Senator Larry Craig convicted of lewd conduct in men's bathroom

[Balta1701]

This oughta spice up everyone's day.

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) was arrested in June at a Minnesota airport by a plainclothes police officer investigating lewd conduct complaints in a men’s public restroom, according to an arrest report obtained by Roll Call Monday afternoon.

 

Craig’s arrest occurred just after noon on June 11 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport. On Aug. 8, he pleaded guilty to misdemeanor disorderly conduct in the Hennepin County District Court. He paid more than $500 in fines and fees, and a 10-day jail sentence was stayed. He also was given one year of probation with the court that began on Aug. 8.

 

A spokesman for Craig described the incident as a “he said/he said misunderstanding,” and said the office would release a fuller statement later Monday afternoon.

 

After he was arrested, Craig, who is married, was taken to the Airport Police Operations Center to be interviewed about the lewd conduct incident, according to the police report. At one point during the interview, Craig handed the plainclothes sergeant who arrested him a business card that identified him as a U.S. Senator and said, “What do you think about that?” the report states.

Full description of the "encounter" is available at that web page.

And while we're at it, a few nuggets from Sen. Craig's relevant voting record:

* Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage. (Jun 2006)

* Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes. (Jun 2002)

* Voted NO on expanding hate crimes to include sexual orientation. (Jun 2000)

* Voted YES on prohibiting same-sex marriage. (Sep 1996)

* Voted NO on prohibiting job discrimination by sexual orientation. (Sep 1996)

[Balta1701]

And if that didn't pique your laughter senses...

Meet the Press January 24, 1999, Sunday 9:00 AM

 

MR. RUSSERT: Larry Craig, would you want the last word from the Senate be an acquittal of the president and no censure?

 

SEN. CRAIG: Well, I don’t know where the Senate’s going to be on that issue of an up or down vote on impeachment, but I will tell you that the Senate certainly can bring about a censure reslution and it’s a slap on the wrist. It’s a, “Bad boy, Bill Clinton. You’re a naughty boy.”

 

The American people already know that Bill Clinton is a bad boy, a naughtyboy.

 

I’m going to speak out for the citizens of my state, who in the majority think that Bill Clinton is probably even a nasty, bad, naughty boy.

 

The question issue now is simply this: Did he lie under oath? Did he perjure himself and did he obstruct justice? And that’s where we’re trying to go now in this truth-seeking process. And I hope we can get there. And then I’m going to have the chance to decide and vote up or down on those articles. After we’re through with this impeachment trial, it’s collapsed, it’s gone, then the Senate will make a decision on if it’s a censure or not.

Naughty naughty Senator...

[daa84]

Craig stated “that he has a wide stance when going to the bathroom and that his foot may have touched mine,” the report states.

 

haha i had a pretty good laugh when i read that....something about a senator talking about his "stance" when dropping a deuce is really quite funny

[Gregory Pratt]

Breaking news! Senator Larry Craig of Idaho was busted in June for "a lewd incident" in a public restroom (more here). Moral of the story? Don't come onto people you don't know while they sit on the toilet. Ever. And you probably shouldn't lecture the American public about morality when you're risking sexual infection, lawful arrest and the humilitation of your entire family and political party by attempting to turn the Junior Senator loose in public and it's even worse when you try to force the policemen to forget all about it by showing them your business card and saying, "What do you think of that?" Reminds me of an old The Critic parody where a woman has no voice but communicates using a slide whistle. Her husband says, "Let's go make love" and the excitement is obvious from the note she plays. He then says, "What do you think of me naked?" and he receives a less than ringing endorsement.

[Texsox]

This gives homosexuals a bad name.

 

I know I am being naive here, but was he expecting the person to crawl under the stall?

 

Plus, what was illegal about this incident? His foot touched and he reached under a stall? Shouldn't there be some offer like in prostitution arrests we see on COPS?

[EvilMonkey]

Maybe his stall was out of Charmin?

[Balta1701]

Maybe his stall was out of Charmin?

When have you ever been in a public bathroom that actually used that high of quality toilet paper?

[StrangeSox]

Someone on another board I frequent managed to spin this story into this:

 

"I love when Dem's criticize Republicans for stuff like this........it makes them even bigger hypocrites than they already are.......

 

First of all by doing so they imply that gay acts are immoral and illegal...........because that is what the guy was caught trying to instigate, a gay act........I'm straight, and I could care less about gays.......but if it's someone else, they are all over it.

 

And if this had been one of their own or any openly gay senator they'd say nothing about it......"

 

Some people are so delusional...

[Rex Kickass]

This gives homosexuals a bad name.

 

I know I am being naive here, but was he expecting the person to crawl under the stall?

 

Plus, what was illegal about this incident? His foot touched and he reached under a stall? Shouldn't there be some offer like in prostitution arrests we see on COPS?

