heterosexuals who have admitted to having had actual sex--not in the airport--but on the airplane! Baby-faced, 21 Jump Street-type cops should be assigned to every high school to offer blowjobs to jocks underneath the bleachers. Anyone who shows up at the designated coordinates should be arrested. Depending on the jurisdiction, some arrestees may even get their names permanently listed on sex offender registries! The entire city of Myrtle Beach should be staked out for the month of March. And don't even get me started on the subject of Craigslist.

Rain - Sep 03, 2007 - 12:30 AM
Post subject:
berto wrote:

Pfffft! What, you sink zee French, zey say "zed"? "Zee" is a LOT more French-sounding, my dears...


Au contraire mon frčre...c'est trčs propre dire ¨zed¨ en français! Pas ¨zee¨!

Zed is said in French...see? Not "zee"!
Feral - Sep 03, 2007 - 02:49 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
Just once I'd like to see the script flipped. Why don't the Minneapolis police post undercover female cops at airport bars who gesture provocatively towards the bathroom and then arrest any man who follows?


The author has a point. Either it is illegal to invite someone to a sexual encounter under certain circumstances or it is not. There is no reason at all why the heterosexual goings-on should be tolerated one day longer.
vanrozenheim - Sep 03, 2007 - 03:33 AM
Post subject:
As always, there will be no discussion among those "conservatives" about homosexuality. As always, they will shake their heads and sigh about the sordidness of human nature and that "nobody can be trusted" -- 'cause "these faggots are lurking everywhere." Senator Craig, as hideous he might have be from the perspective of the Gay people, has dedicated much of his adult life to promotion of those "conservatives" agenda -- and he will be rewarded with nothing more than contempt and disgust, from that side. There is little difference between him and all of those other outcasts who served to this or that heterosexual cause just to be taught that faggots are the most despised creatures of the world, and all of their assumed merits count nothing in comparison to their cardinal, essential failure.
Rain - Sep 03, 2007 - 07:38 PM
Post subject:
Quote:

Rising Pressure From G.O.P. Led Senator to Quit
By CARL HULSE
Published: September 2, 2007

[...]

One Republican senator did privately voice reservations about the rush to force Mr. Craig out, compared to the lack of any public reprimand of Mr. Vitter. This senator and others said the different approach made it appear the party was simply less tolerant of homosexual conduct.

[...]

While some in Washington and even within the Republican Party suggested that the homosexual nature of the charge was a significant factor, others took pains to make a distinction between Mr. Craig’s case and those of Mr. Vitter and Mr. Stevens.

[...]

Others said there were clear distinctions that separated the Craig case from that of Mr. Vitter. Patrick Sammon, president of the Log Cabin Republicans, a Republican gay rights organization, said: “Senator Craig entered a guilty plea to this crime. Senator Vitter, while he is a terrible hypocrite and his behavior was rotten, he wasn’t convicted or charged with a crime.”




berto, feral...I have a theory about straight cruising vs. gay cruising. And it's long, involved, and takes into account certain cultural factors that are very, very American. That will await another post. In the meantime, click the headline to read.
Feral - Sep 04, 2007 - 01:48 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
I have a theory about straight cruising vs. gay cruising. And it's long, involved, and takes into account certain cultural factors that are very, very American.


Mmmmmmmm.

Just like fresh pie.

I await this theory with mounting expectation.
Rain - Sep 04, 2007 - 11:10 AM
Post subject:
Await for a lil while longer. I attempted to create a new partition on my hard drive and ended up erasing EVERYTHING. Well, I didn't, but Acronis Disk Director Suite did. But it did create a lovely partition. It was just totally empty...so was my C drive.
berto - Sep 06, 2007 - 01:04 AM
Post subject:
Savage on McGreevey on Larry Craig

Quote:
I should have posted something yesterday on Jim McGreevey’s op-ed in Monday’s Washington Post about Larry Craig. But I found it hard to suppress the urge to vomit every time I tried to read McGreevey’s piece, and I didn’t want to splatter vomit all over my newish laptop.

I got through it this morning and, man, what a dishonest piece of shit. It’s an absolutely nauseating piece, from its unctuous title (“A Prayer for Larry Craig”) to the italics at the end letting us know that the former New Jersey governor is studying to be an Episcopal priest. That would be the same ex-governor last seen in public making fun of his ex-wife’s dress sense.


You go, Dan!
Rain - Sep 07, 2007 - 12:19 AM
Post subject:
Oh dag nabbit! I think McGreevey's a hotty. I'd do him whatever!
vanrozenheim - Sep 07, 2007 - 11:48 AM
Post subject:
Craig Defends "Don't Ask, Don't Tell"
Quote:
By now most of America knows that Republican Senator Larry Craig of Idaho (seen here singing show tunes (?) with Senator Trent Lott and former Attorney General John Ashcroft) claims to have "a very wide stance" when going to the restroom. What some of you might not know, however, is that Senator Craig also served in the U.S. military, was dismissed from that service, and came to be an outspoken opponent of allowing gays to serve openly.

As reported this afternoon by blogger Mike Rogers on The Ed Schultz Program, there's a recent statement from Craig about his feelings on the matter.

In what could be called another of Craig’s "he said/he said situations," the Senator corresponded with a constituent (and SLDN supporter) earlier this month about why he’d never support repealing "Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell." In the August 17 letter to his constituent, Craig wrote that, "The armed forces exist to wage war. It is unacceptable to risk the lives of American soldiers and sailors merely to accommodate the sexual lifestyles of certain individuals." He also noted that, "I don’t believe the military should be a place for social experimentation."

berto - Sep 07, 2007 - 07:51 PM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
Oh dag nabbit! I think McGreevey's a hotty. I'd do him whatever!


