Talk:Larry Craig

This article contains information about one or more living persons. Articles about living people must be handled carefully, because they are more open to legal threats. Reference any contentious allegations solidly; unreferenced allegations should be removed. If legal threats are raised on this page, please direct the potential litigant to RationalWiki:Legal FAQ; do not interact with them.

Hasn't he been exonerated already? human^{be in} 23:34, 27 August 2007 (CDT)

From what I read, no - he merely stated that he "regretted" the guilty plea. They don't usually exonerate people who plead guilty. I'll poke around later today and see what the deal is....PFoster 08:40, 28 August 2007 (CDT)

Sright:

"At the time of this incident, I complained to the police that they were misconstruing my actions,' he said. 'I should have had the advice of counsel in resolving this matter. In hindsight, I should not have pled guilty. I was trying to handle this matter myself quickly and expeditiously."

Keep ^{æ not e} 08:51, 28 August 2007 (CDT)

When reading about this on WP, I get the impression that "reporting" on the story is a bit beneath RW's standards. Had any of the minor "scandals" that have occurred had any real meat behind them, then, yes, as a "family values" (anti-gay etc.) party member, his hypocrisy would deserve a scathing RWcrit piece. As it is, the only thing he seems to be truly guilty of is bad judgement. Probably because he is a bit, um, "different" than his politics would "allow", but still. I propose we just delete this gossipy article, as it does nothing for our cause. There are bigger fish to fry. human^{be in} 15:32, 28 August 2007 (CDT)

Alright, as the new guy, I concede to your sysoperly power and judgment. Fire away. ^{— Unsigned, by: PFoster / talk / contribs}

Hmmm, well, let's not think of it that way! I am just another editor, stating my point of view. If I'm wrong, ignore me. If I'm right, it ain't because I've got extra buttons on my screen, or, for that matter more or less time here. Let's see what a few more people think before acting, at least. And what do you think of the article existing? human^{be in} 15:50, 28 August 2007 (CDT)

Well, like I said on the "really bad Conservatives" or whatever it's called page, while I'm not a fan of going into the gutter, when an elected official from a party that makes all kinds of noise about protecting family values and who as an individual is on the record as opposing gay marriage **pleads guilty** to lewd conduct in a men's room, I think that's blatantly hypocritical and deserves a place on a website that has, in part, a mandate (hee, hee, man-date. Get it?) to expose the hypocrisy of the right. Sure, dude wants to take back his guilty plea, *after the story breaks*, and maybe the whole thing is a giant misunderstanding...but if were Ted Kennedy or Kucinich or someone like that, it would be all over the CP and every other similar place.

But it's not like I'm married to this article or something. I have enough to keep me amused here. PFoster 15:57, 28 August 2007 (CDT)

Yes, your points are well taken, and I have been trying to get "up to speed" on this sordid story. There is also the angle of a Senator (should be a savvy dude, no?) idiotically expecting a guilty plea to anything would make it go away. Ironically, if he had retained counsel (or common sense), he could have easily beat the rap, since it was weak. The interesting thing is that, yes, he was actually willing to plead guilty for some reason. And, I must also say, at RW we are free to speculate and extrapolate as to these whys and wherefores. I just don't like the occasional "pig pile on the conservative" mentality most of us tend to share. But it is to be expected, since so many US con politiciancs are racists, homophobes, hateful, and just as often, hypocritical. I'll go read the article again (and the dumb cons one) and rethink what I think of it/them. human^{be in} 16:42, 28 August 2007 (CDT)

Human - nice, nice edits to the article. Things like that are why I like it here so much.PFoster 17:55, 28 August 2007 (CDT)

The Bathroom Is In My Hometown

The bathroom he, um, got caught with his pants down in is in my hometown, and I have been there!!!! Hell, one of my buddies even wrote "Caution: Widestance" in the stall where the "activities" took place.The Goonie 1 (talk) 04:30, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Very funny, do we have pix? And why did you fuck up the previous comments above? Accident? I hope so... ħuman 04:56, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

I think it was an accident. My computer's keyboard i s starting to get a mind of it's own, and sometimes it jumps to something else without cause. One of these days, my lazy self will replace it.The Goonie 1 (talk) 05:00, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh yes, keyboard malfeasance mucks many of us up. I cleaned mine a few weeks ago so I could read the numbers across the top... ħuman 05:27, 9 July 2009 (UTC)

the thing is

I have a wide stance in the restrooms. I don't wanna get buttfucked for that!---brxbrx 01:42, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Don't knock it 'til you've tried it. The key is lots of lube, and start with smaller objects like fingers. P-Foster (talk) 01:44, 20 May 2011 (UTC)

Comedic Critique

The entire "No srsly guize, [X] is NOT [Y]" is already not that funny, but continuing to hammer the point home degrades what little value it has. One article of that might not be enough to talk about but there are several other articles that use this same lazy rubric (off the top of my head, Ted Haggard and Richard Spencer). My advice would be to maybe keep one the way it is and come up with perhaps some less monotonous snark on the other two because the joke really doesn't work if it's every third line and on multiple different people. 68.153.113.3 (talk) 18:04, 3 March 2018 (UTC)