Think about his poor children, Joan. There is collateral damage here. He's sucking innocent people into his swirling vortex of mendacity and denial.

So to speak...

His "children" are in their 30's for god's sake. They're not children anymore. If they haven't already, I'd say it's time they got a clue about the adult world. Don't ya think?

If the Democrats had any tactical smarts they'd be sending envoy's to Craig. The Deal: Craig defects. The Dems promise not to run anyone else in his state against him in 2008. The Dems won't pressure him to otherwise vote in their (ha) block, and in return he provides Lieberman Insurance.

Joan, here is an example of a phenomena throughout the feminist blogosphere these past two weeks. Over and over, our top feminist bloggers have minimized Craig's acts, they have asked "what is wrong with sex in public restrooms?", they have compared sex in public restrooms to the verbal harassment of women, and they have turned public sex in male restrooms into another example of the Patriarchy oppressing women. Amanda Marcotte, Pandagon, Feministing, all over this has been happening.

What's up with that?

It's odd how our top self-identified as Feminist(tm) bloggers seek to minimize what Craig was doing and instead describe how what was really going on was just another example of men oppressing women.

Here is a very odd post with some alternative universe comments from our top feminist bloggers.

Odd how our top self-identified as Feminist(tm) bloggers seek to minimize what Craig was doing and instead describe how what was really going on was just another example of men oppressing women.

Here is a very odd post

http://lefarkins.blogspot.com/2007/09/one-more-back-to-well.html

with some alternative universe comments from our top feminist bloggers: http://www.haloscan.com/comments/farlio/8649795345274693260/

Joan,

Why would Broadsheet(TM) style feminists be minimizing this? Are they in league with the RNC?

I don't care whether Craig has sex with men, but Republicans do because they define it as depraved on their platforms, especially when conducted in bathrooms and when it is unknown to the little ladies at home. Even if Craig gets his guilty plea reversed, he'll still be viewed as a hypocrite who preens puritanical on screen while going down low behind it. Ay, that's the rub!

Personally, I'm ecstatic that Craig has decided to fight this thing because he keeps other legendary sex addicts of Washington myth in the news--and we all know who they are.

All this wasted time, energy (and paper- think of the trees) because some lonely loser couldn't control himself in public?

He better pray to that God he seems to know so well for mercy. Mercy from the ongoing not-so-private hell that he will relive in chronic repetition.

Man, it sucks to be Larry. ( no pun. )

Odd how our top self-identified as Feminist(tm) bloggers seek to minimize what Craig was doing and instead describe how what was really going on was just another example of men oppressing women.

Look on the positive side -- tattling on them gives you something to do.

It's all good, eh?

In this crazy, mixed up world, it MATTERS when you do something wrong. But it's WHAT matters that's wrong. Dubya has done all manner of things wrong, but his transgressions tend to be material rather than moral. And that's where the critical difference lies. We are conditioned to feel that material transgressions are hopelessly inevitable. We have no control. We're powerless.

In moral matters though, the barometer of our cultural psyche seems permanently pegged in the Puritan range. We howl in inchoate rage. Want to paint scarlet letters. Hurl stones. Rationality fails.

Garrison Keillor opines hopefully that in 20 years, none of this will matter. People will not be judged by their proclivities. I am more pessimistic. We deserve our fate.

Ah, the Repubs at their finest: "wait a second! I INTENDED to resign...I INTENDED to plead innocent!" It is all laughably crazy that a man who pled guilty in court now feels he has to resurrect himself...does anybody forget that Dubyah has called Craig a "goddamn traitor" for not supporting warrantless wiretaps, because he (Craig) claims he is a Bob Barr Republican who doesn't believe in government intruding into one's private life...that certainly is convenient, if you have been leading a double life, trolling men's rooms. Anyway, could this push to oust Craig be payback for not backing wiretaps by Bushies? As Joan Walsh says this is getting fun, and the black and white of last week is now adopting many shades of grey. I love that Craig was shameless enough to enlist his children in his resurrection campaign, and that they were willing to participate in such a sham. Who else are they going to support? I mean, gimme a break!

Brad Simpson says it best, HA HA!

I see the bank of lawyers gathering on Senator Craig's behalf and think of all the detainees we have in prisons and black sites aroung the world with no contact with anyone except their captors -- no lawyers, no friends or family,no habeus corpus, no chance to plead guilty or innocent. And this obscenity is partly thanks to our Congress which now seems ready to encourage Senator Craig to take his misdemeanor all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court.

My god, have you no capacity for embarrassment? I can get this on CNN. It should be apparent to any carbon-based life form that this non-story is part of the administration's distraction pipeline keeping the country focused elsewhere WHILE BUSH AND CHENEY PUT THE FINISHING TOUCHES ON THE PLAN TO BOMB IRAN.

This is not news. This is gossip. This is smoke and mirrors. By focusing relentlessly ad nauseam on this pathetic story you are complicit in the administration's all-too-successful manipulation not only of the national corporate media, which is no surprise, but of the supposedly more informed and aware alternative media. Congratulations. You are part of the Bush administration's propaganda machine. Is it deliberate, or a problem of taste, or did you just not notice?