sen. 'im not gay' w/matt lauer

[1st love ron]

Did anybody see the special about Sen. Craig and his alleged cock-sucking proclivities (did it really merit a primetime spot...would it have been done if it was a straight gig, or if he was a D...hmmm)? Loved how family pics were in abundance and the camera panned in several times to show it. Poor Ms. Craig...she looked uncomfortable and was the picture of denial. I felt bad for her, yet she chose to stay with him and don't tell me she didn't know. It was a softball interview, with Lauer constantly apologizing for asking "gay" questions and you could almost see him squirm with disgust inside -- or at the very least discomfort (revealed to me that he has a con side to him that I didn't know).

Not sure if the good senator is gay. I picked up a gay vibe when he was talking about Clinton was a "bad boy"...you could hear it in his voice.

What got my panties in a twist is when he said that he "dosen't agree with the lifestyle." Hell of a way to end an interview when you've been caught in a gay sting.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21303825/

 

[PER4MER]

One of the most telling aspects of this whole sorry mess is that Craig didn't even tell his wife he had been arrested until the story was about to break.

Score another victory for those "Family Values" Republicans! Must be quite a marriage those two have.

 

[bike10]

Famous last words from slick politician.

 

[Orlandude]

"Doesn't agree with the lifestyle" is a bogus, copout remark that means absolutely nothing.

The comments of the wife almost beg to know if she is just being the doting wife of a powerful man...WELL AWARE of his "transgressions" but dares not to utter a word or face losing everything. Appears to be a common reaction of nearly all the wives of "outed" men of power in recent years.

 

[jackoroe]

He fucked up by pleading guilty to toe tapping. He'd have beaten that ridiculous charge had he fought it. And more importantly, he didn't talk with his loved ones about the incident. I don't know about you, but I always let my family know when I'm in jail!

 

[CuriousMonkey]

Two things:

First, I think the Senator is doing what he does best (lying). What's with all the "I don't recall" responses when virtually no time has elapsed between the incident and the interview? "I dont recall" if I reached under the divider ? And why would somebody who had no idea that the were performing a sex solilcitation sequence protest that he doesnt do "those sorts of things" ?

Second, and most importantly - why do we need our governemnt deciding how, where and with whom we're allowed to express an interest in having sex? The whole 'workplace harrassment' Anita Hill backlash was bad enough, establishing absurd restrictions on ones ability to express the slightest interesst in a coworker - often at workplaces that expected workers to be available to the exclusion of any opportunitiy for a life outside of the workplace. Now we have cops on the lookout for adults who might ask for or offer sex? Absurd!

 

[Txgoodoldboy]

He knew what he was doing, and he got caught. Anybody who knows anything about tearoom sex, knows that is how it works.

He plead guilty, hoping no one would find out about it. Let's see, how long did he have to think it over before he plead guilty? A month and a half? Give me a break. This is more Republican bullshit. He is a lying liar. He got caught with his pants down. Now, he is lying about it.

His wife is a fool. Sometimes, the wife doesn't want to admit that her husband is a cock sucker.

He fucked up by pleading guilty to toe tapping.

If you believe that "toe tapping" was the only thing he did, you're in the same boat as his wife.

He plead guilty because he was hoping it would go away, and no one would find out about it.

 

[Kulindahr]

Power corrupts.

Republican or Democrat, they all have their dirty secrets.
It's just that this one got caught -- but caught doing something that the police shouldn't have any interest in.


Wasn't it nice when it was a free country?

 

[RandomAccess]

Wasn't it nice when it was a free country?

When, exactly, was that, Kuli? No, really, when?

 

[NickCole]

Boy, that was hard to watch.

He's hurt people, damaged lives with his lies.

Of course there's no defending his behavior.

Still. A lonely, isolated, sad man. He looks alone in a dark and scary place.

Watching his wife was difficult as well, but in her eyes, her mouth, her body, her voice, she looks complicit. She knows. She's always known. Maybe she didn't let herself know that she knew, but I'm not sure that's any more an excuse than his self-deceit. What did she get in the bargain, for letting herself and her children be used as props in this man's deception all these years? Her discomfort, disappointment, disguised anger is justified but she seems to have sold herself and children to this a long time ago.