There is no accounting for taste...
Rain - Sep 07, 2007 - 08:12 PM
Post subject:
berto wrote:
There is no accounting for taste...


ZED!
Feral - Sep 07, 2007 - 08:28 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
"I don’t believe the military should be a place for social experimentation."


But does the senator believe the military should be a place for a "wide stance"?
berto - Sep 08, 2007 - 02:03 PM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
berto wrote:
There is no accounting for taste...


ZED!


...I thought you were never gonna say that... Razz

Larry Craig's daughter is busted after tee-vee appearance

Quote:
On "America’s Most Wanted," suspects often get identified after their pictures are aired. Such was the case when Larry Craig’s daughter, Shea Suzanne Howell appeared on ABC. Craig can add the arrest of his daughter to the list of unintended consequences he is racking up. This sad event proves that "no good deed goes unpunished." After her national TV appearance, a Boise resident put 2 and 2 together and sent this little unsolicited nugget from the local sheriff's warrant list: Shae Suzanne Howell, wanted for contempt of court, $500 bond. We checked with officials at the jail and the April 18 contempt of court warrant is active. The original offense was unlawful entry and malicious injury to property.

berto - Sep 08, 2007 - 02:51 PM
Post subject:
Marc Fisher gets pissy about Michael Rogers...

Who Among Us Would Cast the First Stone? This Guy
Rain - Sep 08, 2007 - 03:35 PM
Post subject:
Don't see how he got pissy. If anything it's a rather badly hidden love-fest. Fisher literally oozes admiration.
Rain - Sep 08, 2007 - 06:26 PM
Post subject:
And now THIS from the pits of our own gay hell:

Quote:
Where the Craig "spectacle" departs from earlier ones is that some in the gay and lesbian community are participating in humiliating Craig or saying nothing as he has been attacked. Most of the leading gay groups have been silent, making no comment on Craig or the suspect police tactics used in the sting.

William K. Dobbs, a gay civil libertarian, described the performance of the gay groups as "Abysmal, absolutely abysmal. It seems the only sexual behavior they care about these days is within the context of marriage."

That the groups made no comment on the police was especially disturbing to Dobbs particularly since 40 other men were busted in the sting.

"It's not just the Craig thing, but this is an ongoing targeting," he said. "There has to be a way in these situations to say, 'Look I don't like this person, but I decry what is being done.'"

Historians who have written about gay life in the '50s, '60s and '70s and some who lived through those decades tended to first object to the sex sting when asked for a reaction. They also had some sympathy for Craig.
"You have to feel sorry for him without regard to his political beliefs," said Ken Sherrill, a professor of political science at Hunter College. "That shouldn't happen to anybody."

But in the gay blogosphere, some Web masters and readers have shown a barely disguised pleasure at the downfall of yet another right winger who was discovered violating the principles that he, his political party, or his church has championed.


I have abso-fucking-lutely NO qualms at all about attacking Craig. None. Nada. Zilch. Nein. Nicht. Nyet. and any other negative you can think of. I relish it. I have lived for it on various and sundry blogs under various and sundry pseudonyms and cybermonikers. Why? Because he's what he is and what he has been and that has done me and others like me a phenomenal disservice. So why should I even flinch at the thought of finally (though vicariously...since he really did it to himself) wielding the sword of fateful justice? Why should I? Because I'm a better faggot than Craig? I know I am. I'm out to all and everyone. I don't care that people know that I fuck and get fucked by my boyfriend. That's as it should be. Craig wasn't as he should be for years. He could have been. But he wasn't. And that hurt me, others like me, himself, his wife, his family, and ultimately, in some some small and hardly measurable way, his political party.

And that last one I really, really do thank him for.

Oh, yes, I empathize with the situation he was in. I've been there more than once. Don't you JUST hate having a good blow job interrupted by a nightstick and a flashlight? Doesn't anybody?

The last time I was rounded up I wasn't lucky enough to get even that. A blow job, I mean...cuz the flashlights and nightsticks I did get.

I was exiting Central Park at 1 a.m. That's the appointed curfew imposed under Mayor Edward I. Koch, another drama queen, during the height of the AIDS mongering. The cops need to fill monthly quotas here in NYC. Central Park has it's own precinct. It also has it's own cruising areas. It's had them ever since the park was built. Cruising them is a rite of passage and a lovely way to spend some time in the gloriously hot and humid NYC summer night.

That last time I was leaving the park, as I say. Well, my friend from who knows what country...he had an accent...well, SHE decides SHE wants to say hello to some boy jerking a rather humongous penis. So large it was quite visible in the 1 a.m. darkness from yards away. This dick was big.

Anyway, as I meander about waiting on her to "say hello", the cops bust in. We all got rounded up. To my horror I remember I had some head candy stashed in a pack of cigarettes. I ditched the pack as we were being led out of the park in some bushes. Some slick rookie cop saw me do it. Now, I wasn't handcuffed. I wasn't taken down to some station house. I was merely given two "desk appearance" tickets. One for marijuana possesion and the other for breaking the curfew in Central Park. How quaint. The judge who oversaw the whole thing a few months later laughed and dismissed it all. He's been there before it seems. And so have professors from Hunter College...that school being so conveniently close to the Rambles, the largest cruising area in Central Park. But I won't mention any names.

Quote:
"It's understandable the delight that people show, but that's kind of shortsighted," Johnson said. "We shouldn't be delighting in the tactics, the kind of homophobia that's behind the system that caught him. Ironically, he helped create it and perpetuate it."


