Keep firing invectives to the Universe if you prefer, but it will not acquire you an audience. You are too belligerant, my friend.

Seriously, we're at war, the housing market is shaky, the gap between the poor and the rich is growing, 1/10th of the country doesn't have reliable health care, social security is going bankrupt, federal spending is beyond sight, and the Democrats on this website have nothing better to talk about?

There is no wonder in my mind why neither party can bring forward an intelligent individual to run for President. If this is what being "politically affiliated" means, then only idiots practice politics.

I'd like to see these people put this same stupendous attention on one primary national issue using politicians' names, faces, voting records and related activities for two weeks per issue. Then recheck just what gets done by our government officials who now must be as publicly responsible and accountable as Craig.

We are a country of fools who not only permit this type of reporting, but seek it out for entertainment.
We do this when we have more important topics to finish like
a) a war that is killing our children for an ideology we don't support,
b) a housing loan market that could adversely affect our economy for years,
c) an energy problem that is sucking disposable dollars from us with no end in site or help from our politicians who have let this issue ride for 40 years,
d) an infrastructure issue so severe that we are told to expect bridges to collapse and kill like the one in MN
e) an antiquated flight control system that will take another fortune to install, but not to be in place for almost a decade,
f) a car industry, once the envy of the world, that has just lost #1 world position to a foreign car maker,
g) a school funding problem that is so old and talked about that most people ignore the pittance our teachers receive for supplies while the states' expect them to spend a $1000/year or more of their own money to supply their students,
h) health insurance fiasco, plights of the elderly, government social
security theft.....
This is a long and incomplete list of national, major issues and yet we dedicate weeks of time to an issue that has more entertainment value than national importance.
Write your politicians. Make them be responsible for the real issues that affect us all.

Young man, I have graduated from middle school. Business School too! And an English/Journalism undergrad squeezed in there, too. And indeed Tar and Feather is the appropriate term here. All Republicans are painted with the broad brush of hypocracy because one guy has issues. Not my problem. Don't paint me with his brush.

Grasshopper, a recent study of history would show that indeed, the party of Democrats as a whole are not held accountable for the actions of a few. Democrats were not forced to wear Bill Clinton's scarlet letter. Nor was the entire party called to answer for Undle Teddy Kennedy's Grand Underwater Oldsmobile Adventure. But mind you, had either of them had an (R) behind his name, the entire party would be called "perjuring adulters" and... I dunno, what exactly would one call Uncle Teddy? He's the kind of guy you'd love to have a drink with and tell war stories, but you'd never leave your daughter or your Chivas in the same room with him unattended.

Silly religious beliefs, eh? Oh, yeah, sort of like the Immaculate Holy Roller Church of the Devine Global Warming Scam (with it's sister organization, the Holy Carbon-Foot-Print-Offsetting Bonanza Cash Flow congregation)? You mean THAT religion? You folks like to cram that religion down the throats of the "infidels." "Convert or die, you non-global-warming-believing heathen!" It's like Faith for the Faithless. Well, at least you all believe in SOMETHING, even if it is misguided.

Besides, I thought you "progressives" liked gay people? I just assumed you guys would come out with loving open arms, ready to embrace the dear Senator in his time of need. Your "tolerance" runneth over.

Silly liberals... always good for a laugh.

"Maybe you should stick to your day job of begging for money, and forget about giving opinions when you are a guest in someone else's place."

As I said, your opinion is just one of the 300.000.000. "Begging for money", and being "a guest in someone else's place" are positions that are not typically entertained by other Americans.

You see your country as being an island, that's just you. You also see the UN as being yours, again, that's just you. And, finally, you see me as "begging" for money. That's something I do not dispute. All three charges, as phrased, are highly inflammatory. I know for a fact the typical American does not share yor views.

CNN is accessible worlwide via satellite. I take that as an invitation to make use of it. I do it routinely.

As to the end of Mr Craig legal outcome, I have already posted my prognostications. That remains my view. I'll be happy to learn something else if the legal case turns otherwise.

Democrats: It is so much fun to see the Republicans stewing over this particular kind of scandal. They played the morality card to get themselves elected, sold their souls to the fundamentalists, and went on and on and on about Clinton and Monica. Now they have to endure the humiliation of their formerly respected leaders hitting on House pages and seeking anonymous sex in airport mens' rooms. Har, har, har.

Republicans: CNN is the Clinton News Network. The only allow posts favoring Democrats to be posted. It is not fair. There are plenty of Democrats who are just as bad as us. They are hypocrites. Look at what Clinton did and no one did anything to him (???????) did they? Besides, all he did was tap his toe. Is that a crime? Besides it was entrapment. Isn't entrapment a crime? (No)

The Weary Citizen: We perhaps should spend some time solving the nation's problems instead of talking about sex so much. There are American children who need medicine, older Americans who cannot support themselves, the national infrastructure is disintegrating, there are lots more terrorists now than there were before we started the war on terrorism, drugs are easier to buy than they were before we started the war on drugs, our enormous national debt is owned by the Communist Chinese and Arab sheiks,
our children cannot afford to go to college, middle class wages are stagnant, and the growing wealth of the nation is all being siphoned off by the wealthiest Americans to pad their enormous bank accounts even more, the people we send to Congress are a bunch of self-serving, self-seeking, self-applauding blow-hards, and we have to face the fact that all of this is our fault.

