These are the responses to my August 29th article, "Reflections on A Senator Caught in Water Closet, What Would You Do?", please continue to provide us with your feedback
henry--- I follow the Ed Koch philosophy, that whatever two consenting adults do is personal and shouldn't be anybody's business. I find it strange that NYC candidates make a big deal of what they do with their lovers in private. I couldn't care less about Ms. Quinn's private life--- or even Ed Koch's, except it's too bad some people feel ashamed about whatever they are.
I wouldn't vote for a candidate because he (or she) was gay, and certainly wouldn't vote against a candidate because he was gay.
It does seem sad in this day and age that adults have to have furtive encounters in men's rooms. I guess I'm just an old fashioned romantic. Maybe the sordid aspect of it is part of the turn on.
Issue of hypocrisy is another matter. But this Senator has to at some point come to grips with his conduct and admit to himself that living a lie isn't healthy--- almost as bad as sexual encounters in Men's rooms.
Very good comment. However, you are missing the psychological basis for the behavior. It is a truth that we fight most what we fear most. I would surmise, that the ultra rightists, those with the most hostility toward, and fear of, homosexuality are all latently homosexual. They certainly have do not like women and do whatever they can to make those lives restricted and miserable. It is a fear of women and rage toward their mothers. Same dynamic amongst the Muslims.
Henry, it comes down to THIS--A United States Senator does not plead guilty to something he is not guilty of. His continence in office is an embarrassment and he must go!
I always say " There are straight people all over the world, for reasons we do not presently know, but science is probably on the verge of discovering brain differences which affect sexual preference."
Perhaps the more appropriate quote is from the former governor of Louisiana, Edwin Edwards, corrupt but colorful and one who, most of all, knew political realities. He is credited with saying "The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy". Edwins was honest in his own way and, as said, knew him some politics. Somehow our Senator Craig, at least in this episode, lacks those two endearing characteristics. If one has to go, as you have in this article, to such lengths to explain how he just may not be a liar and perhaps not even a hypocrite, then I think one must be wrong. The simplest answer is usually the true one. He oozes sanctimonious hypocrisy, a middle American Tartuffe if there ever was one. I believe Moliere, (sometimes one has to love the French, whether in Louisiana or in Paris) was writing not a tragedy but something that combined comedy and morality play. Oh, and the children are adopted, and the marriage entered into quickly by a bachelor politician after the first strong accusation of homosexuality.
Entrapment is an often misunderstood and broadly > misapplied concept in the law--perhaps stemming from > the overabundance of Law & Order reruns--and I think > you do your readership a disservice by invoking the > specter of it with Senator Craig. > > The key to entrapment is that the defendant must not > have otherwise been disposed to engage in the conduct, > but for the active inducement of the government agent. > Thus, for example, one might imagine an officer who > sends sample pictures of a subject of dubious age to a > person who had demonstrated an interest in legal > pornography. Where there is no evidence that the > defendant has demonstrated any interest in child > pornography, if the government subsequently prosecutes > that individual for making a follow up purchase of > similar pictures, the defendant might successfully > assert the defense of entrapment. But conduct that > merely affords a person an opportunity to commit an > offense does not constitute entrapment; so contacting > an individual and offering him child pornography for > sale (or drugs, or any other contraband) does not > constitute entrapment, nor would signaling a person in > a public restroom that the agent wanted to have > illicit public sex, as presumably a person who was not > otherwise disposed to have illicit public sex would > simply reject the overtures. > > In this light, I don't think the officer's actions > even come close to entrapment, because there is not > likely very much doubt as to Senator Craig's > proclivities. He has been accused of engaging in > similar kinds of activities throughout the years, and > should he deny the subjective willingness to engage in > public sex, which would be prerequisite to asserting > an entrapment defense, he would in fact be putting his > sexual desires on trial. > > Isn't it fascinating that the Republican party is > imploding on these kinds of scandals? Every month, it > seems like another one can't keep it in his pants. I > guess once you lose power in Washington, you gratify > your urges in other ways... >
The continuous reporting on this tragic situation is obscene. Is this event really news? I don't think so.
I feel sorry for Craig too. Imagine what it is like to live a life pretending to be something you aren't. Can't a US Senator have a friend he visits, rather than having to pick up guys in restrooms? Remember when it happened to Walter Jenkins, LBJ's press guy, in 1964 before the election.
Apparently, Americans need to have everything exact, defined, pigeonholed - ESPECIALLY, other people. It doesn't really matter what one's sexuality is as long as it's definably something. Preferably one thing. Or the other. There is and has been enormous resistance to the concept of human bisexuality. It makes people -- gay and straight -- more uncomfortable than either gayness or straightness. You, StarQuest, seem to consider sexual preference much like the old timers considered race (if you had so much as a drop of black blood, you were black.) You seem to imply that engaging in same sex sex makes you gay. (You invoked Rule 16J - "nobody does it once".) I say it doesn't matter whether you have same sex sex once or a hundred times. Sexuality is an internal process; there is choice involved, not just biology. I believe most humans have at least the capability to be bisexual until, at a very early age, society (parents-media-the world) begins to prune and train us to grow in one direction or the other in terms of sexual partnering. On some people, happily, this socialization doesn't take, and they grow up preference-free and capable of enjoying physical and emotional connection with both sexes.