And THAT is why I cackle with glee!

This guy quotes two of my political science professors in his piece, Duberman and Sherrill. I don't agree with that dribble. I have no sympathy for Craig. Not even after being in Craig's Manolo Blahniks. I don't care. SHE's a pig...in the 1960s sense of the word. And THIS is the reason why I have no reason for the pig:

Quote:
Craig has consistently opposed legislation sought by the gay and lesbian community, but he was never a right-wing leader and he was probably unknown to most gay and lesbian people before August 27 when Roll Call broke the arrest story. Still he earned the scorn of many gay men and lesbians who have been vilified by his peers and his political party.



Anyway...READ...I'm going to make my Saturday morning coffee and kick my boyfriend in the ass as he sleeps soundly in bed for giving me this nasty flu.
Feral - Sep 08, 2007 - 07:05 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Craig has consistently opposed legislation sought by the gay and lesbian community, but he was never a right-wing leader and he was probably unknown to most gay and lesbian people before August 27 when Roll Call broke the arrest story.


One must always be quite careful when discussing "most gay and lesbian people." The author does not know "most gay and lesbian people," and neither do I. It could easily be assumed that Craig was unknown to "most gay and lesbian people," and it can just as validly be supposed that he remains unknown to "most gay and lesbian people" even today.

In any event, Mr. Craig has been quite known to this particular Gay person for many years.

Quote:
"We shouldn't be delighting in the tactics, the kind of homophobia that's behind the system that caught him. Ironically, he helped create it and perpetuate it."


Who is this "WE"?

There is a certain segment of the Gay populace that is engaged in a dreamy and quixotic attempt to purge at least some corner of the world of this "kind of homophobia." Certainly it would be hypocritical in the extreme for members of that segment of the Gay populace to engage in such tactics, and it would be hypocritical as well for them to delight in the deployment of such tactics as deployed by others.

In the real world, such homophobia exists. It is alive and well. It has neither disappeared nor does it appear to be passing away, as a certain segment of the Gay populace wishes it would (and, indeed, is struggling quite hard to make it do so). The homophobia inherent in the Republican party is quite troublesome, politically -- a pity it will not simply "go away."

Mr. Rodgers' efforts serve a useful purpose. It would be an absurd error to presume that this purpose is the eradication of homophobia in the Republican Party, or even society at large.

Let the one-worlders go "tut, tut" all they wish.

I shall join Rain in cackling at the downfall of yet another of my enemies. If I believed the one-worlders had half a chance, I would also look forward to the day when one's choice of sex partners or sexual venues "doesn't matter." I don't believe such a thing though. Instead I will look forward to the day when people with "a wide stance" work for the good of the Gay people, not against it.
Rain - Sep 08, 2007 - 07:19 PM
Post subject:
Larry Craig voted in favor of the Defense of Marriage Act and twice for the federal marriage amendment. He voted against hate crimes legislation protecting gay men and lesbians. He refused to sponsor: ENDA, the legislation banning workplace discrimination, legislation to provide same-sex partners of American citizens immigration rights, and legislation to expand Medicaid to people with HIV.

He's an enemy of the gay people. PERIOD. If he was apprehended by the agents of the heterosexual state for engaging in cultural practices of the gay people which the heterosexual state has decreed illegal, that's his business. He wasn't in that toilet standing up for gay rights, he was bending down to give a cop a blow job.
berto - Sep 08, 2007 - 08:42 PM
Post subject:
Well, I'm not going to criticize Rain or Feral, any more than I criticized those who were glad to hear of the death of Ronnie Ray-gun (I was one of them). But I will no more condone the homophobic bust of Larry Craig -- because that's what it is -- than I condoned the homophobia displayed against Mark Foley.

Yes, I will even defend homophobic Republicans against homophobes. Wrong is wrong.
berto - Sep 08, 2007 - 08:49 PM
Post subject:
Idaho rep lashes out on Senate's handling of Craig

Quote:
Rep. Mike Simpson (R) condemned Senate GOP leaders yesterday for their treatment of fellow Idahoan Sen. Larry Craig (R), accusing them of hypocrisy. “I hope I never stub my toe and they throw me under the bus,” Simpson said of Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (Ky.) and other Republican leaders. “It kind of makes you wonder what party you want to be a member of.”

Simpson pointed a finger at Craig’s leaders for staying mum on the legal and personal jeopardy facing other GOP senators, including Alaskan Ted Stevens, now under federal investigations, and Louisianan David Vitter, who has admitted contacting an escort service. McConnell declined to comment, but Senate Republican sources shrugged off his frustration with their conference’s handling of Craig. “Who cares what Simpson thinks? He is irrelevant,” one Senate GOP aide said.


Court throws out arrest in Calif. restroom sex sting

Quote:
A Fresno, Calif., man's conviction for soliciting sex from a sheriff's deputy in a park restroom nearly five years ago was overturned by a three-judge panel, it was announced this week. But the ruling, which threw out the conviction of Stephen Lake, 51, did not address whether the bathroom stings were discriminatory because they targeted only homosexual activity. Instead, the judges ruled that prosecutors did not establish that someone was likely to be present who would have been offended by Lake's conduct, an element needed to prove a crime took place.

Lake's attorney, Bruce Nickerson, had argued the arrest and prosecution are discriminatory because men and women are never prosecuted for soliciting sex if money is not involved. He also said Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho, recently arrested in a similar sting in a Minneapolis airport, can probably also reverse his guilty plea on grounds of discrimination.

