The arresting officer isn't even that cute. I wouldn't hit that in a public restroom.

Normally, I come to the defense of a Conservative Brethren and this tape does have some elements of entrapment. However, The Republican Leadership has no room for a Gay and it is time that he go.

Tommathy: The arresting officer isn't even that cute. I wouldn't hit that in a public restroom.


The probable advantage in that scenario is you just need nice shoes.

Sunny Ray: Normally, I come to the defense of a Conservative Brethren and this tape does have some elements of entrapment. However, The Republican Leadership has no room for a Gay and it is time that he go.

That's right, he can just switch parties right now.

JohnnyC: JOEKC: Not even if it were a $50 bill

I'd pick up a fifty... I'd wash it and my hands about 3 to 4 times afterward and spend it fast and wash my hands again, but I would pick up a $50.

funny thing is, most currency in circulation is dirtier than a bathroom floor. especially ones (since they are the most common and pass through many hands...and garter belts!)

Wombatron: Sunny Ray: Normally, I come to the defense of a Conservative Brethren and this tape does have some elements of entrapment. However, The Republican Leadership has no room for a Gay and it is time that he go.

That's right, he can just switch parties right now.

hmmmm ... maybe he is a switch-hitter? I haven't heard the bi-anlge discussed.

Bartleby the Scrivener: funny thing is, most currency in circulation is dirtier than a bathroom floor. especially ones (since they are the most common and pass through many hands...and garter belts!)

Yeah... A girl once picked a $10 off my face with her hoo-ha. So... I can see where you're coming from on that. :)

Wasn't the police officer originally called to the restroom to investigate complaints from someone else? Has anyone heard what the complaints were, or if the complainer could identify Craig?

Cop not cute?? Hell I would hit it anytime.

JOEKC: Bartleby the Scrivener: the only thing he's guilty of is not having a lwayer present.

A lot of people have said that in this thread, but I'm thinking he didn't want a lawyer or he would have asked for one. If he had a lawyer and fought the charges, he would not have been able to keep it hushed up (as he almost did.) With all these rumors swirling in his past, the last thing he wanted was a public airing of the charges. Nope, he was only too glad to get away with a $500 fine and keep his fingers crossed the story didn't get out. He failed.

well, you're exactly right. he did have to do some quick internal negotiating, and i'm sure the last thing he wanted was airtime, but face it, any criminal charge can be brought to light. since that's the case, he could have had his day and court and with a good lawyer *might* have won the case. then he would have been a senator either "wrongly accused" or "cleared off all charges." one can work that spin.

Sunny Ray: Normally, I come to the defense of a Conservative Brethren and this tape does have some elements of entrapment. However, The Republican Leadership has no room for a Gay and it is time that he go.

You can't really have it both ways. Either the tape demonstrates he was looking for gay sex or it fails to demonstrate he is looking for gay sex.

So if you want to say the tape gives you reasonable doubt about his sexual intent then your only real complaint is you can't stand the thought that somebody might imply someone of your political party might be gay. If this is true, please let all us libs know. Because that would be a great strategy for eliminating all of your future candidates. Just imply they are queers.

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm kinda impressed that the cop kept this quiet for so long. He actually kept his word to Sen. Craig. Good for him.

If only Mr. Craig were so honorable.

Listen to the tape. He knew bloody well what he was doing, or trying to do, in that men's room.

Some please explain to me how merely asking someone (same or opposite sex) to have sexual relations is a violation of the law?

There was apparently no actual act preformed.

I haven't heard of exposure of any private parts in public which might have move this from a legal request to a illegal act.

I haven't heard of any allegation that an exchange of money was involved.

Isn't it possible for the senator to use a coded request to pick-up the other person and retire to the privacy of the local airport hotel? If so, exactly what did he do that violated the law?

If merely asking someone for sex is a violation of the law, than I could have been classified as crime wave in college based on all those attempts to convince the sorority girls to come back to my house.

