Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Traitors, Hypocrites and “Brokeback Bathroom”
RedState.com ^ | 28 August 2007 | .cnI redruM

Posted on 08/28/2007 10:25:27 AM PDT by .cnI redruM

Senator Larry Craig has become our nation’s latest congressional joke. The headlines about “Craig’s List”, “His own Private Idaho”, “Brokeback Bathroom” and terror in the toilets are worth a laugh. Yet, even as funny as these headlines are at first glance, something else here doesn’t make me want to laugh.

The upshot of all this bathroom humor will ultimately be that Senator Craig was just another one of those crazy family values types that talks a good game in public and then gets freaky in the c**p stall. Postmodern “moralists” like Larry Flynt will extrapolate from there. The talking point takeaway will read that people who “preach old fashioned morality” are just hypocrites and should go put a sock in it. Because Larry Craig’s disgusting behavior gives the Penthouse Posse ammunition to impugn the decency of everyone attempting to improve the quality of America’s increasingly jaded and coarsening culture, he has become a traitor to the cause of basic decency and needs to resign or be primaried.

Senator Craig received vocal support from pro-life and pro-family groups. These people, such as The Idaho Values Alliance, have praised legislative votes taken by Larry Craig. Because Craig couldn’t rise above the absolute lowest common denominator of respectable behavior, these people now come in for grossly unjustified ridicule.

Ridicule of Larry Craig will now become a proxy for ridicule of anyone attempting to use moral suasion to improve the level of American society. Anyone seeking to stem the barbarism of moral relativity will be viewed as just another biblethumper/hypocrite. Sticking up for common decency now gets you associated with the perverted Larry Craig.

Sometimes moralists annoy me as well. This usually happens any time they accuse Little Old Me of being immoral. I understand why these types get under so many people’s skins. That doesn’t stop the quest for decent public behavior from being worthy.

Morality enforced by shame or persuasion is vastly superior to the alternative. Once all the “big-mouths” and “know-it-alls” that spout morality are demonized, once we derisively dismiss the “family values crowd” as just a bunch of hypocrites lusting for “Craig’s Crusty Crank”, we’re left with one alternative to modify the behavior of individuals in our society. That alternative is violence.

This is something to keep in mind as we snicker at the deplorable ethical example set by Senator Craig. It boils down to one fundamental question. Does Senator Craig’s status as a deeply flawed messenger imply that asking for better societal morals is flawed?

If we keep answering affirmatively to that, I want the next plane out of here. Morality does get reestablished in the end and it’s usually by the likes of Savonarola or Oliver Cromwell. I’ll take my disappointment with the hypocritical “Terror of The Toilets” over that dystopia any day.


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; News/Current Events; Your Opinion/Questions
KEYWORDS: 110th; craig; hypocrisy; immorality; larrycraig; moraloutrage
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last
To: puroresu
i'm only saying that this is not a single-issue that would turn voters away from the party. it's just not as polarizing as abortion or guns, imho. i agree that he should be gone. but if you ousted every legislator that ran afoul of the law (especially really small laws like disorderly conduct), you'd have some empty seats!

this is a moral issue and his constituents should vote him out. he is pro-illegal anyway. get him out just for that!

41 posted on 08/28/2007 11:08:59 AM PDT by thefactor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Antoninus
Like I said in the post, like I said in thread. He’s a enemy to our cause now, not one of our partisans.
42 posted on 08/28/2007 11:09:43 AM PDT by .cnI redruM (James Hansen; Scott Thomas Beauchamp with a PhD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

I wonder how the left would react if Craig stood up and said, “Yeah, I’m a homo who picks up guys in bathrooms, so what?” How would they attack him then? How could they trash him when dozens of their own politicians do the same thing publicly?


43 posted on 08/28/2007 11:10:04 AM PDT by ozzymandus
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ozzymandus
Interesting question. The GOP really would do the right thing and primary him, but it sure would be cool to see what Andrew Sullivan had to serve up as pablum.
44 posted on 08/28/2007 11:11:28 AM PDT by .cnI redruM (James Hansen; Scott Thomas Beauchamp with a PhD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp

“...the GOP could make a positive out of this if they openly demanded his resignation...”

Agreed. And at the same time we need to be ready to “Truth Boat” the leftist candidates at all levels. Link them to Whitewater, the knee-pad Arkansan, and every other Leftist boo-boo.