Feral - Sep 09, 2007 - 06:52 AM
Post subject:
Quote:
Well, I'm not going to criticize Rain or Feral, any more than I criticized those who were glad to hear of the death of Ronnie Ray-gun (I was one of them).


The comparison with the Ray Gun is quite apt. A number of people I've known quite well have had Alzheimer's... it is a dreadful disease. There really aren't words to describe just how dreadful... not in a pathetic sentence or two. There are more than a few people who would not have wished such a condition upon anyone, more than a few who took no pleasure at all in the Ray Gun's illness. Then there are those who had a much more visceral reaction to that creature. "Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy" was something I heard quite often.

Many things are wretched. Sometimes we think people deserve them and sometimes we don't.

In the case of Mr. Craig... he really should resolve to consult an attorney next time he finds himself in legal difficulties. Had he done so, he would likely not have pleaded guilty. The press from a successful (assuming quite charitably that he would have been successful) court fight on this matter would have played far differently than did his no-so-skillful efforts at playing Secret Squirrel.

(Did he really think that telling no one, pleading guilty, and paying the fine would make this matter evaporate? This alone is reason enough for him to resign his seat in the Senate.)

Representative Simpson accuses the Senate GOP leaders of 'hypocrisy." In just which way are they supposed to be behaving hypocritically this time? They haven't been hypocritical... they've been homophobic -- grotesquely so. This is not news, or at least shouldn't be. We're talking about Republicans here. When they display themselves so flamboyantly as just what they are... consider it a gift. At least one Republican congressman claims to be wondering what party he wants to be a member of.

If a wolf eats a lamb (and it's my lamb), I have outrage aplenty for the rapacious dealings of wolves and plenty of schemes for dealing with wolves in the future. When this wolf is eating my neighbor's lamb, and this neighbor has been actively opposing every single one of my efforts to protect my own lambs from these very wolves... I just have no tears for my neighbor or his lamb. All I can offer is "Dude... that wolf just ate your lamb." It doesn't mean I stop fussing about the wolves in the neighborhood. It just means "it couldn't have happened to a better lamb."

Now... there is plenty of room for uber-charitable activism against evil of all kinds. Just don't drink too much of the Log Cabin Kool-Aid. I, at least, just don't have that much charity in me -- not for traitors.
berto - Sep 09, 2007 - 02:19 PM
Post subject:
Feral wrote:
Quote:
Well, I'm not going to criticize Rain or Feral, any more than I criticized those who were glad to hear of the death of Ronnie Ray-gun (I was one of them).


The comparison with the Ray Gun is quite apt. A number of people I've known quite well have had Alzheimer's... it is a dreadful disease. There really aren't words to describe just how dreadful... not in a pathetic sentence or two. There are more than a few people who would not have wished such a condition upon anyone, more than a few who took no pleasure at all in the Ray Gun's illness. Then there are those who had a much more visceral reaction to that creature. "Couldn't have happened to a nicer guy" was something I heard quite often.


Oh, I wasn't pleased that it was Alzheimer's, specifically, or anything like that. I was just glad to hear that the bastard was dead.
Rain - Sep 09, 2007 - 07:59 PM
Post subject:
Two points:

As far as Reagan and Alzheimer's, I was really sorry to see him end that way. Had it been mine to give, I would have given the bastard the most wretched, painful form of cancer. One where he would linger and whither away painfully and slowly, like so many of my friends. So, no I wasn't at all happy that he had Alzheimer's, I was outraged. This man should have suffered and should have had the full mental faculty to feel that suffering. He should have also had the opportunity to clearly reflect on his past and the destruction it cost so many, many lives. Alzheimer's spared him the remorse of conscience that should accompany the end of anyone's life. He got off easy.

As for Larry Craig, he was hoisted by his own right-wing, Republican, queer-bating petard...TWICE! I have no remorse and no compassion.
berto - Sep 09, 2007 - 08:37 PM
Post subject:
Rain wrote:
Had it been mine to give, I would have given the bastard the most wretched, painful form of cancer. One where he would linger and whither away painfully and slowly, like so many of my friends.


No argument with most of what you wrote, but wouldn't him dying of AIDS be more fitting, poetic justice-wise?
Rain - Sep 09, 2007 - 09:12 PM
Post subject:
No, he would have lived to see the advent of HAART and combination therapy. And he could have still been alive today. Some people just need to go. I'm not sorry he went. I'm just sorry he didn't even know he was going.
Rain - Sep 09, 2007 - 11:02 PM
Post subject:
Quote:

Moving on: I'm sure that Senator Craig takes comfort in knowing that some regard him as a victim of police entrapment, CASH. And despite the fact that I am not gay and never have been, I don't think it should be illegal for one man to hit on another man. But if a bill making it illegal for men to hit on other men in airport toilets— or anywhere else—had come up for a vote, Senator Craig, with his perfect antigay voting record, would surely have voted in favor of it. So even if Senator Craig is the victim here, as some are insisting, it's hard to feel much sympathy for him.



I hardly ever agree with Savage on anything. But on this we see eye to eye.

Savage Love
berto - Sep 10, 2007 - 08:08 PM
Post subject:
Pam Spaulding asks, Another GOP gay scandal brews in murder-suicide case?

Quote:
There is a bizarre story swarming blogtopia, laced with unconfirmed (and confirmed) sources that could lead to another Republican Sexual Hypocrite “outing” and scandal. First, some facts about the weird murder suicide in Orlando in late August that kicked off the whole matter:

A Republican political consultant killed in an apparent double murder-suicide in Florida had worked extensively in Alabama politics including a controversial “Adam and Steve” campaign leaflet that parodied gay marriage.