 

What he did is known as cruising. This is basically the same thing that George Michael got busted for in LA.

 

Here's my favorite part about this story so far. It doesn't involve the Senator at all, but his upcoming opponent in next year's election and a really poor word choice. (Emphasis mine)

 

His leading Democratic challenger is former congressman Larry LaRocco, a Boise banker and onetime Senate staffer. He already is campaigning aggressively, baling hay and laying pipe on a "Working for the Senate" tour. LaRocco reported raising $80,000 through June 30 and has lost repeated attempts at state office, including a House race to Craig in 1982 and a bid for lieutenant governor in November. He served two terms in the House in the early 1990s.

[EvilMonkey]

What he did is known as cruising. This is basically the same thing that George Michael got busted for in LA.

 

Here's my favorite part about this story so far. It doesn't involve the Senator at all, but his upcoming opponent in next year's election and a really poor word choice. (Emphasis mine)

That's.......................................bad.

[sox4lifeinPA]

He also said he regrets that he "should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

 

That's what got you into this in the first place

 

 

 

On a serious note:

 

Balta implied that his behavior and his voting record seemed contradictory. Does one's struggle with a problem or sin or whatever you want to call it, automatically make you a hypocrite if you vote against those things? He certainly represents/represented more than himself in the senate.

 

[Rex Kickass]

He voted to allow discrimination in employment based on your sexuality in 1996. The vote to block employment based discrimination failed by one vote. So I can't feel too bad at his embarrassment.

 

I hope he learns to accept who he is and come to peace with himself. And stops acting irresponsibly in bathrooms. You can catch a disease like that.

[NorthSideSox72]

On a serious note:

 

Balta implied that his behavior and his voting record seemed contradictory. Does one's struggle with a problem or sin or whatever you want to call it, automatically make you a hypocrite if you vote against those things? He certainly represents/represented more than himself in the senate.

When said hypocrisy results in OTHER peoples' lives being effected detrimentally due to his onw denial... I can't possibly feel bad for him.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

He voted to allow discrimination in employment based on your sexuality in 1996. The vote to block employment based discrimination failed by one vote. So I can't feel too bad at his embarrassment.

 

I hope he learns to accept who he is and come to peace with himself. And stops acting irresponsibly in bathrooms. You can catch a disease like that.

 

 

Sub-question: So everyone that has some kind of homosexual desire whether acted upon or not is automatically a homosexual and therefore "should come to peace with himself?

 

cos that sounds like a load of crap, to be perfectly honest.

[NorthSideSox72]

Sub-question: So everyone that has some kind of homosexual desire whether acted upon or not is automatically a homosexual and therefore "should come to peace with himself?

 

cos that sounds like a load of crap, to be perfectly honest.

I think "come to peace with himself" is actually a very good phrase. If you are constantly voting and campaigning against something that you yourself do... clearly, you are internally conflicted.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

When said hypocrisy results in OTHER peoples' lives being effected detrimentally due to his onw denial... I can't possibly feel bad for him.

 

 

again, who said it was denial? There are plenty of people with homosexual desires that lead perfectly normal heterosexual lives.

 

I know this is unpopular (as logic is sometimes), but name your addiction or vice, it's the same thing: people battle these problems and lead normal lives in the interim.

 

The real issue is the apparent adultury; regardless of what gender the receipiant was, Sen. Craig needs a hug or something.

[sox4lifeinPA]

I think "come to peace with himself" is actually a very good phrase. If you are constantly voting and campaigning against something that you yourself do... clearly, you are internally conflicted.

 

I like sweets, it has led me to be overweight. Should I "come to peace with myself" and be a fat ass who likes sweets or get some responsibility in my life and battle a destructive behavior?

 

The problem with many people is the inability to see the degrees of an issue, meaning: the resolution of this story isn't sen Craig accepts himself as a homosexual and lives happily ever after. The fact that he behaved in some homosexual way doesn't mean he's 100% homosexual and therefore that's the only lifestyle for him.

 

"but homosexuality is a genetic issue"... so is being overweight, but there are plenty of people with responsible grips on their lives to overcome a propensity for certain ways of life.

 

Everyone wants to see homosexuality put in the "genetic category" because logically it means "I, the receiver of the dna, have no control over it." But this, unfortunately, adds to the argument the fact that many or most genetic abberations are considered negative things...oh except homosexuality and Antonio Alfonseca's sixth finger.

[NorthSideSox72]

I like sweets, it has led me to be overweight. Should I "come to peace with myself" and be a fat ass who likes sweets or get some responsibility in my life and battle a destructive behavior?

 

The problem with many people is the inability to see the degrees of an issue, meaning: the resolution of this story isn't sen Craig accepts himself as a homosexual and lives happily ever after. The fact that he behaved in some homosexual way doesn't mean he's 100% homosexual and therefore that's the only lifestyle for him.

