Anyone seeing a pattern yet? First they knew about Mark Foley's little boytoy exercises, now it appears they may have known about Senator Craig's toe-tapping, homosexual tendencies and did nothing about it.

Coming from Bob Novak, who tends to have some of the best GOP inside connections:

quote:

"I have talked to several of my sources in the Senate, and this came as a surprise to me...They knew about it. They knew that he had this problem, and it was in the closet. And it was not just a homosexual relationship. It was this weird conduct. They didn’t do anything about it."

Full vid:



What is it with closeted gays joining the damn Republican party lately, and then turn around and vote so fervently against gay rights?


Furthermore, why do so many Republicans who hold these "family values" know about such behaviors from their colleagues but turn around and cover it up for them?

Psychotherapists have got to be loving their business with guys like Craig.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

___________________

to win the vote of their base, which is poor religious white people.
poor religious white people have nothing to do with rich white people.

___________________

soulful/latin/deep house + jazz

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Coming from Bob Novak, who tends to have some of the best GOP inside connections:

wtf is the party supposed to do about Craig if they knew he was closeted ghey? run him out of the Beltway with torches and pitchforks? where would your indignation be then if he had never gone to the bathroom in Minnesota?

real sleazy paring with Mark Foley btw. thats politics i guess.

...and "gay rights" is actually "gay marriage" so lets not sleaze it up some more by paring that with the indecent adventures of closeted gay men for the sake of pure partisanedship. it's offensive to homosexuals everywhere.

...and all of a sudden Novak is your best friend

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo wtf is the party supposed to do about Craig if they knew he was closeted ghey? run him out of the Beltway with torches and pitchforks? where would your indignation be then if he had never gone to the bathroom in Minnesota?

Being a closeted ghey is one thing, and no I wouldn't expect the Republican party to do anything about that alone. However, practicing lewd behavior in bathrooms, should have raised some red flags long ago, don't you think?

I also do find it interesting to consider the thought of these GOP Congressmen who own the high ground and teach us all about moral values yet fail to acknowledge one of their own practicing behaviors that is anything but moral in their eyes - i.e. being married with kids and being a regular at lewd behavior, let alone lewd homosexual behavior.

quote:

real sleazy paring with Mark Foley btw. thats politics i guess.

Let's see - one practices lewd homosexual behavior in airport bathroom stalls,

the other practices homosexual behavior with his pages.

If we are to believe Novak's word, in both instances members of the GOP, including top ranking members with Foley, were well aware of this behavior.

quote:

...and "gay rights" is actually "gay marriage" so lets not sleaze it up some more by paring that with the indecent adventures of closeted gay men for the sake of pure partisanedship. it's offensive to homosexuals everywhere.

Please.

I've argued this many times before. When there are rights taken away from individuals because of the preference of sex between two consenting adults, you could call it anything you like. I don't care if the word "marriage" is there or not. If gays want that word there for their own sake then I'll leave that fight up to them.

The rights, however, such as over 1,049 benefits that our government allows heterosexual married couples but does not give to consenting homosexual relationships/marriages, is exactly what I would argue needs to be given.

quote:

...and all of a sudden Novak is your best friend

Hardly. But I will concede, as do most of us libruls, that he has the connections inside the GOP and in Administrations that run very deep. I think you would agree with that, wouldn't you?

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 However, practicing lewd behavior in bathrooms, should have raised some red flags long ago, don't you think?

long time ago? like when? where did Novak ever say people knew he liked to troll bathrooms? Novak implied that the party suspected he might be in the closet. thats it!

youre the one spinnin the theories.

quote:

I also do find it interesting to consider the thought of these GOP Congressmen who own the high ground and teach us all about moral values yet fail to acknowledge one of their own practicing behaviors that is anything but moral in their eyes - i.e. being married with kids and being a regular at lewd behavior, let alone lewd homosexual behavior.

morality is not specific to a political party. lewd behavior, straight or gay, is not specific to a political party nor is it the party's motif. it only applies when one party uses it as instances to embarass the other one. that's it's only value at the shallow end of the political pool. so enjoy.

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Hardly. But I will concede, as do most of us libruls, that he has the connections inside the GOP and in Administrations that run very deep. I think you would agree with that, wouldn't you?

right but you're so easy to take his word and run with his nuance but a year ago you called him a traitor and a piece of shit and didn't take his word for anything.

and you were soooooo wrong to boot.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo long time ago? like when? where did Novak ever say people knew he liked to troll bathrooms? Novak implied that the party suspected he might be in the closet. thats it! youre the one spinnin the theories.

Parsing words again, Q? Let's see again what Novak said:

quote:

And it was not just a homosexual relationship. It was this weird conduct. They didn’t do anything about it."

Soooo, what do you surmise the "weird conduct" implied?

Dancing naked with his canary to the oldies?

Juggling the heads of helpless decapitated baby kittens?

What do you think Novak was implying here? What kind of weird behavior has Craig demonstrated as of late? Are you suggesting it's not appropriate for Novak and his audience to tie that weird lewd bathroom behavior to him mentioning the Repubs. knowing of his weird behavior in the past?

quote:

morality is not specific to a political party. lewd behavior, straight or gay, is not specific to a political party nor is it the party's motif.

On the surface of that argument I can't help but agree. However, agreeing in full would be to agree to erase the GOP's morality religious base that is so closely tied to the political scheme of your party. I'm sorry, but I can't play along with that historical mind-erase with you this time. Your party has owned the anti-gay rights issue to the core.

And by the way, correct me if I'm wrong but Craig's behavior wasn't just immoral, was it?

Seems that you're deliberately avoiding the fact that is was also ILLEGAL. Remember that little interesting nugget of ethical lapse?

quote:

it only applies when one party uses it as instances to embarass the other one. that's it's only value at the shallow end of the political pool. so enjoy.

Just stop. Your defense is becoming silly here. When a man carries the morality flag around while voting consistently against gay rights and benefits and then gets busted for homosexual acts IMMORAL and ILLEGAL lewd behavior, one doesn't need an opposing party to embarrass the guy. His contradictory actions and rhetoric did that all on his own.

Hell, you had guys like Barney Frank standing up for him. Don't tell me about opposing parties taking advantage of this when you had the gayest of the gay Democrats standing up for the guy. Jesus.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo right but you're so easy to take his word and run with his nuance but a year ago you called him a traitor and a piece of shit and didn't take his word for anything. and you were soooooo wrong to boot.

Being a traitor for deliberately outing a spy for the CIA who's sole job was to find WMD in Iraq and Iran does not take away his credence for having strong inside connections inside the GOP party and Administration who wanted and got that CIA operative exposed. If anything that only supports his credibility for having such strong connections.

I'd prefer you not derail the topic of this thread. However, if you feel so strongly about me being soooooo wrong, I'd ask you to start back up any of those threads pertaining to the Plame case right where we left off to make your case. Because if memory serves, you had a propensity of leaving on nearly all occasions.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Being a traitor for deliberately outing a spy for the CIA who's sole job was to find WMD in Iraq and Iran does not take away his credence for having strong inside connections inside the GOP party and Administration who wanted and got that CIA operative exposed. If anything that only supports his credibility for having such strong connections. I'd prefer you not derail the topic of this thread. However, if you feel so strongly about me being soooooo wrong, I'd ask you to start back up any of those threads pertaining to the Plame case right where we left off to make your case. Because if memory serves, you had a propensity of leaving on nearly all occasions.

he was as much a traitor as she was a spy. the courts, the grand juries, and Fitzgerald have already proven that. wtf do you not get about that and what more do you want from me?

Last edited by Q5echo on Oct-07-2007 at 23:51

quote:

Originally posted by MisterOpus1 Soooo, what do you surmise the "weird conduct" implied?

i know what it doesn't imply.

you'd think if Novak, of all people, had information that the party knew of anything illegal Craig was doing he'd be a little more specific...but he wasn't. not even close.

hence the tea leaves you're reading right now. from a man you frikken don't trust as far as you can throw him.

no, you're parsing words.

quote:

Originally posted by Q5echo he was as much a traitor as she was a spy. the courts, the grand juries, and Fitzgerald have already proven that. what more do you want from me?

If you want to claim that she wasn't a spy when I've clearly laid out the case otherwise in those previous threads, then by all means continue that debate in those selected threads.

That's what I'd want from you - to keep the topic of this thread at hand, please.

___________________
Whence September dusk grows crisper still,
with leaves all crimson conquered,
I yearn to shout,
and dance about,
and stick pickles in my honker...