Ralph Gonzalez, 39, president of The Strategum Group, was found dead Thursday along with his roommate, David Abrami, 36, and a friend, Robert Drake, 30, according to The Associated Press. A motive has not been determined. Weapons and signs of a struggle were found in the house.

[...]

Some articles at the time mentioned a gay love triangle, which caught the eye of several blogs. As Andy at Towleroad noted, Florida Today originally ran the story with the “Lovers’ fight may have sparked three deaths.” He did a screen cap[ture] of it:

[image]

The newspaper later scrubbed all references to the “lovers’ quarrel” from the report without comment.

The fact that it gets even more GOP-scandalous -- it also ties into a male escort service/prostitution ring -- shows it is begging for additional investigation by the MSM, but no one seems to want to touch it. Drama Queen notes:

In both Monday and Tuesday’s posts, my point was that it’s highly suspicious that the traditional media has basically ignored the Florida murder suicide: a sensational story that juicily combines fundamentalist Christian politicians and homosexual consultants, election software tampering and this potential tie to a gay porn-related murder in Pennsylvania.

[...]

The events on the record are noteworthy enough for the MSM to investigate at this point, because the office of right-wing Congressman Patrick McHenry (R-NC) has gone on the record tying the pol to the shooting. Howie Klein, making a serious charge:

As we mentioned yesterday, Drake, a former marine, also is alleged to have a strong relationship -- both intimate and business/political -- with right-wing Congressman Patrick McHenry (R-NC). When I spoke to McHenry’s office about this they at first insisted they never heard of Drake then, confronted with specifics, admitted they know him. They refused to put Congressman McHenry on the phone. There is every indication that McHenry may have been one of the Republican elected officials who was using the services of the gay prostitution agency connected to Drake. Our pals over at the BradBlog points out the connections between Florida’s ultra-corrupt, vote-tampering congressman, Tom Feeney, and Gonzalez and reports the threat to expose the list of Republican elected officials who were using the gay escort service.

Where will it go? Who knows, but with a story of this potential magnitude, the mainstream news media, which has the resources to investigate and uncover whether the thick smoke does or doesn’t lead to fire, isn’t biting.


Spaudling then goes on to give a link to another site that lists “ the next GOP closet doors that could be kicked open”, including (apparently) those of Rep. Patrick McHenry, Rep. David Dreier, Sen. Lindsey Graham and Sen. Mitch McConnel.

Mucho links available from clicking the top link...
Rain - Sep 11, 2007 - 07:01 AM
Post subject:
Juicy. This goes under "Found While Wankering". I have to think that this is so sordid, so tentacled, and touches so many more people (especially the escort thing) that many have staff members working overtime to keep this off the national radar.
Feral - Sep 11, 2007 - 12:17 PM
Post subject:
This is more of that "Jason Drake" crap that is lampooned in the 'found while wandering' thread. This story may have been taken up by this blogger and that blogger, but it all ultimately comes from one source and not one shred of evidence to supports any connection to this "gay porn-related murder in Pennsylvania."

Now... the Orlando murder did happen. Three men are dead. Now, goodness knows that when you turn over a dead Republican all manner of icky bugs start scurrying about... but tying this thing somehow to some other murder in PA only serves to show both what lurid imaginations Democrats have and how very eager they are to believe the most salacious of gossip when it comes to Republicans.
berto - Sep 11, 2007 - 01:09 PM
Post subject:
Deb Price of the Detroit News maintains that the whole Craig story has three lessons:

Quote:
Lesson 1: The political closet is dead. Debating the ethics or value of "outing" is now a waste of breath. It's a weapon that's here to stay. And in the Internet era -- with the pressures of 24/7 news coverage and bloggers often setting the pace -- if politicians are gay, they're foolish not to come out before they get shoved out.

Lesson 2: The Republican Party can expect to keep waking up to the nightmare of Mark Foley-Ted Haggard-Larry Craig headlines as long as gay, bisexual or simply sexually confused Republicans, whether pastors or politicians, feel they can't succeed professionally unless they live double lives.

Lesson 3: Gay and bisexual men, many of whom are married, are swept up every day in outrageous police sex stings. Bumping shoes in a men's room stall signals interest; it's not actual public sex and shouldn't be treated as criminal. Countless men have had their lives ruined by overzealous cops.


She also adds:

Quote:
The Craig scandal, Rogers says, has resulted in 500 new tips. Plenty of self-respecting gay Americans are in no mood to protect closeted anti-gay politicians.

Rain - Sep 11, 2007 - 08:56 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Plenty of self-respecting gay Americans are in no mood to protect closeted anti-gay politicians.


I suspect they never have been. This is an odd statement. Self-respect, of any sort, would induce anyone to call a fag a fag. Wouldn't you think?
berto - Sep 13, 2007 - 04:27 PM
Post subject:
Rodgers is backing off...

Quote:
Closeted gay congressional staffers can rest easier. Their worst living nightmare, vigilante gay outer and activist blogger Michael Rogers, has called a truce of sorts: he says he'll stop targeting Capitol Hill aides and will instead limit his campaign solely to publicly elected officials and candidates.

"Enough readers expressed concerns that I have decided to now focus on elected officials, those running for office and to high level political appointees in the administration," Rogers tells the Sleuth.

His tactical change comes in the wake of Sen. Larry Craig's (R-Idaho) arrest and guilty plea in connection with a men's room sex sting at the Minneapolis airport, a saga in which Rogers played a central role. Craig said he pleaded guilty to the charges because of a "witch hunt" carried out by the Idaho Statesman newspaper, which was following up on reports by Rogers that Craig cruised men for sex in public bathrooms, including the Union Station train depot in the District.