All these Democrats/liberals CRYING about a little "sex". WOW... wasn't that the SAME line you libs were using to defend Clinton? (It's only sex)

Stay in office, Mr Craig! Let the libs/dems complaign about YOUR same-sex "problem" (they'll call it) and then call for same-sex marriage!

And what does all this noise about same-sex marriage and gay "rights" (false because gays have the same rights as straight people) do to the moderate voters? Pushes them to the right.

MOST states passed a defense of marriage act... hmmm... wonder why???

See how that works? It's not about what these sleezebags did–it's about who gets to replace them.

"...depends from each observer's opinion. And I am pretty sure that there are 300,000,000 such opinions in your country. Also, I am absolutely sure that I agree with none of those opinions."

Well, no, it depends upon the law, which is made by our elected representatives. I don't particularly agree with all of our laws, and I also don't agree with the opinions of many Americans.

I can't figure out for the life of me why, with your attitudes, I should give a flying hoot about your opinion, however.

"Mr Craig played footsies in a public washroom. Playng footsies is not a crime. Foot contact is also not a crime unless criminality can be established beyond doubt."

No, Senator Craig solicited sex, which is illegal where he was. If he had been soliciting sex from women in the airport, he likely would have been arrested for that, too - except of course he probably couldn't have been in the woman's bathroom to do it.

But whether the crime he committed could be proven or not, he pleaded guilty, so the point is moot - he did it by his own admission. Read the document that he signed!

"No other corroborating evidence exists. It will be very difficult to prove a criminal intent"

Again, you are wrong: the proof is to be obtained by his own guilty plea.

"Mr Craig's 'confession' and subsequent plea were probably caused by a rush to salvage the 'integrity' of his public persona."

Rush? What "rush?" He had plenty of time to consider his plea, and he plead guilty. He threatened to retain a lawyer, as was his right, but he did not do that. He wasn't rushed, nor was he deprived of the opportunity to defend himself or have a lawyer do so.

Maybe you should stick to your day job of begging for money, and forget about giving opinions when you are a guest in someone else's place.

Posted By BCNU purple state, usa :

Heck yeah he is being shunned b/c of his voting record. Tell for what other reason should a SENATOR be shunned?

And No it probably would not be such a big deal if he was a Dem that did not run on a family values platform (It would still make the news though). He is not being criticized for being "homosexual" but for being Adulterous, Criminal, and Hypocritical. Even people that are not senetor will be shunned if arrested, charged, and pled guilty to what Craig pled guilty to.

He has spent at least the past decade on a family values platform, family values he does not have. He is being shunned because people feel betrayed and lied to.

Then he says he's resigning and now says he might not.

Anyone see a pattern here?

I hope all of the Senate and the state of Idaho has had quite enough of Mr. Craig.

One more stupid distraction from the serious business of government.

At this point my observations of what is happening here is getting increasingly muddy. How can I construct a focus out of all that is said about this "scandal" which might not be a scandal after all?

A few actions seem to be "certain".
- Mr Craig played footsies in a public washroom. Playng footsies is not a crime. Foot contact is also not a crime unless criminality can be established beyond doubt. Hard to do here;
- He was charged with the intent to solicit "lewd activities of a homosexual nature" in a public washroom. That is the conclusion of one single airport cop. No other corroborating evidence exists. It will be very difficult to prove a criminal intent;
- no words were exchanged, no assault took place. The recipient was not a "child" as described by your law. He remained a willing, accepting, exchanging party for as long as playing footsies went on. How do you prove a breech of the law out of that?
- Mr Craig's 'confession' and subsequent plea were probably caused by a rush to salvage the 'integrity' of his public persona. There is nothing criminal about that;
- my list could go on for long enough to bore you.

The injured person here is the GOP, Congress, the family, and one single ideal: absolute transparency. I condone that, yes, transparency was compromised, but only to a level that depends from each observer's opinion. And I am pretty sure that there are 300,000,000 such opinions in your country. Also, I am absolutely sure that I agree with none of those opinions.

So, is it really a 'scandal'? I don't believe that 'scandal' can even be defined anymore.

If it is not a crime, not a scandal, therefore not even questionable conduct because there is no consensus about it, what is it?

By now I look at it with amusement and I am beginning to interpret it as recurrence of Classical Greek tragedies. But this well coriographed tragedy, American style, might not turn out to possess a fundamental Act–the final, tragic, self-cleansing Act–because Senator Craig is not going to self-immolate through resignation.

In the last 10 years Republican scandals in Congress have outnumbered Democratic ones 10 to 5.