I went to a park yesterday. Took my dog, met some friends. It's a little cruisy there sometimes but it's between my house and theirs, and it's a gorgeous park so that's where we meet. A man cruised me; it's so familiar, so flattering and disgusting and desperate - maybe only because I've seen that same dance so many decades now. He smiled, started towards me then noticed my girl friends and the dogs. I saw him, his face, his expectation then disappointment then embarrassment. Our dogs had noticed him, ears perked. He bent and called them to him as if that'd been the reason, not cruising me, for heading towards us. The dogs ran to him, one jumped on him. He had a hissy fit. Yelled at the dog, at my girl friends, told them, "This is your fault!" They're young women, just in college, and were intimidated, uncomfortable. I laughed, trying to diffuse the tension. He looked at me. "This isn't funny!" "Don't yell at my dog," I told him, "don't yell at my friends. You invited it, you called the dogs to you." Then there it was: the hurt on his face. Only a moment then his defensiveness rushed forward. But I saw it first. The hurt. I'd betrayed him. Took the side of the enemy. "You're no help," he said and hurried off. And he was right: I didn't help. Didn't help him, anyway. And even if he'd been looking for help in a misguided way, he was looking for it. I don't care what anybody says: a middle aged man cruising a park is not in a good place.

I kept thinking the rest of the day, and then when I watched Larry Craig and his wife and that insipid Matt Lauer, we are too often unhelpful. Nice on the surface, protecting what's easy, civil and well mannered and entertaining, keeping ourselves comfortable in the moment, but way too often we are not helpful to one another. We help people who are easy to help, people others want to help, and turn away from those who are difficult. Who's helping Larry Craig? Who's helping people, no longer young and pretty, stuck in the muck of their messy secrets and just trying to put one foot in front of the other?

I hope Larry Craig resigns from the Senate. I hope his wife divorces him so they're both free of that reeking lie. And I hope someone sincere steps into his life and says, "You need a friend?"

 

[smelter]

^ what a great post Nick. The whole Larry Craig thing is more sad than anything else. He is a lost soul.

 

[RandomAccess]

^ what a great post Nick. The whole Larry Craig thing is more sad than anything else. He is a lost soul.

Yep. I think a day will come when he owns-up to his indiscretions, loses his wife and the respect of his family and constituents, and lives-out his days as a sad & lonely old man. And it could all be so different had he avoided the hypocrisy in the first place.

 

[smelter]

Yep. I think a day will come when he owns-up to his indiscretions, loses his wife and the respect of his family and constituents, and lives-out his days as a sad & lonely old man. And it could all be so different had he avoided the hypocrisy in the first place.

I agree. In his world, death would be preferable to acknowledging his secret. I blame religion for this .... the threat of eternal damnation for homosexuality is a powerful deterrent. Its all so much bullshit!

 

[RandomAccess]

Wasn't it nice when it was a free country?

When, exactly, was that, Kuli? No, really, when?

<bumpity-bump>

 

[Kulindahr]

When, exactly, was that, Kuli? No, really, when?

Back somewhere before Lincoln nationalized the armed forces, I'd say.

But it was still close to being one before FDR came along and poked government's nose into almost everything conceivable...
and Richard Nixon extended its reach into places FDR didn't go.

And now we have had Bush....

 

[Kulindahr]

I went to a park yesterday. Took my dog, met some friends. It's a little cruisy there sometimes but it's between my house and theirs, and it's a gorgeous park so that's where we meet. A man cruised me; it's so familiar, so flattering and disgusting and desperate - maybe only because I've seen that same dance so many decades now. He smiled, started towards me then noticed my girl friends and the dogs. I saw him, his face, his expectation then disappointment then embarrassment. Our dogs had noticed him, ears perked. He bent and called them to him as if that'd been the reason, not cruising me, for heading towards us. The dogs ran to him, one jumped on him. He had a hissy fit. Yelled at the dog, at my girl friends, told them, "This is your fault!" They're young women, just in college, and were intimidated, uncomfortable. I laughed, trying to diffuse the tension. He looked at me. "This isn't funny!" "Don't yell at my dog," I told him, "don't yell at my friends. You invited it, you called the dogs to you." Then there it was: the hurt on his face. Only a moment then his defensiveness rushed forward. But I saw it first. The hurt. I'd betrayed him. Took the side of the enemy. "You're no help," he said and hurried off. And he was right: I didn't help. Didn't help him, anyway. And even if he'd been looking for help in a misguided way, he was looking for it. I don't care what anybody says: a middle aged man cruising a park is not in a good place.