How farking pissed off must this cop's bosses have been that he got assigned to patrol the restrooms at the Minneapolis airport? Sounds like the sort of job they assign when they want you to quit.

When a place gets a reputation as a site for cruising- it attracts more and more people interested in that instead of pooping- eventually rendering the bathroom unusable to those who just want to go to the bathroom. In an airport where people have limited bathroom opportunities and it's crowded- you can see why the airports would be complaining to the police a lot if it were a problem.

On the other hand, I do not believe that what he did should be a crime. Solicitation is a bullshiat charge. Leaving aside the gay part, he asked for sex. Big fscking deal. That's what the word "no" is for. If an individual takes no for answer, nothing has happened. If they don't, there are other laws for that- harassment or assault.


If the signals were asking the other person to follow them out of the bathroom and have sex with them in a motel room then I don't think anyone would care (if money wasn't changing hands). However the signals invite the person to engage in sex with them in the bathroom, a public place. This breaks public lewdness laws or what ever they are called. And, I don't know about you, but if I heard two strangers having sex right next to me I doubt very much I'd be able to go to the bathroom at all. So I'm all for removing them. If I gotta go at the airport, I gotta farking go and I don't want to have to search all over the damn place in the time I have before my next flight to find a bathroom not infested with perverts.

logruszed: Well probably this wasn't his first time. And I mentioned "local" so as to include that concept that there are different signals which are more or less particular to regions, but I did not mean to imply that there are not some more universal signals or that there are not signals that are recognized based more on circumstance or specific environment.

gays in austrlia put their hand on top of the divider, since they're below the equator and everything is reversed.

\culturally competent

Bartleby the Scrivener: with a good lawyer *might* have won the case. then he would have been a senator either "wrongly accused" or "cleared off all charges." one can work that spin.

Won the case, probably. The whole thing sounds weak to me. But my point is, he probably would have lost the war even if he won the battle. There were lots of prior rumors and all of those would have surfaced nationally, most likely, and maybe some of his anonymous trysts, smelling money deals (book, magazine, Larry Flint) would have crawled out of their caves. No, I'm sure he could have beat the charges, but he probably knew other skeletons would start marching out of the closet he really wanted to be in the very back of.

Bartleby the Scrivener: gays in austrlia put their hand on top of the divider, since they're below the equator and everything is reversed.

\culturally competent

Saddest day ever was when I found out the water in toilets in Australia doesn't actually go the opposite way from those in the US.

logruszed:

Just imply they are queers.

I don't believed I implied that at all.

Bartleby the Scrivener: gays in austrlia put their hand on top of the divider, since they're below the equator and everything is reversed.

\culturally competent

ambercat:
However the signals invite the person to engage in sex with them in the bathroom, a public place. This breaks public lewdness laws or what ever they are called.

no. lewd acts are illegal in public. making a sign (that could be demonstrated to have variable significance) is not. it is not lewd until the act is in progress.

Old and busted: crotchfruit
New hotness: pottylove

Wombatron: Bartleby the Scrivener: gays in austrlia put their hand on top of the divider, since they're below the equator and everything is reversed.

\culturally competent

Saddest day ever was when I found out the water in toilets in Australia doesn't actually go the opposite way from those in the US.

yeah, yeah, yeah, i know. but they do have their seasons bass ackward.

Sunny Ray: logruszed:

Just imply they are queers.

I don't believed I implied that at all.

No. The controversy implies this. You imply that there is evidence he was entrapped, hence that his intent was not to solicit gay sex. If this evidence isn't ultimately convincing to you then there exists, for you, no concrete evidence of his homosexuality. Yet your final conclusion is to refrain from supporting him.

So all it takes is someone to imply he is gay for him to lose yoyur support.

They should make the cops suck the perv's weiners before they can arrest them for public lewdness.

