I wasn’t ever intending on bringing MNpublius into the whole Senator Craig situation, but I just read a rather lucid post on the matter and wanted to share it with all of you. The post comes from Marc Acito at “Bastion of Reality”; here’s a snippet:
I’ll admit it, as a gay man, I’ve enjoyed Craig’s humiliation; I haven’t had this much fun since Congressman Mark Foley and pastor Ted Haggard were both featured in the media in their own gay sexcapades. After all, Senator Craig received a zero rating from the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) on gay rights issues. If he’s a closeted homosexual who voted against gay citizens then he deserves a comeuppance. Right?
But as we all step away from the bleeding man, perhaps we should use that opportunity to take a look at the larger picture: men like Foley and Haggard and Craig did not create the homophobia that they espouse, they inherited it. And if Senator Craig is gay, one can only imagine the toll a life in the closet has taken.
The whole post is only 6 paragraphs and well worth the 2 minutes it takes to read, so take a look at the whole thing.
I’ve had quite a few casual conversations with friends about this whole ordeal and I’ll somewhat shamefully admit that almost all of the conversations end and begin with laughter. But as Marc astutely notes, this is ultimately a very sad story of a very sad man. Yes, the hypocrisy of his public face in light of his now exposed past and the immorality of his adultery (even in this day and age I find cheating on your betrothed quite sad) do make it easy to laugh at his situation without much remorse, but the deeper levels of the event — the repressed self, the inherited bigotry, the necessarily secret life — should cause us to pause and reflect on the state of our society, if only for a moment.
Loading ...
Of course we should all feel terrible for Craig. He’s got enormous demons to wrestle with and I don’t see him coming out ahead on that contest. But, we also can’t lose sight of Craig’s efforts to push forward an agenda that would deny basic rights to the gay community. Also, again I have to ask, where’s the outrage from the GOP for Vitter’s prostitution escapade. Surely, hiring a prostitute is an equal or even worse offence then Craig’s misdeeds.
No, no. You’ve got it all wrong. Arlen the Specter says Craig should withdraw his resignation, his guilty plea and fight this thing in court. And indeed, that is the Republican way. Well, except when they cut and run. And concerning GOP outrage about Vitter? Evidently the only thing that offends Republicans about their loyalists is when they get caught. Getting to be a long list, isn’t it?!
Mark Foley, Tom DeLay, David Vitter, Bob Ney and those are just the ones that made the paper. Is there any doubt this administration and this Republican party is not completely corrupt? I will defend the GOP on one point though. Their treatment of Craig vs Vitter is not homophobia, it’s simply politics. For it to be homophobia they would have to have morals. Screwed up morals, but morals none the less.
Craigs life indeed seems to be a sad one of self-hatred.
However, my sympathy for him ends at the point where he decided, like so many republicans, to take his hate and anger out on others who are like him.
Some people take socially induced gay-shame and self loathing out on themselves, resulting in depression, drug abuse, suicide and dangerous sexual practices.
Others, especially the Republican “Family Values” crowd, turn their hate on others and do as much damage as possible.
Craig was one of those.
There are two possible ways for the Republicans to solve their hypocrisy in cases like Craig, Vitter, etc.. They can either voluntarily remove all party members who don’t personally uphold their party’s platform or they can change the platform to be more accommodating. This only goes so far of course since some actions neither will be or should be allowed by a party that wants the credibility or trust to direct the laws of our country. Things that rise to the level of felonies or the use of a persons office to enrich themselves, take advantage of employees, etc.
Of course if we are going to apply this standard fairly across the board there will be a lot more politicians that probably should be nailed up on the cross next to Craig and a good amount of them are Democrats. The Clinton, Condit, Foley, Craig, Vitter actions have all gone beyond the bounds their parties would have supported. If you are interested in hypocrisy that has a bit more impact why don’t we go after the Democrats that continue to vote for war funding and Patriot Act style provisions why blasting the way the Republicans are handling the war. Or if it is more your thing you can go after Republicans who vote to increase spending on just about everything. I suppose it is because most people here view politics primarily as a sport in the vain of football or hockey.
because most people here view politics primarily as a sport
I see it a little differently. Maybe that’s because I don’t think I’m smarter or more correct then anyone here. I think most people here have a generally good view of government and would like to see it work again. The GOP has decended into a proto fascist style and while there’s nothing wrong with being a fascist, they’re not very good at it. Republican’s savaged Craig, a longtime party loyalist, not because he was gay and not even because he apparently like anonomous gay bathroom sex, but because he was going to cost them polling points. He could be replaced by a Republican govenor quickly and now the story will die. Vitter, a whoremonger from way back, could not be replaced and so he isn’t vilified. Nice party there.
It’s too bad that Barney Frank’s gay whore house got shut down…we could have sent all of our disgraced politicians over for a nice send-off..and they could have started raising funds for their comeback as Democrats at the same time.
Frank confirmed the basic details of his relationship with Gobie and the financial and other favors he’d done, but he angrily denied he’d been aware that Gobie had gone into business for himself in Frank’s apartment. Even so, it was an astonishing act of indiscreet self-indulgence, especially for the stiff-necked ethics scold who’d shown no pity for the various Abscam defendants. Even Frank’s closest Massachusetts friends were shaken. And The Boston Globe called for Frank to resign, so as to spare the voters the pain of having to confront his sex life in the voting booth.
Instead, Frank admitted what he’d done, denied what he hadn’t, and took his case to the House ethics committee, which recommended a reprimand by the full House, a lesser penalty than the censure that had been requested in a motion by a notorious back-bench bomb thrower named Newt Gingrich. The punishment was handed down in 1990.
Frank set out to rehabilitate himself. He declined the Globe’s invitation and ran ferociously for reelection in 1990, winning with 66 percent of the vote. He worked doggedly at legislation. Moreover, he found a kind of power in his unique position. When Republican aides began circulating rumors that then Speaker Thomas Foley was gay, Frank called in the press and said that, if the whispers didn’t stop, he would publicly out any Republican member whom he knew to be gay. The whispers stopped.
Got anything newer? Frank was reelected by his constituents. Why did the Republicans throw Craig under the bus so quickly but nary a word about Vitter?
Richard,
How about Condit. The voters in the primary did him in, not his party. How about Clinton? So if Vitter does what Frank did and “turns his life around” is it alright if the Republicans give him as much of a break as the Democrats did for Frank?
Your own hypocrisy is reaching astounding levels. Not really because anything you have done but because you continually defend the errors of the Democrats beyond all reason. Maybe you should run for office. Hell, maybe you already have.
p.s.
How about Mr. Feezer Bags William Jefferson? Sure you can name a bunch of republicans that took bribes of some sort too but this guy got reelected this past November. Quite the party you got there. Maybe naming the Republicans that were just as bad is some sort of therapy that makes you feel better about your undying support for a corrupt party.
Personally, I could give a shit less if Frank or Vitter engaged prostitutes. Jefferson is still under investigation and if he took bribes, throw him in jail. I’m all for that. What I want to hear is the same moral outrage for Vitter that I saw for Craig. Craig’s party forced him out, not the Democratic party. Is normy going to come out, no pun intended, and call for his party to force Vitter to resign? I think not. Is that because of a Democratic govenor in Louisiana? You do the math.
Kerosene Hat’s post says, “Maybe naming the Republicans that were just as bad is some sort of therapy that makes you feel better about your undying support for a corrupt party”, after mentioning Clinton and Franks.
I respect you KH from all I’ve ready in your past posts but I have to disagree with you here. Please read the commentary by Tom Teepen: The wages of holier-than-thou” in the Star Tribune. (9/4/07)
http://www.startribune.com/562/story/1395509.html
Excerpt: “Republicans have been pushing holier-than-thou politics. Democrats haven’t, and when one strays, who expected better? The politics of chastity is its own punishment. Republicans might want to think about that.”
Here lies the difficulty with your statement…”Democrats haven’t”. The Democratic Party stands for inclusion, equal rights for everyone, acceptance, and the list goes on.
Therefore, it’s understandable the amount of scrutiny a Republican politician gets when he/she preaches/legislates such “holier-than-thou” morals and gets caught practicing what they consider in others as immoral.
The original Sam…”Samantha”
” “Republicans have been pushing holier-than-thou politics. Democrats haven’t, and when one strays, who expected better? The politics of chastity is its own punishment. Republicans might want to think about that.”
This statement in and of itself, is a very powerful asessment as to how the Republican Party presents itself to the world stage of politics. There is a saying that goes like this….”That which is repressed, is often obssessed.”
The real tragedy is that of Sen. Craig’s wife and family. Not only has his personal life become open to scrutiny, but that of the marriage itself. How sad for everyone.
While I agree that Republicans have a different standard to live up to because of theirs stance on many issues it is not as though the Democrats have a standard of being alright with hookers and sexual harassment. Which is why I say they too have to live up to their own standards and have all to often failed to do so. Democrats must admit to having standards of some sort (different maybe but they still exist) and that Clinton, Condit, Frank, Hart, Kennedy & Kennedy etc. have failed to live up to them just as much as some Republicans.
Richard just makes the Democrats look worse as he completely ignores these facts. Are the Republicans treating Craig and Vitter differently because of the politics involved in their replacement? I would say yes. Is it right? No. The question one should ask themselves is do you really think if the Democrats were in a similar situation they would be doing anything differently? I have never seen any reason to think they would.
In the end this kind of thing is only a distraction to the real issues at hand. The war in Iraq, the debt in cash and future promises and the current credit crunch which is a bigger deal than most understand. How about we all go back to those subjects and quit worrying so much about who does what with their genitalia i their free time and who else cares about it.
p.s.
Maybe if Democrats can do that and quit being holier-than-thou the Republicans will have to follow suit.
“Democrats have a standard of being alright with hookers and sexual harassment.”
Here we have it folks. A nominee for the most trollish statement ever posted here.
“Which is why I say they too have to live up to their own standards and have all to often failed to do so.”
The Democratic Party has failed to live up to their own standards of being ok with hookers and sexual harassment? Jesus, KH, you might want to lay off of the tequila and benzedrine before you post.
Here is the complete line Richard “it is not as though the Democrats have a standard of being alright with hookers and sexual harassment”. I know a couple elementary school teachers that can help you with your reading skills if you like. Maybe you were taking it out of context on purpose. It would fit into you normal behavior of making things up and calling them facts.
no, here’s the complete line;
While I agree that Republicans have a different standard to live up to because of theirs stance on many issues it is not as though the Democrats have a standard of being alright with hookers and sexual harassment.
I really don’t want to get into composition or punctuation but that is one messed up sentence. How about this
While I agree that Republicans have a different standard to live up to because of theirs stance on many issues. The Democratic party has their standards which, in the past, they have failed to live up to.
So Richard is it that you didn’t understand the point of the sentence or that you decided to ignore it?
“The Democratic Party stands for inclusion, equal rights for everyone, acceptance, and the list goes on.”
Right.
And Barney Frank, Bill Clinton, The “Rev.” Jesse Jackson, Gary Condit, Marion Barry, Keith X Hakim Ellison & etc & etc. banked on Democrat acceptance…they certainly know their people.
It simply is a bigger story when someone takes a morally superior position and then goes against it. Just like when a clergy person is accused of sexual abuse. They (Larry Craig et al) tell us how to live our lives and do exactly the opposite. It’s not surprising that an openly Gay man has a male lover. When a closeted person has a same sex lover it’s news (NJ Gov). When Senator has taken firm stands against equal rights for Gays and Lesbians and then pleads guilty to basically soliciting sex in a mens room it’s news. People are tired of “Do as I Say, Not as I Do”.
“People are tired of “Do as I Say, Not as I Do”.
So, let me see I have it straight. You’re suggesting that public bathroom buggery is more acceptable if the participants have been publicly stumping for toilet (or park bushes, or health club locker room, or under a bridge or where ever the mood strikes them)tet-a-tet tolerance, but not so much if they have expressed doubts.
Or are you suggesting that *we* (society at large) are at fault because we find such behavior unfit for well trained pets much less human beings, despite whatever the mutts who engage themselves thusly have said?
I swear, it’s hard to know just what direction a moonbat is swooping in from at any given time.
I’m just curious. What do you all think would have happened if it was discovered that Senator Craig had a boyfriend he saw on a regular basis in the privacy of one of his apartments? It’s difficult to determine if Republicans drummed him out because of the shadiness of the encounter or the fact that it was a gay encounter. (Obviously the hypocrisy of ‘do what I say not what I do’ is appropriate for both situations.)
Personally, I think (IMHO) it was a bad bust and cops don’t need to go around trolling for perverts in bathrooms unless they’re going after kids. But Craig’s hypocrisy of a gay encounter (criminal or not) still stands.
“Personally, I think (IMHO) it was a bad bust and cops don’t need to go around trolling for perverts in bathrooms unless they’re going after kids.”
So, you’re going for option #2 Sally. Very nice.
I wonder; *is* there a lowest common denominator in the fever swamp, or does the search for the bottom always end up just needing a longer shovel?
LOLOLOLS!!!
Swiftee goes to bat for Larry Craig. Go figure.
WTF??…do you know what day of the week it is, “MySpace pally”?
Are ya sure?
I know it’s time consuming, and boy, that “gif” bling you’ve got hung everywhere is bad assed, but I think it’s time you came up from mom’s basement and ate something.
Wow Swiftee you humiliated me again.
You sure are good at making us Liberals look like morons…meanwhile we’re all laughing at you.
Great job!
“So, you’re going for option #2 Sally. Very nice.”
Thanks for the vote of confidence. Like you, I am a Republican so I’m glad we agree. Although I guess I didn’t realize that soliciting for sex in a bathroom was the sole domain of one party or the other. Or do you disagree? Is entrapment by the cops ok with you? That surprises me, frankly.
The rest of you - I really am curious - do you think Craig would have been drummed out if it was discovered he had a discreet boyfriend?
Sally, if you’re saying that catching these perverts is in any way a waste of time or money, you’re in no way a Republican like me.
I’m no friend to cops, but I don’t see entrapment in that picture. Normal men don’t play footsie while sitting on the can.
Speaking for myself, if the only difference had been Craig was “discovered” to have been shacking up with another man (as opposed to showing up on TV, or anywhere else, to stick his business in our collective faces), and his record and behavior (sans the bathroom deal) had been the same I’d say it would have been none of my concern.
There are lots of people out here doing all sorts of things they know are wrong, but only the truly lost are out here trying to convince the rest of us that wrong is right.
What was Larry Craigs voting record?
http://www.vote-smart.org/voting_category.php?can_id=S0241103
HIS BEHAVIOR IS DISTURBING EVERYWHERE.