PDA

View Full Version : Larry Craig, More Gay Sex Allegations


disrupter
12-02-2007, 10:27 PM
More gay men describe sexual encounters with U.S. Sen. Craig
Allegations made since news of the Minneapolis case broke lend weight to rumors about Craig.
BY DAN POPKEY - dpopkey@idahostatesman.com
Edition Date: 12/02/07

Audio clip disclaimer: Some of the audio interview excerpts contain explicit descriptions of sex not appropriate for children and listeners who find such content offensive. The Statesman provides the excerpts so Idahoans can hear these accounts and decide for themselves about accusations against Sen. Craig.

David Phillips. Mike Jones. Greg Ruth. Tom Russell.

Four gay men, willing to put their names in print and whose allegations can't be disproved, have come forward since news of U.S. Sen. Larry Craig's guilty plea. They say they had sex with Craig or that he made a sexual advance or that he paid them unusual attention.

They are telling their stories now because they are offended by Craig's denials, including his famous statement, "I am not gay, I never have been gay." Those words, spoken on live national TV on Aug. 28, are now memorialized on a just-released-for-Christmas Talking Senator Larry Craig Action Figure.

David Phillips is a 42-year-old information technology consultant in Washington, D.C., who says Craig picked him up at a gay club in 1986 and that they subsequently had sex.

Mike Jones is a former prostitute who told the world he had sex with the Rev. Ted Haggard last year. The former Colorado Springs evangelist at first denied it but eventually confessed. Jones says Craig paid him for sex in late 2004 or early 2005.

Greg Ruth was a 24-year-old college Republican in 1981 when he says he was hit on by Craig at a Republican meeting in Coeur d'Alene.

Tom Russell, now 48, is a former Nampa resident who lives in Utah. Russell said his encounter with Craig occurred at Bogus Basin in the early 1980s.

A fifth gay man, who is from Boise but who declined to be named for fear of retaliation, offered a recent and telling account: He was in a men's restroom at Denver International Airport in September 2006 when the man in the next stall moved his hand slowly, palm up, under the divider. Alarmed, the man said he waited outside the restroom and then identified the man in the adjoining stall as Craig, whom he had met in Idaho.

Craig, 62, says he was a victim of "profiling" when he was arrested June 11 at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport for soliciting sex from an undercover police officer in an adjoining stall in a men's restroom. Craig pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct in August. He is appealing his conviction, financed by his 2008 re-election fund. Because of the scandal, Craig no longer needs the money to run for office; after 33 years in state and national office, he says he will not seek re-election next year. Craig also faces a Senate Ethics Committee inquiry, which was requested by Senate GOP leadership.http://www.idahostatesman.com/eyepiece/story/226703.html

NeoCrooks,
lying, thieving perverts to a man & woman.

The Criminal Elite lying to the GOP base who is so willingly, easily lied to.

I guess there is no bottom line of gullibility in the GOP base.

They have 'faith' but no evidence,
& when the evidence points in the opposite direction, they just deny it.

Pretty bad excuses for human beings.
A discredit to all thinking people everywhere.

radioguy
12-02-2007, 11:40 PM
Dude, who really gives a shit about this guys sexual preference except you?

If he's straight, fine...
If he's gay, fine...
If he's gay, but tells everyone he's straight... fine
If he did in fact solicit sex in that airport restroom... he paid a fine, so who cares?


The conduct he chooses to engage in when it comes to his personal life, is his own business. Even though his suspected conduct might be in conflict with the beliefs and values of the republican party, it doesn't have a damned thing to do with his job as a United States Congressman. He didn't have a male prostitution ring operating out of his apartment, nor was he video taped accepting illegal bribes and found with $90,000 in his freezer either, so what's the big deal?

Is gay bashing the new "in thing" for 21st century liberals?

disrupter
12-02-2007, 11:48 PM
It bespeaks his integrity,

he has none.

You obviously don't care about people's integrity,

that speaks about you.

Moby
12-03-2007, 01:15 AM
Many people freaked out at the thought of a married man having consensual heterosexual sex. He lied about it under oath which was way wrong but why was he even asked under oath?

Double standards?

I don't care if Larry is gay. I do care if he's hypocritical.

He lives in a glass house and throws lots of stones.

radioguy
12-03-2007, 03:18 AM
Many people freaked out at the thought of a married man having consensual heterosexual sex. He lied about it under oath which was way wrong but why was he even asked under oath?

Double standards?

I don't care if Larry is gay. I do care if he's hypocritical.

He lives in a glass house and throws lots of stones.

When it comes to integrity, I put a high value on it. It's different for a man of his generation from the Midwest, than it is for a younger man in a say New York. There is a much greater stigma attached to being homosexual for him, not to mention the ramifications such a revelation would have on his family. If the man is in fact gay, his denial and deception on this matter are quite understandable, and I wouldn't say it reflects very negatively on the mans integrity.

As for your quote above, I presume you are referring to Bill Clinton?

Assuming that's the case, I'll tell you here and now, that I understand completely why Clinton lied. I don't condone lying, but If I believed that lying would allow me to keep my wife, and telling the truth would mean I'd lose her, I would likely make the same choice Mr. Clinton did.

The thing is though, there's a huge difference between Craig and Clinton. Clinton was being sued by Paula Jones for sexual harassment, so he was called to testify under oath in front of the grand jury. He then proceeded to perjure himself, which carries a prison term of up to five years. Craig on the other hand pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct, paid a fine, and has never perjured himself under oath.