Maybe Senator Craig is gay -- I don't know. Maybe he is a true bisexual and is attracted to men and women. Possible. Whatever the truth may turn out to be, it is infinitely less important than the press would like it to be. I find it rather ridiculous that police officers in Idaho or anywhere else are paid to do this. BTW - Having grown up in the age of "Free Love" notwithstanding, before reading your column I had never heard of the "foot tapping means you want anonymous sex in a bathroom" thing. I would guess I'm not alone. So, I too might have tapped my foot in the public john, like I often do when I'm thinking, or impatient. In fact, I probably have. Guess I'll have to watch that.
Thinking back through this mess, the stupidity (on all sides), sleaziness (on all sides) and hypocrisy (again, on all sides) of this story have me totally creeped out, but I have come to understand that sex (between WHOEVER), takes a weak second place to voyeurism, which is truly our nasty little national vice. This type of show really gets us off.
The hearts and minds of the Dems may not be cleaner but they do tend to refrain from hypocritical denunciations - in the name of "family values" - of practices in which they themselves engage out of the electorate's eye. My lack of sympathy for Craig and his heterosexual and homosexual ilk is born of my distaste for their hypocrisy. You can be sure than many of my fellow Republicans now denouncing Craig share both his tendencies and practices.
Senator Craig and George Michael should get together and make some > WHAM with each other. Craig should look on the bright side of > things. He could say he is a bi-sexual American, write a book, hook > up with McGreevey and blame all of their problems on an interolerant > society.
My Name is Henry Stern, President of New York Civic. Please feel free to comment on our articles, and give us your feedback. What you have to say is important to us.
Our lies will do us in every time.
ReplyDeleteAS ALWAYS, YOU'RE RIGHT ON THE MARK!! Excellent
ReplyDeletearticle.
Good commentary---but I still feel sorry for Craig. Don't they have anything better to report in Roll Call.
ReplyDeletehenry--- I follow the Ed Koch philosophy, that whatever two consenting adults do is personal
ReplyDeleteand shouldn't be anybody's business. I find it strange that NYC candidates make a big deal of what they
do with their lovers in private. I couldn't care less about Ms. Quinn's private life--- or even Ed Koch's,
except it's too bad some people feel ashamed about whatever they are.
I wouldn't vote for a candidate because he (or she) was gay, and certainly wouldn't vote against
a candidate because he was gay.
It does seem sad in this day and age that adults have to have furtive encounters in
men's rooms. I guess I'm just an old fashioned romantic. Maybe the sordid aspect of it
is part of the turn on.
Issue of hypocrisy is another matter. But this Senator has to at some point
come to grips with his conduct and admit to himself that living a lie
isn't healthy--- almost as bad as sexual encounters in Men's rooms.
Very good comment. However, you are missing the psychological basis for the behavior. It is a truth that we fight most what we fear most. I would surmise, that the ultra rightists, those with the most
ReplyDeletehostility toward, and fear of, homosexuality are all latently homosexual. They certainly have do not like women and do whatever they can to make those lives restricted and miserable. It is a fear of women and rage toward their mothers. Same dynamic amongst the Muslims.
Henry, it comes down to THIS--A United States Senator does not plead guilty to something he is not guilty of. His continence in office is an embarrassment and he must go!
ReplyDeleteIt seems he knew the code signals. He should not have been there. Guilty by association.
ReplyDeleteI always say " There are straight people all over the world, for reasons we do not presently know, but science is probably on the verge of discovering brain differences which affect sexual preference."
ReplyDeletePerhaps the more appropriate quote is from the former governor of Louisiana, Edwin Edwards, corrupt but colorful and one who, most of all, knew political realities. He is credited with saying "The only way I can lose this election is if I'm caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy". Edwins was honest in his own way and, as said, knew him some politics. Somehow our Senator Craig, at least in this episode, lacks those two endearing characteristics. If one has to go, as you have in this article, to such lengths to explain how he just may not be a liar and perhaps not even a hypocrite, then I think one must be wrong. The simplest answer is usually the true one. He oozes sanctimonious hypocrisy, a middle American Tartuffe if there ever was one. I believe Moliere, (sometimes one has to love the French, whether in Louisiana or in Paris) was writing not a tragedy but something that combined comedy and morality play. Oh, and the children are adopted, and the marriage entered into quickly by a bachelor politician after
ReplyDeletethe first strong accusation of homosexuality.
