Cruising while Republican

Ann Coulter's picture

If you’ve just returned from your Labor Day vacation and are scanning the headlines from recent newspapers — don’t panic! America is not threatened by a category 5 hurricane named “Larry Craig.”

Despite the 9/11-level coverage, Larry Craig is merely accused of “cruising while Republican.” There is nothing liberals love more than gay-baiting, which they disguise as an attack on “hypocrisy.”

Chris Matthews opened his “Hardball” program on Aug. 28 by saying Larry Craig had been “exposed as both a sexual deviant and a world-class hypocrite.”

Normally, using the word “deviant” in reference to any form of sodomy would be a linguistic crime worse than calling someone a “nappy headed ho.” Luckily, Craig is a Republican.

As a backup precaution, Matthews has worked to ensure that there is virtually no audience for “Hardball.” I shudder to think of the damage such a remark might have done if uttered about a non-Republican on a TV show with actual viewers.

The New York Times ran 15 articles on Craig’s guilty plea to “disorderly conduct” in a bathroom. The Washington Post ran 20 articles on Craig. MSNBC covered it like it was the first moon landing — Three small taps for a man, one giant leap for public gay sex!

In other news, two Egyptian engineering students, Ahmed Abdellatif Sherif Mohamed and Youssef Samir Megahed, were indicted in Tampa on charges of carrying pipe bombs across states lines. They were caught with the bombs in their car near a Navy base.

But back to the real news of the week: CNN’s Dana Bash reported that the Larry Craig story was “everywhere and it is not going to let up.”

If liberals were any happier, they’d be gay.

Just as liberals were reaching a fever-pitch of pretend shock and dismay at Larry Craig, it was announced that Craig was resigning. And there went MSNBC’s fall program schedule.

Indignant that Craig had short-circuited their gleeful gay-baiting, liberals quickly switched to a new set of talking points. In the blink of an eye, they went from calling Craig a “deviant” to attacking Republicans for not insisting that Craig stay.

Liberals said the only reason Republicans were not blanketing the airwaves defending Craig — maybe running him for president — was because of Republican “homophobia.” After howling with rage all week about gay Republicans, to turn around and call Republicans homophobes on Friday was nothing if not audacious.

But on the day the two bomb-carrying Egyptian students were indicted and the mainstream media was too busy jeering at Larry Craig to notice, The New York Times editorialized:

“Underlying the (Republicans’) hurry to disown the senator, of course, is the party’s brutal agenda of trumpeting the gay-marriage issue. To the extent Sen. Craig, a stalwart in the family values caucus, might morph into a blatant hypocrite before the voters’ eyes, he reflects on the party’s record in demonizing homosexuality. The rush to cast him out betrays the party’s intolerance, which is on display for the public in all of its ugliness.”

Liberals don’t even know what they mean by “hypocrite” anymore. It’s just a word they throw out in a moment of womanly pique, like “extremist” — or, come to think of it, “gay.” How is Craig a “hypocrite,” much less a “blatant hypocrite”?

Assuming the worst about Craig, the Senate has not held a vote on outlawing homosexual impulses. It voted on gay marriage. Craig not only opposes gay marriage, he’s in a heterosexual marriage with kids. Talk about walking the walk! Did Craig propose marriage to the undercover cop? If not, I’m not seeing the “hypocrisy.”

And why is it “homophobic” for Senate Republicans to look askance at sex in public bathrooms? Is the Times claiming that sodomy in public bathrooms is the essence of being gay? I thought gays just wanted to get married to one another and settle down in the suburbs so they could visit each other in the hospital.

Liberals have no idea what they think about homosexuality, which is why their arguments are completely contradictory. They gay-bait Republicans with abandon — and then turn around and complain about homophobia.

They call Larry Craig a “deviant” based on accusations that he attempted to solicit sex in a public bathroom — and then ferociously attack efforts to prevent people from having sex in public bathrooms.

They say people are born gay — and then they say it’s the celibacy requirement that turns Catholic priests gay.

They tell us gays want nothing more than to get married — and then say it’s homophobic to oppose homosexual sex in public bathrooms.

Unlike liberals, the “family values caucus” that the Times loathes has only one position on homosexuality: Whatever your impulses are, don’t engage in homosexual sex. In fact, don’t have any sex at all unless it is between a husband and wife.

The Idaho Statesman spent eight months investigating a rumor that Craig was gay. They interviewed 300 people, going back to his college days. They walked around Union Station in Washington, D.C., with a picture of Craig, asking people if they had seen him loitering around the men’s bathrooms.

And they produced nothing.

All they had was the original anonymous charge of sodomy in a bathroom at Union Station that started the eight-month investigation in the first place — and his plea to “disorderly conduct” after an ambiguous encounter in a bathroom in Minneapolis. Even his enemies said they had never seen any inappropriate conduct by Craig.

If the charges against Craig are true — and that is certainly in doubt — he’s a sinner (and barely that, according to The Idaho Statesman), but he is among the least hypocritical people in America.

COPYRIGHT 2007 ANN COULTER, DISTRIBUTED BY UNIVERSAL PRESS SYNDICATE

login to post comments | Ann Coulter's blog

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
Locke's picture
Submitted by Locke on Mon, 09/10/2007 - 4:47pm.

