Comments on: Larry Craig – Day 3: The fallout, and misc. thoughts

By: Baklava

Baklava — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 14:28:15 +0000

Tammy Bruce's take. Hint: Includes a review of Ted Kennedy (holding office still)...

By: Dana

Dana — Fri, 31 Aug 2007 01:31:24 +0000

NC Cop: It’s in response to your statement,

That’s like saying putting up a sign that says “Neighborhood Watch” will stop all crime in an area without further enforcement. That’s not realistic at all.

By: G-Monster

G-Monster — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 21:19:27 +0000

I just watched Chris Mathews and Tom Delay on MSNBC. Chris Mathews actually gave Tom Delay a fair interview. I might have to change my opinion of Chris Mathews. If I couldn’t get his Michelle Malkin interview out of mind.

By: Sister Toldjah

Sister Toldjah — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 20:40:56 +0000

Yeah. Patrick Kennedy comes to mind.

By: vegas art guy

vegas art guy — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 20:35:50 +0000

He pled guilty, he needs to resign. Of course he could switch parties and skate. They don’t seem to mind the occasional lowlife amoung them after all…

By: Tango

Tango — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 17:13:19 +0000

Is common decency from a sitting member of the House (or Senate) too much to ask in the current era?

By: Baklava

Baklava — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:27:25 +0000

NC nails it.

Larry plead guilty. To me the lead up antics of the cop and senator is pretty irrelevant.

By: NC Cop

NC Cop — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:21:50 +0000

NC Cop: Maybe it’s like those “Drug Free School Zone” signs.

Meaning?

By: Not sayin'

Not sayin' — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 15:19:53 +0000

NC Cop: Maybe it’s like those “Drug Free School Zone” signs.

By: NC Cop

NC Cop — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 14:01:35 +0000

If you’re trying to stop public sex in a notorious bathroom, then the best way to do it is to post a big sign saying, “This restroom is under surveillance by security personnel” whether that surveillance actually exists or not.

That’s like saying putting up a sign that says “Neighborhood Watch” will stop all crime in an area without further enforcement. That’s not realistic at all.

If you’re merely trying to maximize arrests so that the security department can have a bigger number to put in a bullet point at a quarterly PowerPoint presentation, then the best way to do it is to use plainclothes officers posing as fellow sex cruisers.

Right. Because the use of undercover officers to fight crime has never been used to fight crime effectively. It’s all about the number. Give me a break.

Sure, having the cop arrest one guy stops that one guy, but how does it stop then next guy who’s there fifteen minutes later while the first guy is being interviewed?

That’s like complaining about the NBC show “To catch a predator” where they arrest child predators before they strike. Do they stop after they arrest one? No, they continue. Does it completely do away with all child predators? No, but they do get some off the street.

These tactics are all about being seen to be “Doing Something” and not much about solving the actual problem.

Is this from your many years of law enforcement experience? Let’s stop blaming the cops for this ok?
This guy got caught and pled guilty, that’s all I need to know. If he had pleaded not guilty I would have given him the benefit of the doubt.

By: Alex

Alex — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 13:16:10 +0000

I don’t blame the cops for trying to make sure that the restrooms aren’t hotbeds of sex, but I do question their methods.

If you’re trying to stop public sex in a notorious bathroom, then the best way to do it is to post a big sign saying, “This restroom is under surveillance by security personnel,” whether that surveillance actually exists or not.

If you’re merely trying to maximize arrests so that the security department can have a bigger number to put in a bullet point at a quarterly PowerPoint presentation, then the best way to do it is to use plainclothes officers posing as fellow sex cruisers.

Sure, having the cop arrest one guy stops that one guy, but how does it stop then next guy who’s there fifteen minutes later while the first guy is being interviewed? These tactics are all about being seen to be “Doing Something” and not much about solving the actual problem.

By: TedintheShed

TedintheShed — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:51:37 +0000

All the hubbub aside, in the end, Mr. Craig’s true prosecution will take place in the voting booth.

By: Leslie

Leslie — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 12:33:29 +0000

I’m not one who supports the idea of prosecuting victimless crimes, but like ST, I think that public restrooms should be used for their intended purposes.

I don’t blame the cops for trying to make sure that the restrooms do just that.

And anyway, can you think of anything more soulless than this kind of sexual activity? What’s below the “down low”? Well, this.

By: Drewsmom

Drewsmom — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 09:56:12 +0000

randi rhodes was on larry idiot king last night and I wanted to jump onto the set and beat the livin crap outta her. This women would not shut up and let the lone consevative on the set talk at all and he was making some good points but I would have mentioned all the dems who have been CAUGHT and nothing happened to them whatsoever, just more appointments to more committees and more terms in office. Thats the hipocray here. We conservatives get rid of trash like foley but the dems get voting them in, ect.
We’ve talked about this enough, we have soldiers dying to defend out nation, lets get back to more important reporting and let our party boot craig, as we will, as we should.

By: camojack

camojack — Thu, 30 Aug 2007 07:57:21 +0000

I say it’s entrapment because as I understand it, the undercover cop acted receptive to the alleged advances. If it was me in that situation, then I’d let the individual know in no uncertain terms that his interest was unwanted…and that should be that.

Personally, I don’t care what people do in their private lives, so long as nobody gets hurt. Wrong is wrong, regardless of Party affiliation. If he’s guilty of perjury, however, he’s got to go; I suspect that the voters in Idaho would’ve taken care of that, but he was mulling retirement anyway, apparently…now he no longer needs to decide.

Term limits all around!