Ok now HANG ON.

Im NOT saying the senator is guilty nor innocent.

However, the way the laws are here, oftentimes its less expensive and less fuss to just accept a guilty plea and be done with it even if you are innocent.

As a senator, if he was innocent and it went to court- it would explode in the media. He would have been better off trying to keep it simple, quick and out of the light.

If I get a speeding ticket that has a fine of $110...
I can plead guilty or no contest and pay the fine.
OR
I can plead innocent- pay $500 court fee, then wait for a couple months for a court date- pay a lawyer maybe to present my case...
If I win by trial I might get the $500 returned to me (which I would have to hand right over to my lawyer...)

No...
His plea of guilty doesn't mean jack squat.

I don't know if he is or not.
But given the circumstances- the Court Ruling really doesn't mean anything other than that for whatever reason he didn't want to take it to trial.

Meh, its been a urinating for distance competition on the Hill for so long, the people who started it are mostly dead.

__________________
The last time I felt a warm fuzzy feeling, I was informed by my doctor that it was just gas.

I by no means meant you said he was guilty, or innocent. Mine was just a too-much-television-induced made up quote...well, except the gavel part. But that comes from years of watching court proceedings.

As for the "he could have been pleaing guilty to get it to dissapear quickly"...well, that *could* be true. It would be a really foolish tactic for a politician of his stature to think that such a thing would work, and he'd squeak by unnoticed, but that could have been his reasoning.

I would guess that he consulted a lawyer before both decisions aswell. And probably some PR advisors. And, possibly, his son's "Magic 8 Ball". Somewhere along the lines, he may have gotten some bad advice.

__________________

I'm like one of those idiot savants...well, except for the savant part.
"In order to increase awareness of the homeless, security have been given binoculars."

'ere we go:

__________________
*

If doing something you believe is wrong is "hypocrisy," the word has been redefined to be meaningless.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2009 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

From the smoking gun site:

Yes, because only a dirty dirty homosexual would do something like that! A real man with a suitcase in a busy airport leaves the suitcase in the middle of the concourse - obviously.

Yes, clearly tapping one's foot should be illegal. This brazen criminal was probably tapping a "tune" thus adding copyright infringement to his list of crimes. Lock him up and throw away the key, I say!

Oh, now Sergeant Karsnia the psychic detective is giving signals. Well guess what, tofu recognizes moving a foot up and down slowly as a signal often used by child molesters to indicate that they've been drinking the blood of the innocent. I wonder how Sergeant Karsnia feels about that.

I know. I was stating for the record

I was serious about my post though.
Pleading "Innocent" is a real pain in the butt compared to the quick and easy plea bargain.

Following a hunch (pretty sure it was Quasimodo) I checked to see where Senator Craig stood on a particular issue. As suspected he's strong on "family values".

OK...

As per mike's list, hypocrisy, plain and simple.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Based on Craig's voting record and apparent dislike (<---understatement) of homosexuality, I would think he would do anything in his power not to be convicted of a "gay" crime were he truly innocent. To me, it reeks of actual guilt. He pleaded guilty and paid the fine hoping it would go away. Only when it came to light did he suddenly start pleading his innocence, and the fact that his decision was made without constulting a lawyer. (He pleaded guilty when he was innocent, then says he didn't really understand the consequences? And he's helping run the country? Seriously?)

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"

From the article Maksutov just linked:

and:

and:

and last but most certainly not least!!:


Anyone else detecting a very strong sarcastic slant in a certain direction?

Yeah, real reliable source and article there. Thanks.

No need to, he already admitted guilt. The senator allegedly loves homosexual encounters but not when other people are doing it without him.

And as for tofu's post quoting TSG, if it walks like a duck, swims like a duck and quacks like a duck then there's a pretty good chance that it's a duck. I'm not insinuating that this elected official is queer like a duck but it's not hard to find websites that have information about how to read the various signals and gestures to have a cruisy time.

Finally re: this thread I don't know if neocons are coming out as log cabin republicans in order to save face for the Republican party or if there are real gay people who are trying to defend their private personal life by defending Larry Craig and they've forgotten his stance on homosexuals.

I suppose I should take back everything I've said about the distinguished Senator Craig (R - Potato). Pleading guilty to a misdemeanor charge ("Why did you do it, Senator?" "It had been a long time, Your Honor, and da more I miss, da meaner I get.") is NOT the same as being guilty of same. I made the totally unwarranted presumption that an admission of guilt was tantamount to an admisssion of guilt, not the opening statement in an extended debate about the realities of the judicial system. Changing from a tap to a bit of the ol' soft-shoe.

I offer my sincere apologies to Sen. Craig, and am willing to apologize in person; 7:30 PM, PDX, Concourse A, halfway down across from Hudson News, third stall.

__________________
If they can get you asking the wrong questions, they don't have to worry about the answers.

I wish I lived in the world you folks live in -where everything is so cut and dry- black and white.

I repeat- I don't know if he is guilty or innocent,
What he pled in court really doesn't mean much compared to a lot of factors that can make a person plea the way they do.

But for a group of self proclaimed skeptics- I see you are kinda quick to jump on the media bandwagon and say "He's guilty!"

Heck he probably is.
But I don't know. I wasn't in the stall opposite to bear witness.

But I do know how the real world works. And it doesn't always work very well.

And when it comes to misdemeanors especially- a guilty plea usually means I'll take the stupid plea bargain and get it over with rather than deal with the hell you will put me through for actually having the audacity to say I was innocent.