However, that is not the point. Issues and incidents should not be determined by an inflexible ideology.

- – - – -

Interesting you listed homosexuals with criminals and pedophiles. In your mind is there a similarity going on there??

So what does all this prove with Larry Craig? That some of the GOP behaves like some of the Dems: Barney Frank, Bill Clinton, Teddy Kennedy, Sandy Berger, James McGreevey, Gary Condit, Rostenkowki, Mel Reynolds, etc.

Larry Craig is beholden to his constituents – who will decide his political fate. All the screaming and hollering from 49 other states is meaningless chatter.

THIS is why the GOP has lost me forever. Hypocrites. Spinning their wheels on relatively inconsequential matters while GW Nero fiddles away.

And cuts taxes while we put a war on credit card.
And spies on citizens.
And destroys our credibilty at home and abroad.
And.....

Time to change the meds man!!!

Gee Harry, ya think so? I would venture to guess they aren't the only ones judging. Reid's comments amount to his being judgemental, nearly every comment in this blog has been judgemental (mostly from those who are members of, or sympathetic with the party of tolerance.

Most call Sen. Craig a hypocrite (that's actually the proper spelling for many of you mental heavyweights out there using the word).

Is he actually a hypocrite? He ran on a 'family values' campaign platform, but gets caught not displaying them. Most here want to string him up for that because he votes against gay rights (due to that family values platform'), but is he not voting true to the issues for which he was elected? Is he representing his constituency as they felt he would? Not letting personal opinions alter his vote, but yielding to what he feels is the will of his constituency looks to me like he is doing his job.

I woudl think the GLBT would welcome a new member with open arms, love him even though he has some faults because, we can't all be perfect, can we? But, he has a differing political opinion than the rest of the community so let's boot him to the curb. So many say he's in denial, he's really gay but doesn't want to admit it and won't vote that way (part of that doing his job thing again). Instead of compassion and recommendations for a 12-step come-out-of the-closet plan that must surely exist somewhere, he's shunned by his own kind simply based on a voting record. Intolerance indeed.

Just food for thought.

I thought "progressives" didn't stereotype people, right? That's what the whole "tolerance" thing was about, right?

And, when you consider that liberals, as a whole, don't hold ANY values and don't hold anyone accountable for their behavior, then I guess it's just fine and dandy when they behave inappropriately. See, if you hold no values, no one can call you hypocritical when you act like a cad. Boorish and inappropriate behavior is OK... but God forbid we be accused of being hypocritical.

Funny that Conservatives are tarred and feathered as a group for the behavior of a few, yet liberals as an entire group are never held accountable for the behavior of a few. I don't hear anyone talking about a "culture of corruption" in the Democratic party in regard to William Jefferson and his "cool" $90K, or James Traficant, Rostenkowski, Cisneros, Torricelli, Gerry Studds, etc. etc. etc.

When the entire Democratic party is smeared for Gary Condit's suspicious behavior and Teddy Kennedy's Oldsmobile, then I'll take this Craig thing seriously. Until then, it's just a lot of noise.

Remember, what they can't achieve at the ballot box, they'll attempt via the courts or scandal mongering.

1. His behavior was disgusting.
2. While folks who are gay/lesbian may have a number of different views on this whole incident, I cannot imagine that most would think Craig's bathroom behavior to be very dignified.
3. For once, McCain has something right: the guy pleaded guilty. He never got a lawyer as he threatened. He is using bogus dodges to cover up his inappropriate behavior.
4. Reid is being hypocritical in his innuendos: I cannot imagine that one party is more "moral" than the other, despite what either may claim. Reid needs to go back to giving out gaming licenses to mafioso in Nevada. I think his morality in granting Sinatra a license shows he's nothing more than a a real life version of Senator Geary from "The Godfather."
5. The point about Gingrich, Livingston, Hyde, et al sitting in judgment of Clinton is right on, IMO, tho I still consider Clinton a scum also.
6. Vitter's behavior does disqualify him, IMO. He fits in well with a long history of the Longs, Edwards, Nagin, Blanco, etc., so I'm not surprised. Anyhow, at least he does admit that he's guilty.
7. Bottom line is that Americans are willing to vote for all sorts of dirt bags, such as those I've listed, and so we've gotten only what we deserve, including the present lot of bums. We have nobody to blame but ourselves, not politicians, lawyers, Democrats or Republicans. Failure to take responsibility is a hallmark of our generation.

It's still too early to figure out in what ring to put the presidential hopefuls.

I don't think the Dems will be able to match this.

Bottom line in all of this; Larry Craig is a closet case and tried to hide it from his wife, his family, and his constituents but got caught.... and no-one would care had he not been so outspoken as to his family values, anti-gay platform.

I'm so tired of the lot of them and their pious pronouncements; I'd like the whole lot of the holier-than-thou Rightwingers to just shut up.

Even better, I'd like the whole lot of 'em to just go away...for good!