Bartleby the Scrivener: ambercat:
However the signals invite the person to engage in sex with them in the bathroom, a public place. This breaks public lewdness laws or what ever they are called.

no. lewd acts are illegal in public. making a sign (that could be demonstrated to have variable significance) is not. it is not lewd until the act is in progress.

You've never watched COPS in your life, have you? You think that police doing prostitution stings fark the johns?

fenrael23: always wait for your lawyer, unless it is a public defender. If you get a public defender, practice self-inflicted buttrape, in preparation for that long vacation in PMITA prison

Public defenders vary greatly by where you are. Here in SF the PD's are excellent, high quality attorneys who you should feel lucky to have representing you for free.

In any case, Senator Craig was in a lose lose situation. Even with a not guilty verdict, fight it in court and the facts get dragged out in the media and the trial becomes a media sensation. Either way he's done. Good riddance.

Anyone keeping a tally on all the republican/outspoken-fundamentalist-Christian people going down lately for this kind of stuff? Seems like quite a few.

On the run from Johnny Law: He's clearly not gay. He's said he's not gay. He says that homosexuality is wrong. He's campaigned against the "homosexual agenda".

Remind you of anyone...



Yeah but Ted Haggard went to rehab and got a note from his doctor that says he no longer likes to suck cocks.

the only thing he's guilty of is not having a lwayer present.

Then he's so very retarded that I cannot understand how he manages to get through life, let alone performing the duties of a Senator.

As was noted in a thread a few days ago, there's a site called 'cruisingformen.com' in which you can find a review of the signals and pick-up codes and in which you can find listings of which crappers, public parks and hwy rest stops are good ones for anonymous gay sex. You can find this EXACT toilet listed, with "reviews" going back to early 2006.

I don't believe the Senator is a moron. I do believe that the Senator is familiar with the law and the mechanisms of the court system, seeing as he has served in both the state and federal Senates. I also don't believe that he perfectly replicated the rather intricate "mating ritual" by accident or because he was picking a piece of toilet paper off the floor (yuuuuuck!).

logruszed:

So all it takes is someone to imply he is gay for him to lose yoyur support.

Maybe I wasn't quite clear. I implied that he could probably have good case for entrapment if he hadn't plead guilty. I believe he is gay.

logruszed:

You've never watched COPS in your life, have you? You think that police doing prostitution stings fark the johns?

you may have watched cops, but you have not comprehended it. in prostitution stings, they always set up a monetary transaction prior or get the john to say something about how much he'll pay to demonstrate intent. that's solicition of a prostitute (sex for money). once they do that, they come rushing in. they do not charge them with "lewd conduct".

And, if he considers himself Bi-Sexual, he isn't technically lying when he claims he isn't Gay.

Adapted from Roy Zimmerman's song "Ted Haggard is completely heterosexual"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZmHC75FDqQ (new window)

Oh Senator Craig is completely Heterosexual.
Senator Craig is completely heterosexual.
Glory How-He-Blew-ya

Once there was a Senator by the name of Larry Craig
He had a story to tell that was more than a little bit vague.
He was one man in a million or more aptly one in ten.
Some folks say he put the "men" in "Amen"

He preached his message of intolerance and self-loathing.
And he went his wayward way of betraying his betrothing.
He was The Source of pity and no-one doubted him
Until he was caught for lewdness and used a pseudonym.

So he'll humbly go to rehab-counseling and then...
Three weeks from now he'll be born again... again.

Because... Larry Craig is completely heterosexual.
Larry Craig is completely heterosexual.
Larry Craig is completely heterosexual
Gloy how-he-blew-ya

He telephoned the white house for a weekly consultation
Saying "Here's what jesus thinks of all the pending legislation."
Marriage is a covenant between a man and wife
And homosexuals will fry forever in the afterlife.

He did some other things he'd later disavow
But he's putting it all behind him now.

What does Levecticus have to say?
Yeah what does it say about being gay?
"To lie with man is an abomination
Like cursing your parents
Trimming your beard
Planting wheat and barley in the same furrow
Eating pork
Wearing polyester
And masturbation.