We're skeptical...of his innocence claim

And don't blame us of bandwagoning simply because we happen, in this case, to agree with the media. None of us will ever know exactly what happened in the bathroom, but that's not really the point. He, in a legal case, pleaded guilty to the crime he was arrested for. There's nothing else to discuss really. If he was just pleading that way to "make this go away faster" then shame on him for lying. He's a man of the law, a maker of laws even, he should have known better. Me? I don't believe his charge of innocence now that we all know about it.

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"

Point made.

Granted, Craig may actually be a hypocrite. But we don't know that based on the evidence - unless, as I said, we define "hypocrisy" down to be meaningless.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2009 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

See what mike and Kelfazin wrote, and what some guy named Sen. Larry Craig (R-Tater) said, about the admission of guilt. Either way, pleading guilty while being innocent (lying), or being guilty while pleading guilty (not walking the talk, see "family values et al"), the guy's a hypocrite. No amount of semantic obfuscation will change that.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

Thanks, Mak for hitting the nail on the head.

Sen. Craig IS a hypocrite by his own words.. for the life of me, I don't understand all of the "apologists" posting here.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

I don't know much about the senator in question but this whole incident sounds fishy to me. I do agree that it is often simpler, easier and less risky to just accept a plea bargain than to go to trial , even if you are 100% sure you are innocent. I'd wager a bet that a fair percentage of misdemeanor convictions are actually innocent people just avoiding the hassle and the potential of wrongful convictions. Being innocent doesn't mean your not getting convicted and going to jail.

I've never heard of these "signals" they are talking about. I always put my bag at the front of the stall when in an airport restroom, and I've been known to tap my feet from time to time. Now, I have seen people wave their hands under the divider, I just ignored them unless they were asking for TP or reading material. It seems to me like the FBI jumped the gun on making the arrest, and the senator jumped the gun on accepting the plea deal. No doubt the prosecution pressured him, and assured him, that if he took the deal it will all be over and he can get on with his life with no repercussions. After all, it's just a "misdemeanor". The more they realize they really don't have a solid case the more they pressure the suspect to accept a plea deal. I know this from personal experience unfortunately. I doubt this senator was "up" on the methods used by law enforcement to get their convictions.

A criminal defense lawyer once told me: "Never trust the cops, always assume they are out to get you." "They are not your friend, they are not there to help you, despite what they may claim."

That applies to all parties, even if you are the one calling the police to report a crime. You will likely be the very first suspect. You could ask Richard Jewel about that, except he died today. He never did get his life back together again after the Olympic Park bombing. Law enforcement had absolutely no qualms about destroying his life and showed no remorse for doing so, despite the fact that there was never any real evidence against him and he was ultimately 100% vindicated.

No apologist has posted here.
Perhaps if you actually read the posts you would see that.

I still don't buy the "guilty to make it go away" plea. He's a politician with a strict anti-gay policy. He could have played this out, loudly, to drive his agenda.

"Look America! Look how a man can't even go to the bathroom in this country anymore without having to prove he is not one of them! And parents, do you see the danger this poses to your children when simply tapping your foot is taken by them as a sexual advance? We must stop this now America! Help us put a stop to these amoral gays!"

__________________
I was just sitting here contemplating the immortal words of Socrates who said, "I drank what?"

"Think of the rivers of blood spilled by all those generals and emperors so that, in glory and triumph, they could become the momentary masters of a fraction of a dot." --Carl Sagan "Pale Blue Dot"

My fave:

__________________
*

I'm glad you mentioned this bit simply because I was not aware he had been cleared. Whew!

Just about everybody will do things that they themselves believe to be (and have said to be) wrong. It happens all the time. If that's hypocrisy, then - as I said -the word is virtually meaningless.

Now, it's possible that Craig actually believes there's nothing wrong with homosexuality but says there is. In that case, he's truly a hypocrite. But we don't know that he actually believes there's nothing wrong with homosexuality. Taking the reports of what happened in that bathroom at face value, it would appear that Craig does indeed have homosexual tendencies and sometimes acts on them - but that doesn't necessarily mean he believes it's okay.

I'm not defending Craig, here - I'm just objecting to the "defining down" of hypocrisy.

And I'll definitely take exception to the suggestion that legally pleading guilty to an act you didn't commit qualifies. Whether they apply in this case or not, there can be valid reasons for doing that.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2009 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

Let's take a look at what the good Senator said about this (just one example, there are many, many more). Pretty obvious where he stands in public, and also where he stands in private. The extent of the different is hypocrisy.

Let's keep this in context. There may valid reasons for doing such things and that are not hypocritical, but we're discussing Sen. Craig here.

Saying you did something when you didn't and vice versa is lying, which, in the case of an elected official who ran on a family-values platform, is betraying the public trust placed in him by the people of Idaho, and is therefore hypocritical. It may be hypocrisy for a good reason (e.g., the Senator thought would be a good CYOA move at the time), but it's hypocrisy nevertheless.

As I said and demonstrated, the guy's a hypocrite. No amount of semantic obfuscation will change that.

__________________
A person's name, or a mark representing it, as signed personally or by deputy, as in subscribing a letter or other document.

A politician Lying?!:O
Stop the presses!

He was proposing marriage in that bathroom stall? Opposing the legalization of gay marriage is not the same thing as opposing homsexuality. And engaging in homosexual activity is not the same thing as condoning it.

Betraying a trust is not hypocrisy, and neither is lying. For pete's sake, that word means something.

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2009 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

If you want to disagree with my opinion then just say so, however intentionally trying to "pick a fight" is uncalled for.

Perhaps you should reaquaint yourself with the rules of this board.

If a person says "I never lie" and is then caught lying, he is obviously a hypocrite.

__________________
"The facts gentlemen, and nothing but the facts, for careful eyes are narrowly watching." Isaac Asimov

uhhh...
ok.
I disagree.

You don't seem to follow them much either...


See line above.