Like I said before, who gives a shit about the sexual preferences of this guy other than his family and maybe some members of the republican leadership?

I can't for the life of me understand why this issue is deemed newsworthy by anyone in this day and age.

Little Red Dog
12-03-2007, 01:38 PM
So it's okay for him to lie to his constituents - as long as he doesn't do it under oath. It's okay for him to persecute people just like him for doing what he does - but it doesn't reflect negatively on his integrity.

But a hetrosexual man engaging in consensual sex with another adult, and believing, quite rightly, that it is nobody's business except his and his wife's, is an impeachable offense. Worthy of a full-blown investigation paid for with tax-payers money.

The same man, who never tried to legislate his version of "morality", while LIVING a lie - has committed an impeachable offense, and has no integrity, by your measures.

But a man who lies again and again, to his constituents (who elected him to office while he lied to them), to his collegues, to law enforcement, and to the public in general - he's cool with you. A man who CHOOSES to deliberately drag his family through the mud - all the while KNOWING that he is blatantly lieing through the teeth of his YKK - you don't have a problem with that guy's integrity.

And yet you say, with a straight face, "When it comes to integrity, I put a high value on it."

There is no greater testament to your lack of character than what you just posted. Truly, your hypocrisy leaves me speechless.

kittens
12-03-2007, 02:21 PM
Radioguy this isn't newsworthy to you is just because it seems partisan.

You're right to point out Barney Frank but you would, on the same hand, dismiss a similar prostitution ring that reached as high as Bush Sr's Whitehouse (as reported by The Washington TIMES).

The Franklin Cover-up exposed a nest of corruption that used sexual blackmail to politically compromise individuals in government and in business. It involved Boystown Boys, millions of embezzeled dollars, and Larry King - the black republican rising star who was convicted on multiple counts.

radioguy
12-03-2007, 02:57 PM
Radioguy this isn't newsworthy to you is just because it seems partisan.

Sure it is... But I'm partisan also. :)

The "airport restroom" incident I understand getting some play in the media, but every time some guy comes forward and claims Craig is gay, just isn't news to me.

Did it ever occur to anyone that since the guy is a conservative republican, he just might be an easy target by the gay community for retribution? I'm not saying that's the case, but when you consider that #1, whether the man is gay or not, normally shouldn't be news... And #2, these men coming forward could be to sabotage the guys political career over nothing more than by claiming "He's gay", doesn't this give this story even more of a reason to be ignored?

Oh well... I said my peace... Happy gay bashing disrupter

moonman
12-03-2007, 03:12 PM
Attacking Craig on the integrity issue is not gay bashing.

Little Red Dog
12-03-2007, 03:40 PM
Sure it is... But I'm partisan also. :)


"Those who put political leanings above morality deserve our pity, not our praise."

It's official: we pity you. You've asked us to.

disrupter
12-03-2007, 04:58 PM
Clinton didn't make a political issue over having extra marital affairs,

Larry Craig & all the other GOP fags & diaper fetish freaks have made being anti-gay a political issue.

You really are speaking with a forked tongue on this one radioguy.

Maybe you just have a brain fart,
But maybe you really DON'T care about integrity.

Maybe it is all about getting your twisted tortured agenda installed.

Little Red Dog
12-04-2007, 06:14 PM
I would have put this on my Christmas List, but they're sold out! Dammit!

http://www.stupid.com/stat/LCAF.html

"Action figure" seems particularly appropriate - seems he's been getting quite a lot of "action"!

:lmao2: :lmao2:

moonman
12-04-2007, 07:00 PM
I would have put this on my Christmas List, but they're sold out! Dammit!

http://www.stupid.com/stat/LCAF.html

"Action figure" seems particularly appropriate - seems he's been getting quite a lot of "action"!

:lmao2: :lmao2:

:lmao2: :lmao2:

Still Larry Craig is right, he's not gay. In Red States gay works like this see, the blow-er is gay but not the blow-ee. So in order to prove Larry Craig is like totally Red State gay, you have to show him suckin' on a big one, I suppose a little one counts too.

Moby
12-04-2007, 09:47 PM
:lmao2: :lmao2:

Still Larry Craig is right, he's not gay. In Red States gay works like this see, the blow-er is gay but not the blow-ee. So in order to prove Larry Craig is like totally Red State gay, you have to show him suckin' on a big one, I suppose a little one counts too.
It's not gay, it's not prostitution and they're not too young if you're a party member.

However if you're not a party member then having heterosexual sex with a consenting adult is worse then killing American soldiers.

Little Red Dog
12-04-2007, 11:37 PM
...
However if you're not a party member then having heterosexual sex with a consenting adult is worse then killing American soldiers.

Gotta have your priorities right. Or else people might think you're gay...

disrupter
12-05-2007, 05:28 AM
The human brain must be a strongly self-insular environment.

Scientists note that we create a self-promoting self-narrative in our brains.
We like to look good to ourselves,
it would almost be illogical to do otherwise.

but it is sort of a troubling thought,
just how misguided are we?

Can we really trust our own self-assessments?
Could mommy & daddy have been wrong to love us?

In youth i know i at least intermittently loved myself,
in older age i have a good, agreeable relationship with myself, more like a long term marriage.
I may not be great, but i am all i have.
boy that is not much of a promotion, is it? lol