And what did jesus have to say?
What did he say about being gay???
Well... nothin...

Now Larry's a little Haggard but he's thankful for the schism...

wait for it...

And you might find it hard to swallow the.... syllogism...
That even evil doers have a reason to rejoice
Because they can simply make a better lifestyle choice.

So if you're a gay teenager, probably jesus doesn't love ya.
Cuz he knows Larry Craig doesn't think a whole lot of ya.

So if you're a gya teenager here's what you should do...
Choose to be a hetero and seven foot two.

Cuz... Larry Craig is completely heterosexual.
Larry Craig is completely heterosexual.
Larry Craig is completely heterosexual.
Glory Halle-Lube-ya.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZmHC75FDqQ (new window)

princehal: Cop not cute?? Hell I would hit it anytime.

That's hot.

/straight girl

//go figure!

eraser8: Sunny Ray writes: I implied that he could probably have good case for entrapment...

How do you figure?

If he had not plead guilty and kept his mouth shut, it would have been a he said/he said case. Sure, the law has the edge, but the entire exchange was "code" and I assume no physical stuff happened except for some mutual consensual foot tapping...

mksmith

A gay coworker of mine was cracked up by this whole episode. His response: "Somebody should explain to the senator that you wait until you're both washing your hands, then you say something like 'I'm gonna go get a drink at the bar. You want to join me?' And you take it from there." He thinks Craig should resign simply because he's too hypocritical, naive, and just plain stupid to live.

Your friend is clearly a relaxed, level-headed, and out-of-the-closet gay homosexual and not a deeply buried self-loathing closet case who hates himself and everything that he knows himself to be. That's why your friend, a regular dude who happens to be gay and wants to meet someone special, can't relate to an innerly-tormented public servant who pretends to be straight and craves anonymous airport dong.

retarded: Are there any instances of women getting arrested for cruising for sex in women's restrooms?

Having worked as a guitarist in a lesbian bar for almost twelve years now, the closest thing I can share is that one friend shared with me that her most successful line was "Can I at least smell it?"

/no arrests
//got nothin'

Bartleby the Scrivener: you may have watched cops, but you have not comprehended it. in prostitution stings, they always set up a monetary transaction prior or get the john to say something about how much he'll pay to demonstrate intent. that's solicition of a prostitute (sex for money). once they do that, they come rushing in. they do not charge them with "lewd conduct".

the act of negotiating the monetary exchange falls under "soliciting (new window)". The broad legal definition is "to encourage another to engage in an illegal act". Money is actually only a related issue as in the case of prostitution it takes money to get consent to perform saild illegal act. However you can solicit a person to commit an illegal act if they desire to commit said act without the inducement of money.

Usually there is s separate charge called "pandering (new window)" which involves a prostitute initiating the barter for services in exchange for money.

These laws and application vary from area to area, but the definitions are fairly constant.

I'm afraid you're the one who does not understand.

Chester the Snake: I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm kinda impressed that the cop kept this quiet for so long. He actually kept his word to Sen. Craig. Good for him.

If only Mr. Craig were so honorable.

Listen to the tape. He knew bloody well what he was doing, or trying to do, in that men's room.

Not that I've been overly concerned with any of this, anyway, but the transcript from the interrogation makes me less inclined to believe anything happened that the officer says happened.

Saying you saw a gold ring on the left hand--so he MUST be guilty--is pretty farking stupid considering the senator is married. Gold is a popular metal in rings, it's tradition to wear the wedding band on the left hand in the US, and it doesn't take Copernicus to notice something like that while you're interrogating a man without counsel, all-the-while trying to drive him to a confession. At this point, I'm just as inclined to believe this "honorable" officer is more interested in getting a promotion out of the prosecution of a high-ranking official as I am to believe the senator looks for sex with other men in bathrooms.

