So here is what disgraced Senator Larry Craig did. He placed his bag down in front of the airport bathroom door. He went tap, tap, tap with his foot. He reached over with his left hand and touched the leg of the fellow in the next stall. After that he did...well, nothing. The officer confronted him and accused him of soliciting, and Craig pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct and paid the fine.
Here, to get a little perspective, is what Congressman Barney Frank did several years ago. He answered a personal ad in the Washington Blade in which a male prostitute, Stephen Gobie, drew public attention to his "hot bottom" and "large endowment." Frank began to pay Gobie for sex and even invited Gobie to move in with him. When the arrangement soured, Gobie revealed to the press that he had been running a full-service prostitution ring out of Frank's Capitol Hill apartment.
Why then is Craig on the ropes while Frank continues as a Congressman in good standing? Certainly the difference isn't homosexuality, which seems to be a common factor in both cases. Nor can the explanation be found in the gravity of the offense involved. Craig's is much less serious, since the worst he did was proposition another adult to have sex, not exactly the first time in history that this has happened. Frank, by contrast, was employing a male hooker for paid favors and providing operating facilities for a D.C. prostitution ring.
I suppose the difference is that Craig has been a champion of moral values--which makes him vulnerable to the charge of hypocrisy--while Frank is a libertine which means he gets to do as he pleases. (Bill Clinton and Ted Kennedy are also given free passes for similar reasons.) Another difference, as far as the mainstream media is concerned, is that Craig is a Republican. If you're looking for two-faced people who abuse their power, Craig may not be the greatest offender here.
Reader Comments ( Page 4 of 11)
46. [[Furthermore, I think it is fair to say most Democrats don't think there is anything wrong with being gay.]]
Probably most Americans DO frown on running a prostitution service out of your home, though. Otherwise they would do it themselves in order to pay for college, say.
OomYaaqub at 10:21AM on Sep 1st 2007
47. [[If conservatives want to do Larry Craig a favor they would quietly wait for it blow over.]]
No pun intended, of course.
OomYaaqub at 10:24AM on Sep 1st 2007
48. Well Duh (I tend to say this a lot when reading Dinesh), Frank is still there because he did not resign and was lucky enough to live in a district where he will be re-elected. He could have killed the male prostitute and probably still been re-elected.
davi at 10:29AM on Sep 1st 2007
49. This D'Souza guy has an annoying habit of not reading and/or presenting all the details and facts of a case, thereby making false arguments. His statement that Frank ran "operating facilities for a D.C. prostitution ring" is completely WRONG. D'Souza first assumes that the prostitution ring happened and then that Frank was complicit. Both of these things have been refuted by third-party sworn testimony (Frank's landlord and the telephone company). http://mediamatters.org/items/200708300008
When Frank found out Gobie was bringing clients back to his house Frank ended the relationship and reported the incident to the House Ethics Committee and even REQUESTED them to initiate an investigation. After a 10 month probe the committee found no evidence that an escort service was being run out of Frank's home. On the contrary, they found evidence that contradicted Gobie's claim of a prostitution ring and cleared Frank of this accusation.
So it didn't happen. But D'Souza wishes it did.
Frank freely admitted everything that happened. Craig is covering everything up with pathetic lies and denials and has shown everyone his dishonesty and lack of integrity on how he handles the situation. His audio interview with the undercover cop really is an embarrassment to anyone with half a brain.
But D'Souza really likes to go way back in time to make a point doesn't he? Frank's incident occurred in '89. Why doesn't D'Souza give a more recent example that's also comparable to Frank's scandal as well? David Vitter. He and Frank both hired hookers. Why isn't D'Souza asking why Vitter is still in office? Because you can't attack one of your own, of course. Purely partisan politics.
And why did they give Vitter a standing ovation after his guilty admission of marital infidelity? That seems very bizarre considering their platform of family values. Maybe they were moved by the brutal honesty of the confession, since telling the truth is so alien to most of them.
george at 10:36AM on Sep 1st 2007
50. Weak men are weak men, no matter what party they represent and whether they're gay or straight. Since you've chosen to approach this as a partisan issue, so will I. Seems to me most democrats don't care about politicians personal pecadillos as long as they don't impede their ability to run the country. On the other hand, the republicans seem more concerned with the way a politician conducts his personal life than how he conducts his job (with the possible exceptions of Guiliani and Fred Thompson).
The only people who have rushed to judgement on this one are the Republicans themselves.
So your question is specious at best.
queenie at 10:51AM on Sep 1st 2007
51. you can almost hear ol' DD talking to himself:
DD1: it's not fair that a conservative such as larry craig has to resign for doing something icky in a men's room and liberal barney frank, who did the same kind of thing, is still in office.
DD2: well, larry craig doesn't have to resign if he doesn't want to. nobody's expelling him from the senate.
DD1: but craig is under intense pressure to resign; it's almost like being expelled.
DD2: but the pressure on craig to resign is coming from conservatives, not liberals. liberals are being real quiet on this one.
DD1: liberals are being quiet because they have no family values. they're the ones who let icky barney frank stay in office.
DD2: but i thought you said that the pressure on craig to resign is unfair.
DD1: it is! barney frank isn't being pressured to resign.
DD2: but the pressure on craig to resign is coming from family-values conservatives, not from permissive liberals.
DD1: i know. that's why i like family-values conservatives. they won't put up with icky people like sen. craig.