Until today, in addition to targeting politicians, Rogers had been aggressively either naming or threatening to out scores of gay staffers who he deemed to be hypocritical because they either pushed anti-gay rights agendas or worked for members of Congress with anti-gay rights voting records. His first threat was sent in the form of a mass email to congressional aides in 2004 warning them: if you are gay, secretly or openly, and you or your boss are pushing legislative agendas seen as unfair to gays and lesbians, then watch out.

(It was that year that Rogers caught his first big fish: former conservative Rep. Ed Schrock (R-Va.), who was forced to abandon his re-election bid during the 2004 GOP party convention after Rogers unearthed audiotapes of Schrock, a married man, soliciting men for sex on telephone sex lines.)

But now, from his throne at blogactive.com, the king of outing is giving aides on Capitol Hill a reprieve. "It has become obvious to me that my message on Capitol Hill has been received loud and clear," Rogers explains, adding, "and with so many tips coming from across the country, I will be able to focus on elected officials and those seeking office."

Rain - Sep 13, 2007 - 05:00 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
Closeted gay congressional staffers can rest easier. Their worst living nightmare, vigilante gay outer and activist blogger Michael Rogers, has called a truce of sorts: he says he'll stop targeting Capitol Hill aides and will instead limit his campaign solely to publicly elected officials and candidates.


Can you say "quid pro quo"? Ha ha ha! Mmslle Rogers is ever the crafty bitch. How convenient to declare a truce with the staffers when the ones you need dirt on are their bosses.
berto - Sep 15, 2007 - 02:08 PM
Post subject:
Was Strom Thurmond a swinger, too?

Quote:
In an unfinished manuscript left at his death, Laud Humphreys described meeting with a prominent Dixiecrat politician and his wife in 1948. When the politician left the room, his spouse began undoing Humphreys's tie so that they could all have a little party -- as, she explained, was their wont.

The biography of Humphreys explains that "this archconservative longtime segregationist served as U.S. Senator from South Carolina from 1954 until shortly before his death in 2003."

Anti-gay segregationists have sex with other men and black women in private, while persecuting them with gusto in public. Craig and Vitter are traditionalists after all.

berto - Sep 15, 2007 - 02:10 PM
Post subject:
Was Condi Rice shacked up with a woman?

Quote:
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice co-owned a home and shared a line of credit with another woman, according to a new book by Washington Post diplomatic correspondent Glenn Kessler.

According to the book, "The Confidante: Condoleezza Rice and the Creation of the Bush Legacy, "Rice owns a home together with Randy Bean, a documentary filmmaker who once worked with Bill Moyers. Kessler made the discovery by looking through real estate records.

Bean explained the joint ownership and line of credit to Kessler by saying she had medical bills which left her financially drained and Rice helped her by co-purchasing the house along with a third person, Coit Blacker, a Stanford professor who is openly gay. Blacker later sold his line of credit to Rice and Bean.

vanrozenheim - Sep 25, 2007 - 06:49 PM
Post subject:
All Politicos Now Classed as Sexual Deviants
Quote:
was talking about the Larry Craig sex scandal with a friend of mine from Brooklyn who has run for office many times and lost. He's pretty thankful that he lost. "Most elected officials are sexual deviants," my friend explained.

A ridiculous judgment, seemingly...but as a would-be politician who had failed to craft his image according to the whims of the electorate, it had taken my friend years to identify the perversity that defined his campaigns, a perversity and deviance and self-torture that, I would agree, defines the daily suffering and ultimately the secret madness of the elected official. "Now I'm not saying homosexuals are deviants .... but closet homos who hate homos are," my friend went on.

[..]

The list of these sad sacks grows and grows: Larry Craig; Jeff Gannon; Ted Haggart; Mark Foley. Consider the rumors about Karl Rove: they call him Miss Piggy in the underground gay scene in DC.

My would-be Brooklyn politico continues the argument: "Listen, it's clear that all priests are gay. There's no way around that. They're all gay. Every one of 'em. But they can't recognize it, because they're sick. That's why they become priests. They feel sick, so they choose a sick job. Why sick? Praying to a god that doesn't exist! [..] In any case, it's a perverted existence, a double existence."
Emphasis my.

Miss Piggy? What has that lovely creature done to be compared with Karl Rove?

Like in so many other professions, a politician becomes a politician because he loves the job, not because he was forced to do it. I am certain it is totally possible to be a politician and not become a hypocrite. Sure, there is some maneuvering expected in this profession, but it is entirely possible to join the political corner which best represents one's views.
Feral - Sep 25, 2007 - 08:34 PM
Post subject:
vanrozenheim wrote:
I am certain it is totally possible to be a politician and not become a hypocrite. Sure, there is some maneuvering expected in this profession, but it is entirely possible to join the political corner which best represents one's views.


Now, Herr Doktor... you cannot just declare yourself certain on these points without supplying at least some argument to support it.

I am, myself, quite prone to suggesting that many things are possible. I've even been known to get downright 'supportive' in encouraging others to do something that everyone just knows is impossible...

However... this idea that it is possible to be a politician and not become a hypocrite... why, it flies in the face of some twenty-five years of personal experience with politicians of many stripes. They are, from time to time, useful creatures, these politicians. They are like Rottweilers... occasionally useful, best kept on a leash, and inevitably, you reconsider your willingness to pick up quite that much shit.

One can certainly stake out a corner that IS one's views. That would require an act of creation, though, and who has the time or energy to do that? (It is, after all, one of the things we most hope to achieve... creating this corner that represents our views to even a limited extent.)

To get into politics at all one must marshal a fair army of allies just to get elected. Ah... the things a politician will say and do to add just one more ally to his panoply... Is there really a limit? In US politics, at least, there seems to be nothing the politicians will not consider saying (so long as not too many people are listening). Certainly there is nothing at all that politicians will not consider refraining from saying if he thinks some microscopic advantage might be gained by his silence.

Once elected, the game changes focus slightly. They like to call it "being reasonable." Under the name of "compromise," they transmute hypocrisy into a virtue. These alchemists are quite fond of barbaric words of power, too... words like "bipartisan" and (gods help us all) "multilateral."

I should very much like to hear about how one goes about being a politician without ever dipping one's toe into that pool that is hypocrisy. In theory, of course, many things really are possible. I'm just not seeing this one.
Feral - Sep 25, 2007 - 09:08 PM
Post subject:
Quote:
The list of these sad sacks grows and grows: Larry Craig; Jeff Gannon; Ted Haggart; Mark Foley. Consider the rumors about Karl Rove: they call him Miss Piggy in the underground gay scene in DC.


Would it be too dreadfully pedantic of me to point out that Jeff Gannon is hardly a politician? He's a writer, a journalist. There are, of course, those who question the merits of his writing and the sense of applying the word "journalism" to his typing. Questions of whether he's a "real journalist" (as opposed to a person who types things one does not enjoy reading) aside... he's no politician.

Would it be flogging a dead horse to point out that Ted Haggart is not a politician? He was a minister. Ministers may share the trait of employing oratory with politicians. Hold on... totally unfair... most (though not all) ministers are a whole lot better at oratory than most politicians. And the shear mass of this oratory... I know of no politician who speaks as well or as often as even a country pastor. Anyway... Haggart was and is no politician and does not belong in a discussion of the faults of politicians.

And then someone remind me again about what outrageous example of "hypocrisy" Mr. Foley was guilty of. Was it that federal law against soliciting minors he sponsored... the one he so cleverly refrained from breaking? Now... Foley was a politician, to be sure. Such creatures are little more than packets of hypocrisy wrapped tightly in human skin.

Lastly... they call Rove "Miss Piggy" in the underground gay scene in DC, do they? Just who is this "THEY"? Just which "underground gay scene" would this be? Lots of people call Mr. Rove any number of unflattering names... as many as they can think of. I do not doubt that there are areas of the country (perhaps even outside the country) where one's vocabulary is judged only on the number of unflattering names one can conjure for "the turd blossom." But when one goes alluding to some semi-secret underground network of 'mos and tossing around back-handed hints that this Rove creature is SO in with them that he has his own quaint sobriquet... Then I'm afraid I must have details. You see... It sounds quite made up, fabricated, a scurrilous concoction of drug-fueled fantasy. Are we talking about the underground scene inhabited by hustlers and escorts? Or is it that underground scene populated by largely by embassy staff that moves in a more rarefied atmosphere? Perhaps it is the private parties in private homes circuit that is being referenced... now there's a posh pit to fall into. Perhaps the concierge at the Watergate Hotel knows who this author is talking about. Or maybe... you know... the "underground gay scene" in Alexandria is just immense. Reston's no children's playground either, if you know your way around. And let's not forget Chevy Chase (the city, not the actor). That would be in Maryland, not Virginia or DC. Oh, my yes... the number of oft-rumored but rarely found venues for this "they call him Miss Piggy in the underground gay scene" positively explodes exponentially if one presumes (not too frightfully impudently) that the physical location of this 'scene' is not actually IN the District.

This Ketcham fellow would make a fair replacement for Perez Hilton, should one become necessary.
vanrozenheim - Sep 26, 2007 - 04:15 AM
Post subject:
Feral wrote:
Now, Herr Doktor... you cannot just declare yourself certain on these points without supplying at least some argument to support it.


Well, I just know a very small number of politicians who have managed to remain integer over the time. Their secret is to speak clear talk without offending the opponent, a talent which I really admire. Such people have a natural talent to explain difficult issues in simple terms and gain respect of adversaries.

Sadly, your humble servant lacks this rare talent and had often become guilty of hypocricy himself -- but always for the right cause, never for personal advantage. I hope this will be taken into account when the time will come to be shipped down the Acheron.

Feral wrote:
I've even been known to get downright 'supportive' in encouraging others to do something that everyone just knows is impossible...

You too, Brutus? Wink
Feral - Sep 26, 2007 - 03:18 PM
Post subject:
Fortunately, I am what people call (disparagingly, to be sure) a "mystic." I am by no means a politician. I have no desire to be one.

There are but two important questions: "Who are you?" and "What do you want?" It is best to answer them thoroughly and with some promptness before proceeding much further. Then, of course, you can branch off into "What are you willing to do to get what you want?" This is, of course, just a modification of "Who are you?" If you've already answered the question, it is a simple matter.

The bulk of politicians I have any familiarity with (I've met a few) seem to have decided to skip this portion of the class. Either that, or they've taken on way too many extra-curricular projects in lying... both to others, and to themselves. Sometimes I can even believe that they have fallen for their own deceptions. Perhaps they even think they are saying something resembling the truth.

The same thing happens to activists, too. Perhaps they are some sub-species of politician. It happens to organizations as well. There seems to be no limit to the amount of folding, bending, spindling, and mutilating of "the truth" when it comes to gathering in as many accomplices as possible. They call it "the big tent" for some reason. Hell... if you cannot persuade the people to join you based upon your position, then simply change your position and join the people. They like to call that "evolution." They call it "democracy" too... when it suits them.