 

"but homosexuality is a genetic issue"... so is being overweight, but there are plenty of people with responsible grips on their lives to overcome a propensity for certain ways of life.

 

Everyone wants to see homosexuality put in the "genetic category" because logically it means "I, the receiver of the dna, have no control over it." But this, unfortunately, adds to the argument the fact that many or most genetic abberations are considered negative things...oh except homosexuality and Antonio Alfonseca's sixth finger.

um... I didn't say any of those things. And yes, if you like sweets and that results in you being overweight, then you probably will be heathier and happier if you come to terms with that. Those "terms" may mean quitting, or moderation, or just doing it. Who knows?

 

You are trying to make this into an argument that no one is making with you. Here is what I am saying - do whatever you want to. Just don't tell people they are somehow wrong or evil, when you do those things yourself. Its the plain old glass houses thing, when it comes down to it. Nothing more.

 

[sox4lifeinPA]

um... I didn't say any of those things. And yes, if you like sweets and that results in you being overweight, then you probably will be heathier and happier if you come to terms with that. Those "terms" may mean quitting, or moderation, or just doing it. Who knows?

 

You are trying to make this into an argument that no one is making with you. Here is what I am saying - do whatever you want to. Just don't tell people they are somehow wrong or evil, when you do those things yourself. Its the plain old glass houses thing, when it comes down to it. Nothing more.

 

I totally agree. I was just trying to create conversation.

[NorthSideSox72]

I totally agree. I was just trying to creat conversation.

Yes. Yes you were.

 

[Jenksismyhero]

um... I didn't say any of those things. And yes, if you like sweets and that results in you being overweight, then you probably will be heathier and happier if you come to terms with that. Those "terms" may mean quitting, or moderation, or just doing it. Who knows?

 

You are trying to make this into an argument that no one is making with you. Here is what I am saying - do whatever you want to. Just don't tell people they are somehow wrong or evil, when you do those things yourself. Its the plain old glass houses thing, when it comes down to it. Nothing more.

 

This might be a stretch, as I know nothing about this guy or the state he represents, but is he anti-gay or is he just voting that way because of who he represents? More likely than not he is anti-gay, but to be sure just because he votes that way doesn't automatically make him that.

 

 

[Rex Kickass]

Sub-question: So everyone that has some kind of homosexual desire whether acted upon or not is automatically a homosexual and therefore "should come to peace with himself?

 

cos that sounds like a load of crap, to be perfectly honest.

 

There have been accusations swirling around about his sexuality for decades - he was implicated although not sanctioned in the 1982 Congressional Page investigation for starters. Whatever his sexuality may end up being, I hope he comes to terms with it. If he's soliciting sex in a toilet stall in an airport, gets arrested and then denies it, he clearly hasn't come to terms with his sexuality - whatever it may be.

[Rex Kickass]

"but homosexuality is a genetic issue"... so is being overweight, but there are plenty of people with responsible grips on their lives to overcome a propensity for certain ways of life.

 

Everyone wants to see homosexuality put in the "genetic category" because logically it means "I, the receiver of the dna, have no control over it." But this, unfortunately, adds to the argument the fact that many or most genetic abberations are considered negative things...oh except homosexuality and Antonio Alfonseca's sixth finger.

 

You mean like blue eyes? Red hair? Skin pigmentation?

[Jenksismyhero]

You mean like blue eyes? Red hair? Skin pigmentation?

 

Ginger kids!

[sox4lifeinPA]

You mean like blue eyes? Red hair? Skin pigmentation?

 

blue eyes and red hair are natural genetic variations that stand little in the way of evolution. Homosexuality is an aberration that is a period at the end of a genetic sentence, as is any genetic aberration that might limit the evolution and/or continuation of genetic code.

 

This subtle difference is the unfortunate postering of an agenda, just like the hesitancy to call morbidly obese kids exactly that, but instead health professionals are forced to classify all kids over their estimated weight as"over-weight".

 

Obviously no one likes to feel that the way they are is some how weaker than the next person, and I would never discriminate on those grounds and find it wrong that this guy would discriminate based on any genetic differences, aberration or otherwise.

 

Discrimination is discrimination and shouldn't stand. How one arrives at the point where one is the subject of discrimination is a whole different argument.

 

--------------------------------------------

 

ok, now here's where I talk like a human being and remove myself from the conversation. One of Mrs PA's friends recently came out and I totally ok with his lifestyle and find him to be a joy to be around. However he got to feel and be the way he is doesn't really matter to me. I would defend him against the staunchest objector to his lifestyle and hopefully will engage in some interesting conversations about his life in the future. Whether genetics are the lone culprit or nuturing and social settings had a part as well, the friendship is not defined by the fact that I like women and he likes men. Ok, back to my regularly scheduled mouth-breathing.