DD2: then why do you think the pressure on craig to resign is unfair.
DD1: i dunno. gimme a minute to think...
[repeat in endless cycle until next blog deadline]
slowbadhands at 10:52AM on Sep 1st 2007
52. Slowbands - great comment! You are funny and smart, and would be a far better commentator than Dinesh.
Conservatives always think its unfair that they can't dictate everyone's morals, behavior and thoughts. They end up shooting themselves in the foot over it.
JWinn at 11:20AM on Sep 1st 2007
53. The repubs want him out because him staying around would exposed them as the hypercritics they are instead of the moral party they are not. Frank is in because he never called out someone of their morals like this loser did when he and Ken Starr made it their life work to impeach Clinton for lying about his little thing with Monica. Clinton should have told the truth and been finish with it. Craig is stating "he ain't gay" because he got "caught with his pants down" in a public place. Now he want people to believe that he sleeps with his wife. Please, Craig, stick a fork into yourself because you are done, dude!
Ray at 11:40AM on Sep 1st 2007
54. Dinesh you are a hoot. Attributing the demise of Craig's career to democrats is patently false. Which of course is SOP Standard Operating Procedure for republicans. Attempting to justify the actions of Craig By making comparisons to otherws indiscretions is flawed and immature. I guess your mommy never taught you that two wrongs don't make a right. The Republican s devoured Craig because they know he will be replaced by a republican in the senate because the Governor of Idaho is a republican. If the Governor of Idaho were a democrat; I have no doubt the GOP would rally around the old pervert.
Soothesayer at 11:54AM on Sep 1st 2007
55. Listen Mr. D:
Go Fuck yourself.
Behzad at 12:24PM on Sep 1st 2007
56. When you have a party that attacks a group of people as the Republican Party does to the LGBT community, guess what, your going to be scrutinized more, it is a issue of hypocrisy, and his ass should be thrown out.
Look, Democrats do dance around the gay issue, they kind of endorse it but they kind of dont, I give you that, its a load of crap, so they dont deserve a pass, but we see this huge unbelievable hypocrisy from Pastor Ted Haggard, Congressman Mark Foley, Mayor Jim West, and now the Senator from Idaho.
It is easier for people to accept that Barney Frank, an openly gay man who supports all things gay was doing something GAY... Its more shocking to find out that Pastor Ted Haggard, who champions the cause to basically anialate gays and thier rights, was having bareback three ways which snorting crack!
And one more thing, is anyone else getting tired of people like Pat Bucchanan getting on TV and saying how he is tired of people trying to throw there beliefs of gays on him... Guess what, Im tired of you throwing your Straight beliefs on me you idiot! The artogance that some people have... Maybe Im tired of straight marriages.... I'm not, I could care less..you know why... BECAUSE IT DOESNT EFFECT ME IF YOU GET MARRIED!! Imagine that... me not worrying so much about what everyone else is doing... I am starting to think that these old white men that keep fighting this are either A) fighting a hidden passion for men and over compensating OR B) they got molested when they were a kid and now everybody has to pay for what there dad did to them. Well, someone had to say it! LOL
Thats all....
Mike with a Y at 12:40PM on Sep 1st 2007
57. "If you have read the news lately his fellow republicans are the ones making the most noise about this and want him gone because it makes them look bad. The democrats are just sitting back laughing."
That's exactly right. It's the Republicans who are reacting the most to this. Dinesh is attacking his own people.
Dunkly at 12:53PM on Sep 1st 2007
58. I am one of the two Democrats here in Idaho (we meet in secret every once in awhile). Craig has not helped his party or the nation by lying about his behavior. He has claimed he is in the mess because the local newspaper has been harassing him until he lost it--it is all their fault. He was one of the first to jump up and to demean Clinton for his behavior. I think he should apply to teach a course in family values at Brigham Young University.
Tom Edgar at 1:31PM on Sep 1st 2007
59. Your comments: Two thoughts: Senator Craig, like so many older gay men has tried to hide from himself for many years. He has convinced himself
that he is not really gay because he doesn't go to bars or have a boyfriend or hire a man. He assures himself that his feelings come from the devil which must be fought. In fighting it, he is not gay.
Gays give in, gays are effeminate. I feel sorry for him. The pain he has within, the pain that he has caused his family (especially his wife)is the hell he now must suffer.
He grew up in a time when being gay was itself a crime. Unfortunately that is the time he wants to
return this nation to. The Republican Party made a pact with its religious right in order to overthrow 40+ years of Congressional Democratic rule. It has now been kidnapped by that group and it must now
villify gay people, smuggly proclaiming itself morally superior to all those who do not support is views.
Fortunately, their time on stage is dying. Too many people have come out of the closet, too many
businesses have hired openingly gay people and too many people know being gay is no big thing for Larry Craig's hellish world to ever hurt us ever again. Larry Craig? May you find peace.
----------------------------------------------
Kenneth Weeden at 1:53PM on Sep 1st 2007
60. All I have to remember with DD when I read anything of his is how he got nailed by Stephen Colbert, exposing how he agrees with Islamofacists that our 'immoral' freedoms should be censored to fall in line with their ideals, so they'll like us more. DD is a traitor and should go ahead and join the jihad, he belongs there. This man has no credibility and brings shame upon the right of free speech. It's shocking that anyone would employ this guy or take one word of his to heart.
abers076 at 2:37PM on Sep 1st 2007