"I respect you, but you're disrespecting me, sitting here lying to a police officer. I'm not trying to act like I have all kinds of power here...."

Bullshiat. He is, in fact, flexing his police muscles throughout most of the interrogation by attempting to guide the senator to a confession and introducing pure speculation and hearsay into the procedure. If the senator is innocent, I'm betting every single one of you would be just as nervous as he was (and wanting to keep something like that quiet) if you had been accused of doing something which might have been a complete accident and mistaken for something like this. You have to wonder about the mind set of an officer whose charge is to sit in bathrooms, waiting for some pervert will solicit him for sex.

You also don't "respect" someone by insinuating they've been succesful in "getting activity" after you ask them how often they're in that particular bathroom....

I have great respect for the job police have to do and, again, I'm really uninterested in whether or not the senator is guilty of solicitation. If he's guilty, great, if he's not, great. The media frenzy over this is bullshiat, and everyone is lapping it up like antifreeze at a petting zoo. Clinton got head, Bush did coke, Craig's a male-bathroom fornicator. Priests molest little boys, pastors have sex with men, Tucker Carlson is a lying douchebag, Courtney Love is a stupid ho. Some republicans are gay, some liberals cheat on their wives (and vice versa). They all lie. Everything seems normal in the world.

Get over it. Partisan politics is ruining this country.

I've asked before, and I'll ask again...

Can somebody please, please, PLEASE do a photoshop on a Larry Craig and Fred Phelps theme? That's all I want, Santa, honest.

logruszed: Bartleby the Scrivener: you may have watched cops, but you have not comprehended it. in prostitution stings, they always set up a monetary transaction prior or get the john to say something about how much he'll pay to demonstrate intent. that's solicition of a prostitute (sex for money). once they do that, they come rushing in. they do not charge them with "lewd conduct".

the act of negotiating the monetary exchange falls under "soliciting (new window)". The broad legal definition is "to encourage another to engage in an illegal act". Money is actually only a related issue as in the case of prostitution it takes money to get consent to perform saild illegal act. However you can solicit a person to commit an illegal act if they desire to commit said act without the inducement of money.

Usually there is s separate charge called "pandering (new window)" which involves a prostitute initiating the barter for services in exchange for money.

These laws and application vary from area to area, but the definitions are fairly constant.

I'm afraid you're the one who does not understand.

well, that wasn't your point.

but if you believe the broadest defintion of "soliciation", since when is asking for sex illegal? if i put both my hands in front of me and thrust my hips to an fro, or place my hand near my mouth and poke my cheek with my tongue, both are "code" or nonverbal gestures for sexual act and there is nothing illegal about that.

Bartleby the Scrivener: since when is asking for sex illegal?

Ever since I've lived in the Midwest. Especially if you ask a cop.

Nentuaby: This case makes me feel rather deeply conflicted.

On the one hand, the man's an incredible hypocritical asshole who has fought the fight for gay rights all the while staying incompetently in the closet.

On the other hand, I do not believe that what he did should be a crime. Solicitation is a bullshiat charge. Leaving aside the gay part, he asked for sex. Big fscking deal. That's what the word "no" is for. If an individual takes no for answer, nothing has happened. If they don't, there are other laws for that- harassment or assault.

I understand what you are trying to say here, and I generally agree with you. OTOH, unless there is a sign outside saying: "Warning. You may be solicited for gay sex," when I use an airport bathroom I do so with the expectation that there will not be some dude peeping into the stall or rubbing my foot with his.

And it's not like this is the restroom of a public park at 3 a.m. I do not think dudes trying to hook up with each other should be a crime, but the non-participants should be allowed to non-participate peacefully.

JOEKC: Bartleby the Scrivener: since when is asking for sex illegal?

Ever since I've lived in the Midwest. Especially if you ask a cop.

touche.

Already Disturbed: Leave the poor fag alone.

It's been days of this now, so in my opinion, FTW.