Craig may not resign after all

By -
This has been all over the Internets, but I think it should be posted here: Senator Craig (R-Idaho) may not resign after all. I suppose he'll deny that he is gay, which is sad. If he came out and renounced his anti-gay legislative stances, my heart would be with him, despite the fact that his Republicanism enables Bush and all that entails. But if he's going to continue to push an anti-gay agenda, then I'm going to enjoy watching the Republican party go into conniptions over him. I think the Republican party as a whole needs to come out of the gay-bashing closet into which it has locked itself. But it would have to tear itself away from puritanical fundamentalism in order to do. Or fundamentalism would have to tear itself away from homophobia. How likely are either of those?

I feel its worth mentioning that in Britain, it is possible for Tories (i.e. conservatives) to be openly gay. On this issue (and on health care), Britain's right is left of America's left.

UPDATE: TPM TV has a pretty good summary of what's going on:
We thought it was all over when Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) announced his resignation Saturday following the eruption of his airport bathroom sex scandal. But stop right there - was it a resignation, or just the statement of an intent to resign? Now Senator Craig is saying he might not resign after all. What's really going on here behind the scenes? It just so happens that thanks to a couple bizarre twists (in case this story hasn't given you enough), we're privy to the backroom details, in today's episode of TPMtv...

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Snarking The Odyssey (with AD&D)

By -
Image
WARNING: Those of you who are accustomed to pithy political remarks here on Internal Monologue should brace yourselves for a major dose of gaming geekitude. Here's a link to one "Jamie R." who does a very snarky close reading of Homer's The Odyssey (HT: Mad Latinist via email). I've only read book 1, but it's pretty funny so far. An excerpt: Tell me, O muse, of that ingenious hero who travelled far and wide after he had sacked the famous town of Troy. Many cities did he visit, and many were the nations with whose manners and customs he was acquainted; moreover he suffered much by sea while trying to save his own life and bring his men safely home; but do what he might he could not save his men… Sooooo, he’s in charge, and everybody dies. Tell me, O muse, of that ingenious hero and his colossal failure. What? … for they perished through their own sheer folly in eating the cattle of the Sun-god Hyperion; so the god prevented them from ever rea...
Read more

Where is 56th and Wabasha? "Meet Me in the Morning" Dylan Mystery Solved

By -
Image
Short version The lyric is not "Fifty-sixth and Wabasha", it is actually "Fifty-six and Wabasha", referring to the intersection of old Minnesota Highway 56 and Wabasha Street in Saint Paul, Minnesota. If you listen, you can hear Dylan sing "fifty-six", rather than "fifty-sixth", particularly on the take that was released as the B-side to "Duquesne Whistle". Minnesota Highway 56 no longer intersects Wabasha Street, but from 1963 to 1974 it did intersect Wabasha Street, at what is now (in Feb. 2021) the intersection of George Street and Cesar Chavez Street in St. Paul, or possibly South Wabasha & Cesar Chavez.  Long Version "Meet Me in the Morning" is the first song on side two of Bob Dylan's celebrated 1975 album  Blood on the Tracks. In the opening lines of the song, according to the lyrics on Bob Dylan's official site (https://www.bobdylan.com/songs/meet-me-morning/), the narrator invites the listener to a rendez...
Read more

Victim or perpetrator? How about both!

By -
Remember in the movie Adaptation , the main character's brother has this idea for a screenplay called The Three? It's about a detective trying to track down a serial killer before he kills his next victim. Pretty standard, right? The twist is that the detective, serial killer, and victim, are all actually the same person . Whoa, dude. Fight Club 's got nothin' on that one. Well, this isn't quite that weird. But apparently, Utah legal authorities are somewhat perplexed by a situation in which a 13-year-old girl and her 12-year-old boyfriend are both simultaneously the perpetrators and victims of the same crime: having sex with each other (HT: Feministing ): Utah Supreme Court justices acknowledged Tuesday that they were struggling to wrap their minds around the concept that a 13-year-old Ogden girl could be both an offender and a victim for the same act - in this case, having consensual sex with her 12-year-old boyfriend. The girl was put in this odd position be...
Read more