Are all Republicans gay? Is this the real issue with this party. They are certainly always ready to make it an issue
ReplyDeleteEntrapment is an often misunderstood and broadly
ReplyDelete> misapplied concept in the law--perhaps stemming from
> the overabundance of Law & Order reruns--and I think
> you do your readership a disservice by invoking the
> specter of it with Senator Craig.
>
> The key to entrapment is that the defendant must not
> have otherwise been disposed to engage in the conduct,
> but for the active inducement of the government agent.
> Thus, for example, one might imagine an officer who
> sends sample pictures of a subject of dubious age to a
> person who had demonstrated an interest in legal
> pornography. Where there is no evidence that the
> defendant has demonstrated any interest in child
> pornography, if the government subsequently prosecutes
> that individual for making a follow up purchase of
> similar pictures, the defendant might successfully
> assert the defense of entrapment. But conduct that
> merely affords a person an opportunity to commit an
> offense does not constitute entrapment; so contacting
> an individual and offering him child pornography for
> sale (or drugs, or any other contraband) does not
> constitute entrapment, nor would signaling a person in
> a public restroom that the agent wanted to have
> illicit public sex, as presumably a person who was not
> otherwise disposed to have illicit public sex would
> simply reject the overtures.
>
> In this light, I don't think the officer's actions
> even come close to entrapment, because there is not
> likely very much doubt as to Senator Craig's
> proclivities. He has been accused of engaging in
> similar kinds of activities throughout the years, and
> should he deny the subjective willingness to engage in
> public sex, which would be prerequisite to asserting
> an entrapment defense, he would in fact be putting his
> sexual desires on trial.
>
> Isn't it fascinating that the Republican party is
> imploding on these kinds of scandals? Every month, it
> seems like another one can't keep it in his pants. I
> guess once you lose power in Washington, you gratify
> your urges in other ways...
>
The continuous reporting on this tragic situation is obscene. Is this event really news? I don't think so.
ReplyDeleteI feel sorry for Craig too. Imagine what it is like to live a life pretending to be something you aren't. Can't a US Senator have a friend he visits, rather than having to pick up guys in restrooms? Remember when it happened to Walter Jenkins, LBJ's press guy, in 1964 before the election.
A couple of things...
ReplyDeleteApparently, Americans need to have everything exact, defined, pigeonholed - ESPECIALLY, other people. It doesn't really matter what one's sexuality is as long as it's definably something. Preferably one thing. Or the other. There is and has been enormous resistance to the concept of human bisexuality. It makes people -- gay and straight -- more uncomfortable than either gayness or straightness. You, StarQuest, seem to consider sexual preference much like the old timers considered race (if you had so much as a drop of black blood, you were black.) You seem to imply that engaging in same sex sex makes you gay. (You invoked Rule 16J - "nobody does it once".) I say it doesn't matter whether you have same sex sex once or a hundred times. Sexuality is an internal process; there is choice involved, not just biology. I believe most humans have at least the capability to be bisexual until, at a very early age, society (parents-media-the world) begins to prune and train us to grow in one direction or the other in terms of sexual partnering. On some people, happily, this socialization doesn't take, and they grow up preference-free and capable of enjoying physical and emotional connection with both sexes.
Maybe Senator Craig is gay -- I don't know. Maybe he is a true bisexual and is attracted to men and women. Possible. Whatever the truth may turn out to be, it is infinitely less important than the press would like it to be. I find it rather ridiculous that police officers in Idaho or anywhere else are paid to do this.
BTW - Having grown up in the age of "Free Love" notwithstanding, before reading your column I had never heard of the "foot tapping means you want anonymous sex in a bathroom" thing. I would guess I'm not alone. So, I too might have tapped my foot in the public john, like I often do when I'm thinking, or impatient. In fact, I probably have. Guess I'll have to watch that.
Thinking back through this mess, the stupidity (on all sides), sleaziness (on all sides) and hypocrisy (again, on all sides) of this story have me totally creeped out, but I have come to understand that sex (between WHOEVER), takes a weak second place to voyeurism, which is truly our nasty little national vice.
This type of show really gets us off.
The hearts and minds of the Dems may not be cleaner but they do tend to refrain from hypocritical denunciations - in the name of "family values" - of practices in which they themselves engage out of the electorate's eye. My lack of sympathy for Craig and his heterosexual and homosexual ilk is born of my distaste for their hypocrisy. You can be sure than many of my fellow Republicans now denouncing Craig share both his tendencies and practices.
ReplyDeleteSenator Craig and George Michael should get together and make some
ReplyDelete> WHAM with each other. Craig should look on the bright side of
> things. He could say he is a bi-sexual American, write a book, hook
> up with McGreevey and blame all of their problems on an interolerant
> society.
A United States Senator does not plead guilty unless he IS. He has disgraced his office and he should GO. How can there be ANY debate about this?
ReplyDeleteD2yK5S Your blog is great. Articles is interesting!
ReplyDelete