Headline of the Day
Posted on August 29th, 2007 in Uncategorized | 20 Comments »
Larry Craig: Still Not Gay
âThe Washington Post
Despite a published report that he once fellated a man in a bathroom in Washington’s Union Station, Larry Craig insisted yesterday that he isn’t gay.
“I’m not gay,” he said.
This despite the fact that in 1999, during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, Craig saidâand I promise, I’m not making this upâ
It’s a, ‘Bad boy, Bill Clinton. You’re a naughty boy.’ The American people already know that Bill Clinton is a bad boy, a naughty boy. I’m going to speak out for the citizens of my state, who in the majority think that Bill Clinton is probably even a nasty, bad, naughty boy.
Um…senator? You’re gay.
20 Responses
8/29/2007 9:13 am
Not a Washington Post headline, Rich — they don’t kid around like that — but a washingtonpost.com *blog* headline.
8/29/2007 9:18 am
great reader’s comment on the site too:
“Anybody actually buy this “wide stance” defense. Next time you go the the bathroom and pull down your pants check and see just how “wide” you can spread your legs without the top of your pants restricting the movement. Sorry it doesn’t work unless the guy sits on the throne sideways.”
8/29/2007 9:19 am
EADW-
Actually, I thought about that before writing my description, and wrote what I wrote quite consciously, with all that it implies.
RB
8/29/2007 9:35 am
Rich - you signed in as “shannon” on that one. ?
8/29/2007 9:44 am
Richard needs to get in touch with his feminine side from time to time. And why not “Shannon”? I see her as a “Juicy Couture” kind of a lassie. She can probably tell us about Americans and maps, too.
8/29/2007 9:49 am
Put the clip up, Rich. It’s even better than the quote.
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2007/08/senator_larry_craig_rid_on_mee.php
8/29/2007 9:50 am
Rich, is Shannon your transgender alter-ego? Fess up, dude!
8/29/2007 10:24 am
Well, that’s embarrassing. But you are a smart bunch, and can figure it out.
8/29/2007 10:25 am
Who’s Shannon?
8/29/2007 10:26 am
Rich’s wife - Shannon Bradley?
8/29/2007 10:28 am
Rich is married?
8/29/2007 10:42 am
No, he’s not. But maybe that’s his girlfriend. Or he prefers to comment on other blogs using another name as a joke. Who cares? No biggie. I’m not putting my name on this comment either and I have my own blog.
8/29/2007 10:52 am
Think Yankees. Here’s Rich’s other blog
http://www.beingagirlbooks.com/shannon.php
8/29/2007 10:56 am
Ohmygod-she does look like Richard.
8/29/2007 12:38 pm
I just think it’s funny Rich wrote “wrote what I wrote quite consciously, with all that it implies” as Shannon. I thought he did it deliberately as a joke until the ensuing comments. But really who cares?
8/29/2007 12:58 pm
No, no. I just meant that I thought about identifying the quote as from a Washington Post blog, and then I thought, but if the Post is publishing blogs, isn’t it really a Washington Post headline? Isn’t the distinction between an article and something written on a WashingtonPost.com becoming meaningless?
But I agree, it is funny that I attributed something conscious to myself, then did something entirely accidental.
8/29/2007 2:42 pm
Whatever happened to?:
ARTICLE I
Section 6
(1) The Senators and Representatives shall … in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place.
8/30/2007 10:00 am
Are you suggesting that while in a bathroom in Minneapolis he was “in attendance at a session”? What proposition exactly was on “the floor”?
8/30/2007 11:40 am
No, but (read on) possibly “in going to and returning from the same”. Possibly to vote an anti-Iraq war bill?
Hey, it’s in the Constitution and it used to be important.
What happened to it?
9/1/2024 11:24 am
Could he have been committing Breach of the Peace? Or just breach of the breeches?