Wednesday, August 29, 2007

It's a Sexy Retard Hypocrisy Feeding Frenzy!

The title of this post is not meant to be ironic. This is precisely the kind of thing that chaps S-Tard's ass, and with good reason--he must sometimes feel like the only politically-inclined white Christian male in America who isn't having gay sex in bathrooms, straight sex with hookers, or scamming Indian tribes out of their hard-won lobbying money (I'm not so sure about the last one, actually).

Anyway, here's the Good Senator on MTP in 1999 regarding Bill Clinton:

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.

And here's a fantastic post from Glenn Greenwald on the evolving positions of our winger bloggers regarding gay bathroom sex.


Blogger Jeff said...

Go ahead and try to say "nasty, bad, naughty boy" out loud without sounding, well, kinda naughty.

2:45 PM  
Blogger sexyretard said...


I would say that someone should muzzle that hypocrit, but then again, I'd think that he would enjoy that.

3:54 PM  
Blogger sexyretard said...

I've been pondering this matter. Just how horrible is it to have gay sex in a bathroom stall?

Get me different from saying that I believe gay sex to be moral behavior; I'm just wondering whether it's the kind of thing that, given the pantheon of Republican sins (Abramoff and Duke Cunningham's Bribery Menu), I might suggest should be ignored until he dares to speak out about the sanctity of marriage or the like.

I remember when Bill Clinton said something against medical marijuana and about choking on my Blatz (I think I was in grad school and that was about what I could afford). I feel the same way about this fellow--but neither Clinton's not inhaling nor Craig's sexual proposition to a cop (D'oh!) is, in my mind, equal to the sins of bribe money in freezers or bribe menus for legislation.

Let me put it this way

When two gay men do their thing in a bathroom stall, it's wrong, but only two people get fucked.

When a Republican or a Democrat takes a bribe, the whole country gets fucked.

7:48 AM  
Blogger International House of Pedantics said...

"When two gay men do their thing in a bathroom stall, it's wrong, but only two people get fucked.

"When a Republican or a Democrat takes a bribe, the whole country gets fucked."

On one hand I agree with this. That is to say, I agree that what two adults do privately is their own business (though I don't understand why you think it is wrong), and bribe taking affects us all: the greater crime.

Yes, I am pissed that the Democrat Congress has not taken a strong stand against Rep. Jefferson and his freezer. They've taken some action, but it is fairly anemic.

Sen. Craig's situation is curious. OK, fine he do what he like in private. Train/Plane restrooms aren't exactly private. Children (sometimes unsupervised) use them. It would be very nice if the gay Sen. Craig would find himself a stable man, divorce his wife, and settle down. Or at least book a hotel room for an hour.

Sen. Craig's behaviors since the arrest show him to be a very confused man. Perhaps he should not be run out of DC on a rail, but the citizens of Idaho will be better represented by someone else who is a bit less confused about life.

8:38 PM  
Blogger sexyretard said...

Well, IHOP, I think it is wrong much in the same way that I think that following Buddha on the path to enlightenment is wrong. It's none of my business if someone else wants to do it; my faith and moral convictions lead me elsewhere. I don't think we should be legislating sex of any kind (being it Christian maritals, Senator Craig and the Village Policeman, a man and a hooker,a boy and his dog, etc. I would even suggest that polygamy is nobody's business but the five or twenty people involved, provided that they have all consented. That married people have different taxes and automatic rights (and responsibilities) has always bothered me. If marriage is so important that the state must encourage or protect it, then why are divorces so attainable?

In the world of mixed up gay Senators, I would say treat Craig as I treat Al Gore whenever he tells me that the earth is being destroyed. I get a visceral reaction not just from Craig but from the legions of divorced Republicans standing up for traditional marriage (which, to be complete, would be a first marriage each for a man and a woman, failing a widowhood situation).

We would do well to hold all members of Congress to the same standards that we would hold ourselves. I realize that someone could theoretically be personally foolish and yet advocate sound policies (as Giuliani supporters would have you believe describes him), but I guess I'm the odd duck who would like our leaders to both advocate the right policies and ethics and abide by them in airport stalls as well as Congress.

1:47 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home