Hi Joan,

You've really got the story wrong. The surface story is that Larry Craig is a tortured homophobe, and that's something that normal, relatively well-adjusted people can relate to.

But it's not the story. The real story is that Craig is a sociopath-- a self-serving sociopath. He has constructed an image in Idaho of 'rancher, family man, conservative values.' It's all nonsense. Before Larry became a politician, he was a failed donut shop manager in Weiser, Idaho. Immediately after the page scandal broke (good old-fashioned pedophilia) he was proactive in his denial of impropriety. He was married off by the Reps. immediately thereafter (his engagement was announced in Idaho during the aftermath). The kids he claims are adopted-- hers. His proclivities have never been much of an issue for her and him because they, for the most part, live separate lives, though she has been well-taken-care-of by the machine. She's worked for the Beef Council, and enjoyed the status of a Senator's wife. Notice how none of the children have stepped forward to defend their 'father'. Larry's voting record has always been one that has supported the strong corporate interests (old-line interests) that have put him in power, and often been against the good of rural Idahoans, who he claims to represent.

The real story is betrayal-- how someone like Larry Craig would be such a poseur to hang on to power, and how ignorant and stupid people can be with keeping someone like him in power.

The gay story, of course, is getting a lot of traction. But it's really an insult to gays to equate Larry's behavior with sexual repression. That's a relatively small part of the story of a profoundly self-serving individual who has exploited a backward, rural state for his own ends, as well as how hard it is to get people to realize change is imperative when the leadership uses their cultural disposition for their own personal exploitation.

But Gonzales can't recall the encounter.

You won't be able to tell us that any Democrat who has an imperfect record of supporting gay rights (and ultimately that will include just about everyone except Dennis Kucinich, Tammy Baldwin and Barney Frank) and who is outed after having led a closeted life, won't be political 'fair game.'

As for Larry Craig, I'll be glad to see him go, soon, and stop embarassing his party.

I feel about the same way toward the Idaho party that advanced Craig and the Idaho voters who propped him up, as the way I feel about the voters who elected Barney Frank or Gerry Studds: there's not much I can do about it so why let it bother me.

But mark my words; if a Democrat, any Democrat, who ever voted for DOMA or any other 'compromise' in the culture wars is outed, he or she will be toast. There won't be any defense that it is a private matter or that it is a Republican witch-hunt.

Of course, if Jim McGreevy is any example, those cases won't take much pushing by the Republicans.

I criticize you a lot, but I think your approach to this story is near-perfect. Not "Let's jump on the closet case" but "Let's look at the insidious Republicans jumping on the closet case; are these the people allowed to run the country?" Great.

One problem.

It's clear that a significant number of men are drawn to the moralizing right wing of the Republican Party because they can't accept their own sexuality

You in no way demonstrate this, nor can I tell that this situation is "clear" at all. I used to live in Texas, and though I knew far more gay Democrats than Republicans, I certainly knew my share of those. They weren't closeted. They weren't incapable of accepting their sexuality.

Nor do I get the impression that most closeted Republicans are any more self-loathing than closeted celebrities. As if there's a difference these days (sigh). The impression I get is that they know what they have to project to win a majority of votes. I think your interpretation is rather cliched and outdated. I'll expect most gay politians to be out of the closet about the time most gay action movie stars and sitcom celebrites are. That is, sometime in the far distant future.

Senator Craig offered a plea of guilty to a misdemeanor. That is more than just being a closeted homophobe. Now he is a convicted sex offender.

And good luck with the idea that gays will somehow forget they are better off with Democrats.

Dear. Ms. Walsh:

You just made my day by standing up for Pat Buchanan! Finally someone did! Thank you very much! He's probably another Republican Hypocrite! They are so obsessed with Morality and Family Values that they just forget what they are!

Sincerely,

Ralph Kanaan

Ft. Lauderdale FL

Joan Walsh writes:

“I expect Buchanan to complain about liberal media double standards, but the story is simple. People hate hypocrites.”

Oh, they do? Is that why they keep electing them to high office?

Please stop pandering, Ms. Walsh. When it comes to making political decisions, most U.S. voters are idiots.

Joan, your blog on this is right on and so was what you said on the Dan Abrams show. Thank you. Your thoughts on this are what people need to understand and "get" from this really sad life of Larry Craig and other self-hating hypocritical "leaders."

Joan, you always look like you're in pain or something when you're on TV. Like you're really disappointed. Like the irony is so intense it hurts. Something about the way you hold your eyebrows. You need to learn to relax them.

Joan,

Always interesting to see you square off with Pat. He tends to steamroll other panelists, especially when his hands get pumping, so I appreciate that you go toe to toe with him and don't let him get away with it. I like listening to him despite the fact that I probably disagree with him on about 100% of social issues and that he tends to be especially craven about defending the 'republican team'. Back in '03 he was right about Iraq.

My issue with Pat's "I have have high moral standards, but I don't always live up to them, forgive me (in the best christian tradition, of course) " argument is the following:

'Moral' conservatives like Craig and Vittner always seem to be seeking punitive actions to enforce their 'moral' beliefs upon others (willing or not). They appear to leverage their political success using those punitive actions. The more punitive and draconian, the better to stoke the urge to inflict righteous punishment upon the wicked and keep the poll numbers high.

"Clinton should resign and be impeached",

"Gays should have no collective rights".

"Let's not close Gitmo, let's double it!"

So when a little of the fire and brimstone they perpetuate cooks their own keister, I think they earned it.

Live by the sword, die by the sword