Ann is just hysterically funny! The NYT ran 15 articles about Craig and the Washington Post ran 20? CNN’s Dana Bash reported that the Larry Craig story was “everywhere and it is not going to let up.” Whatever could these liberal papers be reporting about the Craig scandal? Well, it seems they were reporting Republicans bashing Craig.

Senator John McCain was the first Republican to demand Craig resign, declaring, “When you plead guilty to a crime, you shouldn’t serve.”

Senator Norm Coleman of Minnesota, who announced he was donating a campaign contribution from Craig to charity.

Senator John Ensign of Nevada, who chairs the Republican senatorial campaign committee, said, “If I was in a position like that, that’s what I would do (resign).”

Former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney, who had enlisted Craig as the Senate chairman of his campaign, revoked the appointment and scheduled a series of television interviews to denounce his erstwhile supporter as “disgusting.” Romney condemned Craig's behavior and stripped any mention of Craig from his Web site, including a video of Craig saying he supported Romney because of family values.

Republican presidential contender Mike Huckabee said Larry Craig should step down as Idaho's senior US senator to spare the GOP and his state from further embarrassment.

Senate Republican leaders requested an Ethics Committee investigation into the Idaho Republican's arrest in a public restroom.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell Minority,, Whip Trent Lott GOP conference Chair Jon Kyl, Senate Republican Policy Committee Chairwoman Kay Bailey Hutchison and NRSC Chairman John Ensign stripped him of his committee assignments,

U.S. Rep. Ron Lewis "Senator Craig's guilty plea for his alleged conduct last June illustrates moral hypocrisy inappropriate for an elected official," "undermine the conservative principles of the Republican Party and should not be tolerated by voters or party leaders,"

Rep. Peter Hoekstra, R-Mich., called on him to resign from the Senate

Conservative bloggers and sycophants were just as kind:

Hugh Hewitt commented: "I realize that I did not say this about Senator Vitter, but Craig's behavior is so reckless and repulsive that an immediate exit is required."

Erick Erickson at Red State blogged: "I can only say he must resign.”

Rush Limbaugh says it would be "a huge mistake for Sen. Larry Craig to withdraw his resignation and continue to fight to hold onto his seat in the Senate. The fact of the matter is he has no political support left, other than Sen. Specter.”

Sean Hannity repeated his call for Craig to resign "if he did it," but also insisted that Craig had “only” been charged with “tapping his foot, peeking in, in the partition, putting his hands under and playing footsy.”

The Republican blog site Mainstream Iowan posted this headline: "Senator Larry Craig Should Resign Because Cruising Johns For Sex Is Unbecoming Of A Married United States Senator."

At Hawkeye GOP: “More stunning than the stupidity, is the hypocrisy. Craig has been known as a family values guy. He is a married father of three who has been an outspoken opponent of the homosexual agenda. Craig's problem is not that he is gay - it is that he is a hypocrite.”

Gary Bauer American Family Association issued a press release saying: “Senator Specter Should Stop Interfering with Senator Craig's Plans to Resign -- Issues being ignored during this debate: 1.) public health dangers of homosexual bathroom sex; 2.) some homosexual groups promote this activity; 3.) being involved in homosexual activity should disqualify Republican candidates.”

The Christian Coalition called for his resignation.

After deploring the newspapers for the number of articles (without saying they were reporting what Republicans were saying about Craig) Coulter, continuing her assault on facts, writes: “The Idaho Statesman spent eight months investigating a rumor that Craig was gay. They interviewed 300 people, going back to his college days. They walked around Union Station in Washington, D.C., with a picture of Craig, asking people if they had seen him loitering around the men’s bathrooms. And they produced nothing. All they had was the original anonymous charge of sodomy in a bathroom at Union Station that started the eight-month investigation in the first place…”

Since Ann had stated it so forcefully it had to be a lie. Here are some excerpts (all of which Craig denies by the way):

“…the Statesman played Craig an audiotape of the man claiming that he and Craig had sex in the Union Station restroom. Like the Minnesota airport restroom, the Union Station restroom is known as a place where men can find anonymous sex.”

“One man, who was considering pledging with Craig's fraternity at the U of I in 1967, said Craig took him to his room and made what the man said he took to be an invitation to sex.”

“Another man said that in November 1994 Craig "cruised" him at the REI store in Boise. The man, who is gay, told the Statesman that Craig stared at him in a sexually inviting way and followed him around REI for a half-hour.”

“The Statesman began its inquiry last October, after a gay activist blogger, Mike Rogers, published a claim that Craig had sex with men.”

“The Statesman followed dozens of leads about alleged sexual partners. Two prevalent rumors swirl around two men who are dead.”

“…rumors about Craig were grounded in the 1982 congressional page scandal Craig alone — among 535 members of Congress — issued a statement saying, "I have done nothing that I need to be either publicly or privately ashamed of. I am guilty of no crime or impropriety, and I am convinced that this is an effort to damage my personal character and destroy my political career." (Nobody had accused Craig of anything when he spontaneously issued this statement.)

Ann Coulter and Craig are giving my gay friends a bad name!


Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.