Thursday, October 18, 2007


The Matt Lauer interview with choirboy Larry Craig and his grandmotherly wife was white-knuckles all the way, but the Craigs came through just fine.

Matt failed to attack the gaping hole in “Mensroom Larry’s” argument. Craig's position:

1. I’m was an innocent traveler, na├»ve regarding any mensroom sex happenings, and I entered the airport mensroom simply to use the toilet.

2. I was using the toilet normally when I was arrested. I had no idea why I was being arrested.

3. I made a big mistake by not consulting a lawyer, keeping it secret, and pleading guilty.

4. The reason I made this big mistake was because I was deeply embarrassed by the event and hoped it would “go away,” and I wouldn’t have to tell my wife and kids and the public.

If #1 and #2 are true, then there is no reason for any “embarrassment.” Outrage would be the appropriate response. I’d demand a lie detector test.

Getting arrested is no embarrassment, it’s what you get arrested for that’s embarrassing.

Then, making your spouse face the music with you?

Has any man in America ever inadvertently “touched shoes” with the man in the next stall? Except as part of a sex-advance?

Larry Craig said in the police interview: “I looked down and saw that our shoes were close, but I don’t recall them touching.”

Almost sounds like “quivering lips.”
----- o -----

1 comment:

Anonymous said...

Senator Larry was so ignorant, he ddn't think the story would get in the paper anyway? Is a U.S. Senator that dumb? Give me a break. r.s.