I kept thinking the rest of the day, and then when I watched Larry Craig and his wife and that insipid Matt Lauer, we are too often unhelpful. Nice on the surface, protecting what's easy, civil and well mannered and entertaining, keeping ourselves comfortable in the moment, but way too often we are not helpful to one another. We help people who are easy to help, people others want to help, and turn away from those who are difficult. Who's helping Larry Craig? Who's helping people, no longer young and pretty, stuck in the muck of their messy secrets and just trying to put one foot in front of the other?

I hope Larry Craig resigns from the Senate. I hope his wife divorces him so they're both free of that reeking lie. And I hope someone sincere steps into his life and says, "You need a friend?"

I was no longer young and pretty when I realized who I am -- your words hit me hard.

On line there's lots of encouragement and sympathy, but I've only once met it in person. Americans don't want to meet anyone in need; they want a government program to "care" for "those people" so they won't have to actually encounter them. Young people especially don't want to meet anyone in need; it reminds them of a future they refuse to believe in.

Now that my dad died, holding my hand, and I'm still reeling from it, I get words of sympathy from cute younger guys -- but so far, not one has stepped forward to say, "You need a friend?"

 

[RandomAccess]

Back somewhere before Lincoln nationalized the armed forces, I'd say.

Ah. . . back in the days our black population could not only not vote. . . but they were held as slaves to white folks? Women weren't allowed to vote? As I understand it, only land owners were considered important enough to vote. And homosexuality was an evil not to be spoken.

But it was still close to being one before FDR came along and poked government's nose into almost everything conceivable...

Ooooo. . . those early days when women were just beginning to vote. . . blacks were segregated and physically prevented from voting. . . the world was in the depths of the worst global depression on record. . . Hitler was attempting to conquer Europe and eradicate all Jews. . . and homosexuality was an evil not to be spoken.

and Richard Nixon extended its reach into places FDR didn't go.

Oh. . . the end of the Viet Nam era. . . Kent State. . . the infancy of the civil rights movement. . . assasinations of JFK, RFK and MLK. . . and police regularly "raided" gay bars like New York's Stonewall Inn and San Francisco's Elephant Walk, harassing the gay populace. . . sodomy was illegal in virtually every state (and these ridiculous laws were often enforced).

And now we have had Bush....

Touche'


All-in-all, Kuli. . . you're not making me long for "the good ol' days" here.

 

[bike10]

May be he should try the don't ask don't tell theory.

 

[Kulindahr]

May be he should try the don't ask don't tell theory.

I much prefer DADC -- "Don't Ask, Don't Care"...
or as a friend in Salem puts it, "DASTFU" . . .

 

[Kulindahr]

Ah. . . back in the days our black population could not only not vote. . . but they were held as slaves to white folks? Women weren't allowed to vote? As I understand it, only land owners were considered important enough to vote. And homosexuality was an evil not to be spoken.


Ooooo. . . those early days when women were just beginning to vote. . . blacks were segregated and physically prevented from voting. . . the world was in the depths of the worst global depression on record. . . Hitler was attempting to conquer Europe and eradicate all Jews. . . and homosexuality was an evil not to be spoken.


Oh. . . the end of the Viet Nam era. . . Kent State. . . the infancy of the civil rights movement. . . assasinations of JFK, RFK and MLK. . . and police regularly "raided" gay bars like New York's Stonewall Inn and San Francisco's Elephant Walk, harassing the gay populace. . . sodomy was illegal in virtually every state (and these ridiculous laws were often enforced).


Touche'


All-in-all, Kuli. . . you're not making me long for "the good ol' days" here.

I notice you're accusing people of things they didn't do, when I was talking about what they did to increase oppression.

BTW -- we might have been better off if only landowners could vote -- though if we define "landowner" to include condos, that nearly 2/3 of adult Americans anyway... wouldn't it be great if that many would actually vote?
Just for entertainment: I read a proposal where everyone would be allowed to vote, but landowners would be REQUIRED to vote -- I can't quite wrap my mind around the reasoning used, but it was reasonable... something about those actually owning chunks of the country having a duty to take part in the decision-making. Oh -- the penalty for a landowner's failure to vote was suggested at 5% of net worth.....