45 posted on 08/28/2007 11:14:44 AM PDT by GGpaX4DumpedTea
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Red Badger
He “showed his feelings.” I could do a whole different vanity about how gross this “I have feelings. I am merely human.” dodge works. Yuck!
46 posted on 08/28/2007 11:16:08 AM PDT by .cnI redruM (James Hansen; Scott Thomas Beauchamp with a PhD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

“Craig is the latest arrow in Larry Flynt’s quiver.”

You’re probably correct, though the rumors about Larry Craig have been circulating for years in DC.

Now, however, Larry Craig will definitely go down in the anals of history.


47 posted on 08/28/2007 11:19:54 AM PDT by DangerDanger ("Libertarianism is the Heart and Soul of Conservatism." - Ronald Reagan)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: DangerDanger
Does it also bother you that the whole thing was so pathetic? I wouldn’t spend more time in an airport restroom than it took to finish, wash and sprint to the exit. Yuck!
48 posted on 08/28/2007 11:24:14 AM PDT by .cnI redruM (James Hansen; Scott Thomas Beauchamp with a PhD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

Craig, you dummy, you risked everything for a chance encounter to get off. Stupid is as stupid does. Resign, idiot!


49 posted on 08/28/2007 11:31:57 AM PDT by lilylangtree (Veni, Vidi, Vici)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

It boils down to how America distinguishes between “ethics” and “morality”, even if the dictionary doesn’t distinguish between them very much.

Americans really like ethics, because they interpret it to mean that somebody follows the law. The written law. Man’s law, objective law with trial by a judge and jury. The common law that we are all expected to follow. The only people who get a pass on ethics are those we know are terribly corrupt, but like anyway, like John Gotti and Bill Clinton.

However morality is a lot harder, because America sees it as spiritual law, which varies tremendously, even between different churches in the same denomination. Therefore, when somebody claims to be “moral”, while you might hope you know what he means, you can’t be too sure. The morality of a liberal Episcopalian is very different from a Fundamentalist Evangelical, and Orthodox Jew, a Muslim, or a conservative Catholic. It is such a vague term that it is even used hypocritically by those who aren’t religious, to create the impression that they are spiritual. Like Bill Clinton, if not John Gotti.

This is why the typical American on the street is dubious about politicians who claim they are moral. It sounds like they are bragging about being evasive, while patronizing those who actually admire real morality. And the typical American is pretty on-the-mark in assuming this in many cases. Bragging about your morality is like bragging about your humbleness. If you are moral, you probably don’t even have to mention it.

And I don’t mean to downplay “patronizing”, either. For example, when Gonzalez became Attorney General, in a time of war, when the nation is at high risk from terrorism, and the resources of the office of the Attorney General and the FBI are stretched to the limit, he proclaims that two of his top priorities are to stop pornography and crack down on head shops.

It just made me wince. I think that all that really came of it was arresting head shop chain owner Tommy Chong (of Cheech and Chong) and putting him in jail for a few months.

This smacked of morality, and whose morality I haven’t even a guess, as just about any morality I know of would consider the War On Terror, thwarting mass murder at an enormous scale, etc., as rating a lot more important than dirty pictures. This is not to say that they like dirty pictures, just that they have their priorities in order.

So what about Senator Craig? I don’t know, but I would suspect that he proclaimed his morality frequently and with vigor, as do many other scandalous individuals, from embezzlers and perverts, to great big bible carrying Bill Clinton.

Who should have been tried for his ethical violations, not his moral violation, had Ken Starr really wanted to prosecute him, and not just give him a pass.


50 posted on 08/28/2007 12:11:49 PM PDT by Popocatapetl
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Frank_2001
You might want to read "The Franklin Coverup" by John DeCamp.

Carolyn

51 posted on 08/28/2007 12:17:25 PM PDT by CDHart ("It's too late to work within the system and too early to shoot the b@#$%^&s."--Claire Wolfe)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: 3AngelaD

No, he needs to resign by Friday.

He is fully compromised. He has lost his core constituency. He will probably lose his family. He is now in his darkest moment, and his weakness can be blackmailed by any one of untold numbers of former tryst partners to effectively alter the legislative future of this country and the world.

20 million illegals costing untold trillions of dollars of tax payer dollars could have been legalized because Craig was under blackmail pressure.