Even organizations should know who they are and what they want with some completeness. Whether or not they then act in accordance with the answers to those questions then becomes a simple matter of efficiency. It just does not do to spend too awful much time engaged in side projects that have nothing to do with who you are and what you want.
vanrozenheim - Sep 26, 2007 - 11:31 PM
Post subject:
You have right, of course -- I shall take this to heart.

Politician of all sorts, the larger and the smaller ones among them, are only tools in the hands of others. Those "others" are sometimes a couple of wealthy and influencial people, sometimes a crowd of have-nots. This way or the other, politicians are instrumentalized by their supporters to push certain causes, and they are <i>expected</i> to make things happen -- no matter <i>how</i>. Activists, <b>of course</b>, are some sort of politicians, too. What they do is nothing else than attempting to achieve something for the <i>polis</i>, for the <i>res publica</i>. Depending on the means they have at hand, their dedication, and their ability to mobilize their supporters, the results of those activities can be very different, from greate changes to zero effect.

One thing should not be forgotten, however - some couses require certain means to achieve them. Facing a brick wall, one is best advised to look for a gate somewhere around, instead of banging with the head against the damn thing. An army required to cross a river will be ordered to build a bridge first, being engaged for a while with nothing more heroic than gathering woodstock and putting it together. Certainly a side project in terms of military handywork, but yet a necessary step to achieve the larger goal.

Similarly, to be able to tell people something inconventional, one must first turn them into listening to you at all. Is this hypocricy? I think not.
Feral - Sep 27, 2007 - 12:21 AM
Post subject:
I agree. Sometimes you have to start way out at the tips of the twigs before you can trace a path back to the trunk of a tree.

Politics can be described as the mechanism by which you get what you want. So... knowing what that is and keeping a clear focus on it is rather important. Sometimes all manner of games must be played. Rather than pound one's head against a brick wall, of course one must look to see if there is a gate. Should one find the gate guarded and a toll being charged, it is worth considering whether it might not be better to simply pay the toll rather than hatching schemes to overpower the guards. One might even have to turn back from the wall for a time in order to acquire the funds to pay this toll. There are all manner of games that must, from time to time, be played. Even the insistence on pounding a new opening through this wall with one's head is a form of this game (a stupid form, to be sure).

And then there are those for whom the game is all. Having achieved some objective, they do not enjoy the enviable position of possessing what they desired. Instead, they must rush off to some other conquest. They no longer want anything other than the pursuit, and any pursuit will do. These people are dangerous. There can, I think, be nothing more dangerous than a hunter in a forest who has lost all concern for his quarry and is focused instead on just "the hunt" as a pure act.

There are admirable politicians (or at least politicians who were, for a time, admirable). They have a tendency to be forced into their positions, usually kicking and screaming the entire time. If they are wise, they achieve their goals and then sit back, put their feet up, and enjoy their achievements. Of course, there are also those admirable politicians who never quite succeed. They don't get to sit back. They usually die quite miserable deaths.

In the main though, politicians are a disturbing creature. Despite all the disagreements I have with Mr. Ketcham's article, he is quite right about one thing -- there is definitely something "wrong" with politicians if only because they want to be politicians in the first place. This game is not some tool to get them what they want; the game itself is what they want.
vanrozenheim - Sep 27, 2007 - 09:21 PM
Post subject:
You have right, Master. For some, it is time to go into meditation, I guess.
Feral - Sep 28, 2007 - 12:04 AM
Post subject:
Do not mistake my rambling mutterings for specific advice. It is just a topic that has been much on my mind of late.

I can think of no more typical example than of certain Gay Pride events. (I don't have any particular city in mind... the example is drawn from a number of different accounts I've read in the news.) A gaggle of well-meaning people gather together and put on a parade. It's far more difficult than might be imagined, this putting on of parades. To everyone's great pleasure (and considerable shock), all goes well. They expand their efforts and put on ever better displays. It's really quite a fine party. (There is, at times, nothing on this Earth more important than a fine party.)

The gaggle has gotten good at their craft. Unfortunately, as has played out time and time again in city after city, they decide to branch out into other affairs. Summer is no longer enough... there must be an Autumn event as well. The apparatus of paying for such extravaganzas takes on a life of its own: soon any number of charities have been somehow linked to the whole matter. The organizing of the various fund-raising events comes to overshadow the organizing of the parade itself. The parade turns into just one more fund-raiser in a perpetual calendar of begging sessions.

It goes still further (if the whole house of cards has not yet collapsed): some bright-eyed fool thinks the parades need "a message." Some starry-eyed idiot thinks the party is a waste of "human capital" and that these efforts should be turned toward some political objective. Sometimes this particular species of rot sets in earlier than the others. They start deciding who is and who is not "fit" to be seen at the events, whose name can be associated with the efforts and whose cannot.

...And it used to be a really quite a fine party. And they wonder why no one comes to it anymore.

It is what happens when party-planners confuse themselves with politicians.

One could, with a whole lot more paragraphs, go on in the same vein about activist organizations. There is nothing sadder than a gaggle of activists who, more or less, get what they want. There are people, you see, who are just addicted to shaking their fists. It's become who they are. The demonstration (it hardly matters for what cause) was a success... how wonderful. But it isn't enough, and can't be enough because the demonstration was was never the point at all. It was just the convenient excuse for another bout of fist-shaking. Once the party is over, the activists want to "build the movement" and seek out some new windmill to tilt at.

This is not living. This is a masquerade ball. There's nothing wrong with masquerades... they can be quite entertaining. There should be more of them. You oughtn't live in one though.
All times are GMT
Powered by PNphpBB2 © 2003-2006 The PNphpBB Group
Credits