The public as a whole, and the voters of Idaho in particular have no way of knowing who and how many nefarious characters have hooks in Craig’s back. They can no longer trust his character, and have no way to ever feel any level of comfort with the actions he takes in office.

That being said, he can hide away a few years and turn into a lobbyist like Torricelli and McGreevey, and find himself a career if he wants one at his age, and can find himself some inner peace and some sort of personal life resolution.

No person is capable of upholding the duties of the office under such circumstances. Barney Frank is at peace with himself, he is not going through inner conflicts, doesn’t have untold characters lurking to blackmail him, and his constituency knows up front of his sexual persuasion.

Craig on the other hand, is nearing into suicide watch territory right now.


52 posted on 08/28/2007 12:37:49 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: alloysteel
Don’t think for a minute that this was not a set-up, nor was it just a casual “net” of someone unfortunate enough to wander into a “sting”. Senator Craig was targeted, and had been for some time. The trap was laid well. And the go-ahead came from way up there in the Democratican apparatus, perhaps at the level of a large donor OUTSIDE the formal campaign organization.

Guess what? The dems could "target" ANYONE from now until hell freezes over and they won't find people having sex in public bathrooms who don't already have sex in public bathrooms.

Funny how that works, huh?

53 posted on 08/28/2007 12:47:12 PM PDT by Dianna
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Popocatapetl

It boils down to this,

Can ANYONE who knows the man now honestly say they didn’t know his wife and her family were a beard?

People in the Democrat party in NJ and NY knew McGreevey was a perv for at least 6 years before he outed himself.

Rumors that Torricelli was caught in bed with the wife of one of his largest campaign contributors were circulating 4 years before he was forced out of office.

Craig has been a marionette for a small clique of powerful behind the scenes interests for years, even if you believe all Senators are marionettes to special interests, you have to admit that when the reason for their subservience to special interests might be because of this disturbing behavior, how can any one expect the people in Idaho to ever trust the man to represent the common interests of the voters of the state again?


54 posted on 08/28/2007 12:48:11 PM PDT by JerseyHighlander
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM

I’ve never met a loud moralist that wasn’t a first class hypocrite.

Never once.

Leading by example remains the single best way to lead anyone, any time, any where. Those that feel the need to talk a good game, are usually hypocrites.

Just my experience coming out here.


55 posted on 08/28/2007 12:51:13 PM PDT by Badeye (You know its a kook site when they ban the word 'kook')
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: GGpaX4DumpedTea
Do you mean "Swift boat"?

They are Swift Vets and POW's for Truth and their purpose is clear. Copied from the site:

Swift Vets and POWs for Truth has been formed to counter the false "war crimes" charges John Kerry repeatedly made against Vietnam veterans who served in our units and elsewhere, and to accurately portray Kerry's brief tour in Vietnam as a junior grade Lieutenant.
..SNIP...
Though we come from different backgrounds and hold varying political opinions, we agree on one thing: John Kerry misrepresented his record and ours in Vietnam and therefore exhibits serious flaws in character and lacks the potential to lead.

There was no 'linking' campaign.
Swift Vets did nothing but call John F'n Kerry on his traitorous lies.

56 posted on 08/28/2007 1:14:12 PM PDT by skeptoid (AA, UE, MBS (with clusters))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: Long Island Pete

“and McGreevy is lauded for his exploits on I-95?
Well that’s different. I just havent figured out how.”

well that is easy you see McGreevey has a D next to his name while Craig has an R
hope that helps


57 posted on 08/28/2007 1:15:49 PM PDT by DM1
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: .cnI redruM
Just ask the democrat candidates..

Do you think that all people that go trolling for sex with other men in the bathroom makes them a pervert?

real easy question, huh?

or is it?

Just think about who and how the democrat candidates would answer that.

Just a thought.

58 posted on 08/28/2007 4:42:51 PM PDT by Dick Vomer (liberals suck....... but it depends on what your definition of the word "suck" is.,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: lilylangtree

Exactly. Bad judgement on a basic instinct and urge means bad judgement on more complex issues.

Can’t be trusted. Resign.


59 posted on 08/28/2007 4:49:41 PM PDT by Fledermaus (Get a colonoscopy - Ron Paulyps could be cancerous!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: Dick Vomer
It would be funny to see how unserious they would try to be while answering.
60 posted on 08/28/2007 5:41:16 PM PDT by .cnI redruM (James Hansen; Scott Thomas Beauchamp with a PhD)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-64 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson