Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

UPDATE: Craig Says He Won't Resign After Adverse Ruling on His Guilty Plea

Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho) has changed his mind about resigning and will remain in the Senate through next year. His decision comes on the same day a Minnesota judge ruled Craig could not withdraw his guilty plea to disorderly conduct in a men's restroom at a Minnesota airport [Read our original post on the judge's decision below].

Craig had previously said he would resign if he could not withdraw his guilty plea and take the matter to a full trial.

But Craig reversed course after Porter rejected his plea. GOP leaders -- who have demanded Craig resign and formally called for a Senate Ethics Committee investigation into his behavior should he stay in the chamber -- remained silent after the judge's ruling, and Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-Ky.), who stripped Craig of his seniority on his committee assignments in late August, canceled a press conference on an unrelated matter after Porter's ruling came out.

Here's the statement from Craig:

"I am extremely disappointed with the ruling issued today. I am innocent of the charges against me. I continue to work with my legal team to explore my additional legal options.

"I will continue to serve Idaho in the United States Senate, and there are several reasons for that. As I continued to work for Idaho over the past three weeks here in the Senate, I have seen that it is possible for me to work here effectively.

"Over the course of my three terms in the Senate and five terms in the House, I have accumulated seniority and important committee assignments that are valuable to Idaho, not the least of which are my seats on the Appropriations Committee, the Energy and Natural Resources Committee and the Veterans' Affairs Committee. A replacement would be highly unlikely to obtain these posts.

"In addition, I will continue my effort to clear my name in the Senate Ethics Committee - something that is not possible if I am not serving in the Senate.

"When my term has expired, I will retire and not seek reelection. I hope this provides the certainty Idaho needs and deserves."


A Minnesota judge today denied Republican Sen. Larry Craig's request to withdraw his disorderly conduct guilty plea following his arrest in a Twin Cities airport men's restroom sting, a move that is likely to rekindle efforts by GOP leaders to force Craig to give up his seat.

Craig (Idaho) has said that if he could not successfully withdraw his early August guilty plea in Minnesota, he would step down from the Senate. But he has already backed away once from that pledge. Following last week's hearing before Judge Charles A. Porter, the senator announced that he would remain in the chamber "for now," pending a final outcome of his legal maneuvering.

Craig was arrested June 11 after allegedly peering into the restroom stall at the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport where an undercover officer awaited. According to the police officer, Craig entered the stall next to him, tapped his feet and bumped the foot of the officer in the other stall, then ran his hand under the partition. The prosecution contends those are well-known signals among men seeking to have sex in restroom stalls.

Craig, who faced condemnation from Senate Republicans and former conservative allies after the case became public last month, tried at first to keep his arrest from his family, friends and colleagues by quietly pleading guilty without seeking legal advice. He made his plea through the mail, without a judge's involvement.

During last week's hearing in Hennepin County District Court, Craig's lawyer argued that his conduct in the men's room did not constitute illegal activity and that his guilty plea under pressure from the police and his fear of being publicly exposed amounted to a "manifest injustice," as described under Minnesota law.

The senator, who has said he will definitely not seek re-election in 2008 regardless of the outcome of the legal proceedings, has not yet issued a statement on the ruling. The conservative lawmaker, who regularly opposed homosexual rights in the Senate, has declared he is "not gay" and pleaded guilty because he was "deeply panicked" about a home-state newspaper's investigation of his sexuality.

Porter asserted in a 27-page ruling today that a portion of Craig's legal argument to withdraw the plea was "illogical.",He declared that Craig's guilty plea was "accurate, voluntary and intelligent". Those are the three bars which defendants need to cross in order to claim that a guilty plea created a "manifest injustice" and therefore must be withdrawn, under Minnesota law. [Here's link to the pdf file of the ruling.]

In refuting almost every claim put forward by Craig's legal team, Porter wrote that Craig's actions in making the guilty plea were well thought out and a planned attempt to shield himself from the public scrutiny of his crime, which would have likely come to light if he pleaded not guilty and fought the charges at a trial.

"The defendant chose to not appear and to enter his plea by mail just so he could avoid any such publicly (sic), of record, inquiry into his conduct," Porter wrote, underling the last portion of his sentence for emphasis. "He kept many of the facts out of the record in so doing. He cannot now complain that he should not have allowed to take advantage of an approved method to enter a misdemeanor plea."

By Paul Kane  |  October 4, 2007; 4:30 PM ET
Categories:  Ethics and Rules  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Larry Craig: The 'Crime' Scene
Next: Senators get multipe-ticket benefit restored


Craig, resign already! And take Sen. Vitter with you.

Posted by: meldupree | October 4, 2007 3:19 PM | Report abuse

GOOD. NOW the other Senators need to send him to the "OUTHOUSE"!

Posted by: KYJurisDoctor | October 4, 2007 3:20 PM | Report abuse

Larry Craig is not gay...he is a pervert. So keep him on your team with Vitter and Foley.

Posted by: | October 4, 2007 3:28 PM | Report abuse

One wonders why Craig was "deeply panicked" about a newpaper investigation into his sexual orientation if he is indeed not gay and has nothing to hide...

Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 3:34 PM | Report abuse

Are the Springsteen tix all gone?

Posted by: Alan Greenblatt | October 4, 2007 3:38 PM | Report abuse

According to this ruling, Craig used more slime to wiggle out of his plea than is produced by all the slugs in the US in a year.

The judge found the plea accurate and in according to the evidence. So now, instead of retiring with a shadow of doubt, we now know that the accusations were true. Thanks for eliminating all doubt!

Craig is a disgrace of a Senator and as a human being. He should retire immediately, get on his yacht and sail far, far away from American shores.

Thank god he isn't gay, who'd want him?

Posted by: Ethan Q | October 4, 2007 3:41 PM | Report abuse

Well, he's tried everything, lying, denial, entrapment and blaming the arresting officer and what not for his playing footsies with an undercover police officer. What next? A request from a presidential pardon? Knowing the idiot in the white house..he may well grant him one.

Posted by: Larry Craig | October 4, 2007 3:49 PM | Report abuse

The Craig comedy just gets funnier and funnier. Ya gotta admit the Gay Old Party is a source of endless laughs. Tell us more about your party's "Christian family values" that you keep bragging about!

Posted by: checkered.1 | October 4, 2007 3:52 PM | Report abuse

This is the correct result. Craig had ample opportunity to refute the charges when he was arrested; chose not to obtain the advice of counsel; he is a seasoned law maker and was fully knowledgeable of his rights at the time of his arrest. He made a decision to plead guilty to a lesser charge thinking that the police report would not be uncovered and there would be no adverse publicity. He made a poor judgment. The police did not coerce or intimidate him into this choice. It was a reasoned decision which backfired on a guy intent upon concealing his activities, illegal or otherwise, out of embarrassment and shame.

Posted by: Bruce | October 4, 2007 3:55 PM | Report abuse

No "do overs" allowed.

Posted by: Tina | October 4, 2007 3:58 PM | Report abuse

Please note Craig's phrasing: "the senator announced that he would remain in the chamber 'for now,' pending a 'FINAL' outcome of his legal maneuvering." He left himself wiggle room - again - by stating he would await a FINAL outcome. Do not be surprised when we next hear that he does not consider this judge's decision FINAL, and that he plans to remain in office while he appeals that decision (and on and on and on....)

Posted by: Dave K | October 4, 2007 4:04 PM | Report abuse

I'm glad Porter addressed the conviction sans colloquy point Martin brought up. The state has a vested interest in protecting the prior convictions via mailed-in pleas.

Something I was unsatisfied with in reading the ruling: Porter says the plea may be "invalid if the defendant's statements in the plea do not clearly admit guilt". The point being that Craig claims he maintained his innocence throughout. Porter dismissed this since he never told the court (Renz or Larson) he was innocent once. However, Craig did claim such to Karsnia... and Karsnia acted in the role of the prosecution by telling Craig that he didn't have to go to jail, i.e., plea-bargaining. That's a possible avenue for Craig to explore if we wants to remain a senator for a few more weeks? He'll lose of course... but if he has money to pay for it, Martin will think something up. Lawyers love getting paid! :-)

Posted by: proxli | October 4, 2007 4:05 PM | Report abuse

This is a case of Gays winning a battle but losing a war. You got someone with severe anti-gay politics out of office. However you also criminalized one gay man hitting on another. From a legal standpoint I fail to see how this would be all that diffrent from two gay men hitting on each other in a bar, with the intention of meeting up to have sex later. Precedent is a powerful thing and the gay activists groups lust to see another anti-gay out of office may backfire this time. That would be a true shame.

Posted by: Jon | October 4, 2007 4:06 PM | Report abuse

The senator has just announced that he will not resign, he will serve out his term, and continue to clear his name. He proclaims his innocence. He feels because of his seniority, and committee appointments, only he can best represent Idaho at this time. Ho-boy! Hope McConnell has set a date for the ethics committee. And I thought he was stripped of his committee appointments, or will he fight for those, too. I'll bet his lawyers are advising him to continue his fight. How else will they be able to milk this has-been?

Posted by: Sharon | October 4, 2007 4:10 PM | Report abuse

So now all Larry has to do is admit that he has the lead roll in Brokeback Mountain The sequel

Posted by: THE BIG CHUCQUITA | October 4, 2007 4:16 PM | Report abuse

Larry Craig was not elected by the Republican leadership. He was elected by the voters of Idaho.

Posted by: tchain | October 4, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

Larry Craig: The gift that keeps on giving.

Posted by: afam21 | October 4, 2007 4:24 PM | Report abuse

I find this case both hilarious and extremely troubling. On one hand, Craig's bizarre, creepy behavior and voting record demand our laughter and outrage. However, I have a hard time agreeing that he actually committed a crime. If the act of soliciting a sexual encounter with a consenting adult and without a currency exchange is illegal, you single folks out there better watch out. Who says that undercover cops don't start targeting happy hours and nightclubs entrapping horny guys and gals on the prowl? The court is assuming Senator Craig planned on having sexual intercourse in the bathroom, which would be a criminal offense. However, we do not know if he intended on taking his "date" to a local hotel. Therefore, the bizarre acts of foot tapping and a hand gestures should not be considered criminal, but should be viewed as creepy and unworthy of a public official. He should resign from the Senate but should not have been charged criminally.

Posted by: Foot Loose | October 4, 2007 4:27 PM | Report abuse

i love senator Gay, oops, i mean senator Craig. it's a beacon light that draws untold attention to the filthy GOP cultians (that's christians for you dumb dumb americans). i want senator Gay to fight his sexual orientation on the GOP political stage while it handcuffs itself to the stage floor. exposure of these pieces of filth (gay (i mean craig), vitter, foley, bush, delay abramoff) is just what this "country" (i use that term very lightly) needs. the ignorant european cult practicing rejects that founded this "country" need to disappear. a known racist and author of this "country's" most sacred document (an alleged sacrament to the GOP, but just a "god damn piece of paper" to georgie bush) should be read to every dumb dumb american (european cult practicing reject) school kid these words.

"I am not an advocate for frequent changes in laws and constitutions. But laws and institutions must go hand in hand with the progress of the human mind. As that becomes more developed, more enlightened, as new discoveries are made, new truths discovered and manners and opinions change, with the change of circumstances, institutions must advance also to keep pace with the times. We might as well require a man to wear still the coat which fitted him when a boy as civilized society to remain ever under the regimen of their barbarous ancestors."

Appears on the panel of the southeast interior wall. Redacted and excerpted from a letter to Samuel Kercheval, July 12, 1816.

Posted by: far_to_the_right | October 4, 2007 4:29 PM | Report abuse

So, apparently the judge refused to take a wide stance on the motion?

Posted by: Shecky | October 4, 2007 4:30 PM | Report abuse

It's really interesting to see this guy manipulate the law, like it were a cheap accordian.

Posted by: lwps | October 4, 2007 4:32 PM | Report abuse

Larry, does the number TWO ring a bell? Well it should. As stated in the police arrest report, you entered the restroom and stood outside the occupied stall for TWO MINUTES (one hundred and twenty FREAKING SECONDS) PEEPING IN at the undercover officer before occuping the adjacent unoccupied stall, thereupon initiating your toe tapping, footsie routine you've learned on the downlow all these years.

Oh, and TWO MONTHS, Larry, the time elapsed between your arrest and the time your guilty plea was entered. No split second decision here, was it, Larry? Deeply panicked, yeah probably. When you are widely regarded as one of the most vitriolic homophobes in national politics, when you maintain that one group of humanity is better than another all the while being a monstrous hypocrite, your hateful, vindictive nature needs to fade into obscurity.

Your ploy is TOO little, TOO late. Stop feeding at the public trough, stay out of public restrooms, just ride off into the western sunset, you prairie pervert.

Posted by: 2by2 | October 4, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse

The one thing that leads me to have questions about Craig's guilt is that there haven't been gay men coming forward saying that they've had sex with Craig. It would be hard to believe that Craig got caught the very first time he propositioned someone...This leads me to believe that Craig is like Micheal Jackson...certainly creepy, but not a criminal.

Posted by: Wolfcastle | October 4, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Larry, The Gay Dude. Please show your fellow senators, that your are not quitting the senate, they have to put up with a gay Senator....Tell them you LOVE them.....

Posted by: Louis Levario | October 4, 2007 4:35 PM | Report abuse

Foot Loose,
you are 100% correct. So why did Craig admit to wrong doing when there was none to admit to? I take Craig at his word that he was trying to avoid publicity because this sort of thing would have cinched the belief that he is indeed GAY.

All of this because he pandered to his party's fear base. I'm a Christian and I believe that homosexuality is an abomination to God a sin, like all other sins, are punishable by death; however, Jesus did not intend for us Christians to create an atmosphere where sinners could not come unto the Father for redemption.

Posted by: SteelWheel | October 4, 2007 4:40 PM | Report abuse

Holy cow, I cannot believe the Democrats' luck. We just do not have this kind of luck. Undoubtedly we will find a way to blow this, no pun intended, but until that happens I am just tickled pink. Maybe next the Republicans will get fed up with the current slate of presidential nominees and go with Rick Santorum....maybe the president will veto the Food for War Widows and Orphans program....a girl can dream....

Posted by: Jen | October 4, 2007 4:40 PM | Report abuse

"All of this because he pandered to his party's fear base. I'm a Christian and I believe that homosexuality is an abomination to God a sin, like all other sins, are punishable by death; however, Jesus did not intend for us Christians to create an atmosphere where sinners could not come unto the Father for redemption."

i too am a religous person, and i believe people who judge their neighbors with death should theyselves be killed. we can kill each other. i'll throw my bullet 1st. catch!

Posted by: far_to_the_right | October 4, 2007 4:44 PM | Report abuse

There WERE men who said they had had anonymous sex and had been "cruised" by Larry Craig. They were reported on in a blog, I forget the name, and it was looked into by the Idaho Statesman who ultimately decided it wasn't strong enough to run with -- probably a wise decision -- nothing proven, but the allegations have definitely been there. I think the rumors have circulated for years. And I think if you are going to the live the life of a closeted gay person while voting against gay rights legislation, you absolutely deserve to be a target of bloggers who want to out you.

Posted by: Jen | October 4, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Turns out Senator Craig was a real "blow-hard"

Posted by: Steve | October 4, 2007 4:45 PM | Report abuse

Ah, well. Bush said he would fire everybody in his administration involved in the Plame outing, too.

Doesn't do to take what these people say as the truth.

Posted by: Helena Montana | October 4, 2007 4:46 PM | Report abuse

helena montana
"Ah, well. Bush said he would fire everybody in his administration involved in the Plame outing, too."

rove already quit.

Posted by: far_to_the_right | October 4, 2007 4:47 PM | Report abuse


Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

Craig just doesn't want to lose his pension. He should have thought of that before he committed a crime. I don't want to know if he's gay or not; I already know he's a jerk.

Posted by: Lisa | October 4, 2007 4:48 PM | Report abuse

i want senator Gay to stay. it's the poster boy for the GOP. please keep talking senator? please?

Posted by: far_to_the_right | October 4, 2007 4:49 PM | Report abuse

No, no, no, anonymous person who blames the Republicans who spawned him! The Congressional Republicans will be adopting, let's call it a wide stance, from Craig. They do not want him to stay, to put it mildly. It's AWESOME.

Posted by: Jen | October 4, 2007 4:51 PM | Report abuse

Dear Larry,

On behalf of everyone at the DSCC, I'd like to thank you for your good work! You are igniting Democratic hopes in Idaho and raising hundreds of thousands of dollars for us all over the country! Keep it up -- the more you're in the news, the better off Democrats are.


Posted by: Chuck Schumer | October 4, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

In an article in these pages about the resignation of Senator Pete Domenici of New Mexico, he was described as suffering from "...frontotemporal lobar degeneration, a progressive disease that in some forms can cause dysfunction in the parts of the brain important for organization, decision-making and control of mood and behavior."

In other words, the Republican lobe of Domenici's brain is shriveling. Could this also be what Larry Craig is suffering from? What's in the Washington DC water?

Posted by: H5N1 | October 4, 2007 4:55 PM | Report abuse

In going with poster 2by2's coincidence of "twos." Two minutes peeping in the stall, two months passing before pleading guilty - I'd like to add another. When he was sitting in the stall, he didn't flush his "number two."

Posted by: Sharon | October 4, 2007 5:02 PM | Report abuse

I was hoping Craig would not resign! This is going to be delicious. The GOP Senate Ethics Panel, televised ethics hearings...just great! I only hope this stretches into the election period next year. The GOP is going to bet clobbered again. Sick and tired of hearing about "immoral" Bill Clinton. At least Bill had HETEROSEXUAL sex with a consenting ADULT FEMALE. The GOP hypocrites hitting on young male pages, or with creeps in airport restrooms, or just those Repubs who had girlfriends on the side when at the same time they were persecuting Clinton. Let the circus begin!!!

Posted by: A.Lincoln | October 4, 2007 5:05 PM | Report abuse

Somehow, the Republican logo takes a whole new dimension:

Larry Craig is the face of GOP!

Posted by: RC | October 4, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

Is anyone really surprised. There is an infestation of egomaniacs at the Capitol and elsewhere in D.C. The serious question is what's up with Portis?

Posted by: Andy | October 4, 2007 5:08 PM | Report abuse

I derive some satisfaction out of seeing a hypocritical closet case like Craig get his comeuppance. However, I do not think the Republican leadership should force him to resign. I agree with the ACLU: the police have no business arresting guys for tapping toes in restrooms. It's a ridiculous waste of public resources! Send the cops out to arrest the REAL criminals who are killing and stealing. Making such an effort to stop restroom cruising is a reflection of our society's homophobia. If a straight guy finds himself being cruised in a restroom and he's not interested, he should just say so and tell the other guy to move on.

Posted by: Progressive | October 4, 2007 5:11 PM | Report abuse

Please make no mistake, As a gay man I have never cruised a bathroom...None of my gay friends know the secret tap or handshake or finger movements these police talk about

It's just too dam easy to meet at a gay bar, or place an add in a news paper or get on the internet to find a partner or find a sexual encounter.

These kinds of behavior senator Craig was participating in is not a GAY thing, It's a want to be gay thing.

These are straight guys with families, wives, or girlfriends who can't deal with their sexual preferences so they hide and sneak around in bathrooms.

It is sick, and it can be stopped...Lets be more understanding about being GAY and let them know it's ok and they will come out and have healthy gay relationships and not cruise bathrooms and cheat on their wives.

It's simple when they baned alcohol years ago, people were sneaking around and did it illegally cause they didn't want to be seen.

As long as there are homophobes there will be park, public, and bathroom sex and married cheaters all over the place!

Posted by: FAG | October 4, 2007 5:12 PM | Report abuse

This is the best news I've heard today. Now the republicans will lose another senate seat next Nov. Yahoo!!!!

Posted by: Sophie McGlumphy | October 4, 2007 5:16 PM | Report abuse

I think it is interesting, in the judges's ruling that the officer said that Sen. Craig did not flush as he left the restroom. I had never heard that before -- to me that is the most compelling evidence that he was there for other reasons than bodily elimination.
He needs to go -- NOW!

Posted by: Kate | October 4, 2007 5:19 PM | Report abuse

Oh, the "no flushing" was mentioned from the start of the publicity (in the statement by the undercover cop). And I'll bet he didn't wash his hands afterward either !

Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 5:24 PM | Report abuse

Jon: "This is a case of Gays winning a battle but losing a war... From a legal standpoint I fail to see how this would be all that [different] from two gay men hitting on each other in a bar, with the intention of meeting up to have sex later."

Read the ruling, page 26. The ACLU had the same issue and Porter addressed this. What was disorderly here is that Craig invaded Karsnia's space by 1) peeking into Karsnia's stall, 2) moving his foot into Karsnia's stall and touching Karsnia's foot, and 3) reaching his hand into Karsnia's stall.

Look, free speech doesn't go far enough to allow me to physically grab a woman's breasts (or shoe) as a method of soliciting her for sex. Nor does it allow me to invade her privacy (peep in her stall, shower, locker room) as a method of soliciting her for sex. It needs to be vocal.

Moreover, this is not tantamount to TWO consenting men hitting on each other. It is tantamount to ONE man hitting on another man (without the other man's approval) and doing so inappropriately. And the other man need not be straight for this to be disorderly.

The ACLU is wrong on this one. It is not the kind of sex solicted that matters nor where, it is HOW you solicit that sex. Right to privacy is paramount here.

Posted by: proxli | October 4, 2007 5:26 PM | Report abuse

I am not a homophobe just because I don't want take a crap sitting next to two men jerking each other off in public. I suppose the only reason a straight couple can't go into a restroom and have sexual intercourse is because one of them would have to defy the gender specification on the door? Give me a break.

I don't think the goal of gay rights activists is a glory hole in every men's room.

Posted by: Nappy-Haired Homo | October 4, 2007 5:31 PM | Report abuse

what part of 'get the F out of here you sicko' does he not understand?

Posted by: pv | October 4, 2007 5:32 PM | Report abuse

Good another poster boy for the GOP in 2008

Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 5:33 PM | Report abuse

There seems to be an awful lot of
hubris going around in the GOP these days. What IS Craig thinking? Are the repubs going to have to throw the guy out of the senate? Looks like it.

Posted by: rk | October 4, 2007 5:34 PM | Report abuse

Once more, the Right proves it's willingness to stick to it's word. If only I could say I was surprised.

Posted by: Fred Evil | October 4, 2007 5:37 PM | Report abuse

Oh, Senator Craig's plea reversal request did not fly. It stalled!!

Of course it was Senator Craig's right to send his request up the flag pole to see if any one would tap.

Posted by: auto1 | October 4, 2007 5:43 PM | Report abuse

As Jon Stewart recently said on the "Daily Show," in neither Iran nor in the Republican Party are there any gays, just men who like to have sex with other men.

Posted by: No gays in Iran either | October 4, 2007 5:45 PM | Report abuse

Sen. Domenici has Alzheimer's. At least that's the rumor that's circulated widely on Capitol Hill for years. I've said repeatedly there was no way he could run again in 2008. I'm more relieved by the news than surprised.

Posted by: Sandwich Repairman | October 4, 2007 5:46 PM | Report abuse

Isn't this a no-brainer?

Sen. Craig is not a homosexual. Therefor, he should move to Iran, where they have no homosexuals.

Case closed.

Posted by: Shishimai | October 4, 2007 5:56 PM | Report abuse

Craig is one pompous SOB. He says because of his seniority on committees (which he was immediately stripped of - did no one tell him?) he owes it to the people of Idaho to continue serving, because his replacement wouldn't have the same stature on the Hill as he has earned during his rubber-stamping 3 terms. Sure, we (Democratic) Idahoans don't want him to resign, but not for the reasons he cites. For us, he's a lance to twist in the Republican party's wound. May he fester into a giant boil.

And isn't it just like him to have tested the waters in D.C. to see how he would be accepted. The man thinks only of himself (the only time he thought of his family was when it would have affected HIM) and I'm sure he has plenty of lunch dates penciled in, but only with his lawyers! ha ha ha ha

Posted by: Idaho Potato | October 4, 2007 5:57 PM | Report abuse

Larry is just taking a wide stance on this issue.
As he said: "I have seen that it is possible for me to work here effectively."

He must mean there are plenty of bathrooms at the Bus Station downtown.

Posted by: katman | October 4, 2007 6:02 PM | Report abuse

Washington D.C.
So many bathrooms - so little time.

Posted by: 1-20-07 | October 4, 2007 6:04 PM | Report abuse


a guy who can tapdance in Congress,

once a lowly foofer, looking for a B.J.,

now a lonely foofer, looking for a B.J....

or is it better to give than recieve?

it's nice to finally understand the true meaning of Gay Old Party.

.ah, me.

I could really care less, but, those bible thumpers need to feel safe in the face of their homophobia...

Idaho? who would a thunk? I guess they don't just plant spuds in Idee hoe...


Posted by: this is so cool, | October 4, 2007 6:11 PM | Report abuse

Senator Craig: You have no decency. You have no humility. You don't even know the definitions of those words.

Posted by: Barbara B. | October 4, 2007 6:13 PM | Report abuse

Larry is just taking a wide stance on this issue.
As he said: "I have seen that it is possible for me to work here effectively."

He must mean there are plenty of bathrooms at the Bus Station downtown.

Posted by: katman | October 4, 2007 06:02 PM

Ha! Ha! Ha! GOOD ONE! Except, Katman, remember, it's UNION STATION that's Pervert Craig's "workroom" of preference! And so convenient to the office, too!

Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Shouldn't someone who makes laws be capable of knowing the difference between guilty and not guilty? Or would that level of competence preclude him from being in the GOP?

Posted by: dan | October 4, 2007 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Larry , I duh hoe!, Craig...

gotta beat you can dance to!


Posted by: nice ring to it... | October 4, 2007 6:16 PM | Report abuse

Lusty Larry the Liar - a person without principles, ethics or morals.

He is a disgrace to Idaho, to his party and to the nation. He will serve as the poster boy for all that is wrong with the Repug party for the 2008 elections. In that, he will be doing the country some good.

Posted by: ALEX H. | October 4, 2007 6:17 PM | Report abuse

"... From a legal standpoint I fail to see how this would be all that diffrent[sic] from two gay men hitting on each other in a bar, with the intention of meeting up to have sex later. ..."


Bars - with their legal-aged clientele and private restrooms - are publicly accepted and commonly known playgrounds for hooking-up; therefore, one can EXPECT to be a hit-ee or a hit-or in a bar. That expectation is absent in a public restroom - airport, shopping mall, library...

Assuming he stays, does the Not-very-honorable Senator Craig's senate pension take an upward jump between now and the elections? I can't see him stumping the 'family values' talk circuit to 'fill the old coffers'.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 6:19 PM | Report abuse

A pervert and an inveterate liar. Exactly what this country needs. Very classy. Idaho must be filled with perverts and liars if they're satisfied to have him as their representative. How humiliating.

Posted by: Chip Barbre | October 4, 2007 6:24 PM | Report abuse

Looks like the party of God needs to fear the BMOC - JC himself for allowing this sinner to remain in office. Any chance Hillary's been having staffers call him up anonymously telling him that staying is the right thing to do?

Posted by: Uh-oh | October 4, 2007 6:25 PM | Report abuse

Craig should be congratulated. He just became a person that King George can put in some high profile position. Dubya loves to surround himself with criminals, even if they are gay.

Posted by: Michael | October 4, 2007 6:26 PM | Report abuse

What's Craig so embarrassed about? He's not the first gay guy or bi-sexual gay guy in the GOP, and it is not illegal to have sex with other guys! Heck, the GOP has all kinds of skullduggery going on in their party, and they still stick together, for better or for worse. Geez, they know the Iraq war is wrong, but they stick together to keep that going. So how's about a little sex, just between men. Is anybody mad at Craig cause he likes to take it from behind? I don't think so.

Posted by: LindaLoveJones | October 4, 2007 6:43 PM | Report abuse

You can be sure the Dems will have this pervert on 24hr surveillance to catch him in another compromising situation which I am sure will happen again. Then release story and video about 2 weeks before election day.

Posted by: Bob | October 4, 2007 6:44 PM | Report abuse

I may be all Pollyanna on this issue, but perhaps Craig figures he can do some good by staying and spurring more discussion on his leanings and whether what he did was a crime or not. The jaded side of me says he is sticking it to the GOP folks that dropped him like a hot potato.

Posted by: Stephen Boyington | October 4, 2007 6:46 PM | Report abuse

Craig wants Americans to believe he is innocent yet he has lied repeatedly about his resignation. Even if you give him a pass on his original speech where he said he only "intended" to resign he then reneged on his pledge to stay only if he could get his guilty plea nullified. The lies get deeper and deeper every day. If I were the ethics committee I would boot his behind to the curb based on his recent dishonestly alone.

Posted by: Cal | October 4, 2007 6:57 PM | Report abuse

News just in: Craig will be heading up the new GOP voter registration drive: Project Widestance.

Posted by: Alex | October 4, 2007 7:01 PM | Report abuse

Larry Larry quite contrary
swears to God he's not a fairy;
maybe in the afterlife
someone'll believe him besides his wife.

Posted by: mickeyinATL | October 4, 2007 7:07 PM | Report abuse

This really sucks for Larry Craig,...

so I guess he got the end result he wanted after all.

Posted by: Jim | October 4, 2007 7:11 PM | Report abuse

So this guy is willing to say that he committed perjury by signing a guilty plea when he wasn't guilty?

I think they should toss out the whole misdemeanor thing, then they can nail him for perjury. That will get him thrown out of the boy's club.

Posted by: Fran Taylor | October 4, 2007 7:18 PM | Report abuse


"... From a legal standpoint I fail to see how this would be all that diffrent[sic] from two gay men hitting on each other in a bar, with the intention of meeting up to have sex later. ..."

______________ EXPECTATION ______________

Bars - with their legal-aged clientele and private restrooms - are publicly accepted and commonly known playgrounds for hooking-up; therefore, one can EXPECT to be a hit-ee or a hit-or in a bar. That expectation is absent in a public restroom - airport, shopping mall, library...

Assuming he stays, does the Not-very-honorable Senator Craig's senate pension take an upward jump between now and the elections? I can't see him stumping the 'family values' talk circuit to 'fill the old coffers'.


in other words, one does not _expect_ to be hit on while taking a dump.


Posted by: this bears repeating... | October 4, 2007 7:23 PM | Report abuse

What do you think would have happened if a Senator taunted as gay was one of the sixteen ladies in the U.S. Senate.

Congressman Foley and Senator Craig both relinquished seats they had held for many years on innuendo alone, albeit damning as it was; while a revised PBS American Experience telecast on January 16, 2006, had deleted all evidence they had shown in a January 10, 2000, telecast of First Lady Eleanor Roosevelt being a lesbian lady, which is an uncontested fact of life.

The good news is in 2008 America will positively have its long awaited answers for the posers; is a gay lady any less gay then a gay man, or entitled to one whit more regard -- and when is the unconscionable disparity between the way gay ladies and their male counterparts are treated going to end?

Why not let me know what you think @

Posted by: kensme | October 4, 2007 7:25 PM | Report abuse

i like how everyone posting here is an expert on Larry Craig, his beliefs, his morals and his experiences. i'm willing to bet 95% of you had never heard of Larry Craig or could pick him out of a line-up before all this.

while the allegations and charges against him are creepy and gross (not that gay sex is gross, but looking for it in a public restroom is), is what he's accused of worse than drunk driving, tax fraud, spousal abuse or any of the hundreds of other charges the rest of our U.S. Congresspersons and Senators have been accused of throughout their personal and professional lives? Ted Kennedy killed someone!

Seriously, if he'd been charged with child pornography or sexually assualting a minor, I'd be at the head of the line calling for his scalp. But this continues to make news? an overzealous undercover sting cop in an airport bathroom's tesimony of alleged improper behavior against a long time decorated public servant?

and who gets the benefit of the doubt? cause i've NEVER known a cop willing to trump up charges to make an arrest, especially in an undercover non-recorded potentially homophobically-motivated situation. who volunteers for that duty, anyway?

Posted by: Fish | October 4, 2007 7:32 PM | Report abuse

I'm a life-long Democrat and we understand the piccadillos and sins that normal humans are prone to commit...We accept that...and give/get a pass...The issue with Repugnicans is, was and always shall be...HYPOCRISY

Posted by: pegleg | October 4, 2007 7:35 PM | Report abuse

apologies for misspellings above...I was speed-posting

Posted by: pegleg | October 4, 2007 7:37 PM | Report abuse

************************************ BOX NEWS ALERT ********************************

I suggest America look at the ACTUAL court documents from the Larry Craig ordeal Larry_Craig_-_Copy_of_State's_Memorandum_in_Oppo sition_to_Defendant's_Motion_to_Withdraw_Plea_of _Guilty_092407.pdf

Now, scroll down to where Larry was arrested and pulled out his Senate ID + Senate business card and says "What do you think about THAT ?" to the officer.

what we have HERE is an entirely NEW story.

This is a US Senator using their senate status to infer they are above the law

Foley cost them 2006, Craig's gonna cost em in 2008.

Here is a GOP senator using his PULL as a US Senator to infer that well America ? What do you think about that ?

Further, it might be of interest to see what hotels Larry had booked in the nearby area, and in the past as well coinciding with this airport visits.


What code was he actually tapping


If you read in the court documents ? He actually flew BACK to Washington - THEN - flew BACK to visit the prosecutor PERSONALLY.

I want to know what he posted in his senate office as to where he was GOING that day- and to do what.

He flew BACK to D.C. then - took 11 days and mailed in the Plea.

this document has EVERYTHING that happened in the bathroom. It's pretty CLEAR there was NO QUESTION what he was up to.

And he thinks he's 'still able to play a functional role' as he states today.

I'd say he's the foley before 2008 if he's not careful.

When the US public finds out a US GOP senator is willing to abuse their position and advocate they are above the law ?

it's all over GOP !

See ya larry, or see ya GOP.

Posted by: ReRun | October 4, 2007 7:38 PM | Report abuse

dear fish,

Larry Craig is and was a homophobe user...

he also dumped on Clinton for wetting his seegar as being a sin against AMERICA...

can you say, talks the talk but don't walk the walk...

as in hypocritical LIAR?????

who needs to know him?

who wants to know him?

he deserves to be shot with the gun he murders others with....get it?


Posted by: oh really? | October 4, 2007 7:39 PM | Report abuse

I think he should stay ! his personal is just as Good As Bills ? right ?tata

Posted by: Mgilfoy | October 4, 2007 7:41 PM | Report abuse

Craig knows he can stay because the Ethics committee has too much scandal on its hands to sort him out till next year, when he resigns.

Posted by: ioana | October 4, 2007 7:47 PM | Report abuse

Thank you, Senator Craig. I am grateful to have a good joke planted amidst the other grim, ugly, and downright scary news coming out of Washington.

Posted by: Helena Montana | October 4, 2007 7:49 PM | Report abuse

Can you imagine! If he were a Democrat, they Republicans and the Righteous Right would have him hung and quartered. Asit is, they will pay lip service for a few days, then forget their responsibility as they always do, the fools.

Posted by: 274627 | October 4, 2007 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Mgilfoy attests to the attractive ness of larry's tap dancing...he sees a likeness with his own methode...AEI


Posted by: hello | October 4, 2007 8:01 PM | Report abuse

About time someone showed the situation!
Could they afford the luxurious Spacing of the two Stalls? I hope the 2.5' wide PAIR of stalls did not put the city in Hock!

I have NEVER seen a more trumped up sting operation in my life!

How come nobody mentions the Judge's Party affiliation?

Now, I'll make a deal with all the Two-Faced So called "Homo Loving" Dems, who seem to revile Gays so much they are willing to publically attack someone for something that could have so easily have just been a missunderstanding-After all, WHAT HAPPENED?-He tapped his foot because he was sitting in a Strange Bathroom next to a total stranger who was obviously just hanging out(Who's the Perv?) in a Public Stall? I'd have gotten a little edgy too!

I am not Gay, and until this contrived Public Announcement did not, Did not want, or felt I should have ever had to learn, about gays tapping their little toes to get it on!-More than I wanted, or needed to know!

The deal is this: IF gay lifestyles in PUBLIC, are REPULSIVE and VILE-Hence CRIMINAL!--Then BAN their DAMNED Public Festivals, and get all the DAMNED GAY TV SHOWS OFF THE AIR!

Jesus Wept People! Children see that garbage!

Otherwise-STFU and Exonerate Craig from this ridiculous assualt on his Charractor by an OBVIOUSLY Dem leaning Police Force and Judge!-Who LEAKED Private info to other Dem leaning Media Slimebags!

I get no kick, and am repulsed by the Gay Shows and Charractors on the Public Television Viewing!-Back, BACK I say-INTO THE CLOSETS!-I ain't ASKING-And believe ME,-I don't WANT TO KNOW!

Posted by: RAT-The | October 4, 2007 8:01 PM | Report abuse

Republicans in the House could propose articles of impeachment against Craig. It'll be interesting to see if they do it.

Posted by: john brisker | October 4, 2007 8:07 PM | Report abuse

I haven't lived in Minnesota since 1967 but I do understand the sensibilities of the people that live there. For Larry, this situation really sucks. The judge evidently took a wider stance than Larry and prevailed. I think that it will be good for Larry to hide out in the Senate Chamber (pot) until the people of Idaho take him to task.

The judge said that Larry pleas was "accurate, voluntary and intelligent". I reluctantly beg to differ with the judge. The use of the word "intelligent", in reference to "Larry", is an oxymoron.

Go home Larry, Idaho is waiting. Oh, wait! These guys never leave! They stay here! Please Idahoans, ask him to return.

Posted by: MN Born and Raised | October 4, 2007 8:08 PM | Report abuse

I'm sorry that the good people of Idaho will be the butts of the late night shows foranother year. The Republicans will want to let things quiet down and hope that the public will forget about Craig. The GOP won't go through with the threats of open hearings.

Posted by: sorryforidaho | October 4, 2007 8:20 PM | Report abuse

rat-the swallows and goes down hard...

or so they say.

Posted by: piece on earth good will in the end... | October 4, 2007 8:23 PM | Report abuse

Seriously, what is it with Republicans and facing reality? No matter what your party affiliation, the continuous need to suspend disbelief when listening to Bush, Cheney, Craig, Lott, Rice, Chertoff, Thomas and what have you is exhausting. Not that I'm defending the Dems either. But would it kill a politician to just GIVE A STRAIGHT ANSWER AND STICK TO IT?

Alas, the evidence suggests that it would...

Posted by: Jaso | October 4, 2007 8:25 PM | Report abuse

Does this mean the Singing Senators will be getting back together?

Posted by: Singing Senator | October 4, 2007 8:43 PM | Report abuse


why was Larry Craig plying the "Tea room Trade,"

in public stalls in a Minnesota airport?

serendipity or saliciousness?

SEARCH on "TEAROOM TRADE," for a detailed description of Larry Craigs' _way_of_life_


Posted by: what we need is a little | October 4, 2007 8:43 PM | Report abuse

Give the guy a break. I'm sure there are more than a few republican 'leaders' that employ the wide stance technique.

Posted by: branfo4 | October 4, 2007 8:45 PM | Report abuse

By all means STAY, Larry!
You will be useful throughout the election season!

Posted by: Kase | October 4, 2007 8:51 PM | Report abuse

This is a classic case of a man in denial and it will continue until the evidence is overwhelming. You don't think that his wife knows that this man is gay? She will put up with him as long as he is in office then she will be gone from his life.

Posted by: Jay | October 4, 2007 8:58 PM | Report abuse

Wow! Craig has no shame and no credibility.
He promised he would resign by the end of
September and now he has decided to stay. I believed he has changed his mind six times.
He should get the Senator's Award for being
the best flip flapper of the year and for best wide stance dancing. No one else in Congress can beat his record.

Posted by: genuine | October 4, 2007 9:03 PM | Report abuse

it's not about the sex,

it's about the accountability, the lack of safety for the spouse as in AIDs,

and the hypocrisy....

didn't this guys ssqash the "gay marriage,"


didn't he claim to be "all man?"

Senators and Representatives need to be held to the same standards that the people that serve them are....

if they can't hold a clearance, they shouldn't be passing laws...

this behavior, is clearly "clearance losing," behavior.


Posted by: hello AMERICA | October 4, 2007 9:03 PM | Report abuse

Please people from Idaho! Take back your
rotten potato! Craig brings to mind an unpleasant rotten potato smell.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 9:17 PM | Report abuse

I haven't seen the grounds upon which the judge based his rejection of Craig's petition to withdraw his guilty plea. Probably the fact that Craig knew what he was doing, or should have known, when he pleaded guilty played in the judge's decision. The truth according to law seems to be that Craig did no wrong in legal terms. He committed no crime. The fact that he pleaded guilty does not make a crime what in fact was not criminal conduct. Technicalities are importan in the law world, certainly. But fairness and justice are, or should be, not less important. I think that Craig is not a honest man. He has lied repeteadly. He does not bring any luster to the Senate nor to the US political world. But that was not the crime he was charged with. In fact, there are quite a number of liars and dishonest men in Congress, from both parties. So, in my opinion, Craig should have given the opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea and given his day in court.

Posted by: adian rossa | October 4, 2007 9:28 PM | Report abuse

I believe Larry Craig has amply proved that he is too stupid to be a U.S. Senator. This fact remains, whether or not one feels the arrest was entrapment, that it was based on insufficient action, or that the State of Minnesota ought not be worrying about who is doing what in a public toilet.

Posted by: Anonymous | October 4, 2007 10:29 PM | Report abuse

Hypocrisy is the so rampant in the Republican party it makes me sick. Now Craig not only lies and is a complete hypocrit, he cannot even honor the commitment of stepping down.

These guys are horrific. And what is worse, we have a Congress doing nothing about it. Where is the ethics committee? Get him out of there.

Posted by: Traei | October 4, 2007 10:38 PM | Report abuse

If you look at things from Larry's perspective, what's he got to lose? He's already been the laughing stock of the nation for more than a month. He's a sociopath that doesn't really care what anyone says or thinks of him. And there's absolutely no way to embarrass or humiliate him more than he's already embarrassed himself. At this point in his life, what would be the point of succumbing to pressure from the GOP? They've already thrown him under the bus, while at the same time they let David Vitter completely off the hook. I think Larry decided to give the GOP and everyone else a middle finger salute and move on with his laughing stock life.

Posted by: Don Adams | October 5, 2007 4:28 AM | Report abuse


Posted by: RAS1142 | October 5, 2007 8:18 AM | Report abuse

I find this situation very sad. Isn't it sad how people can bash the "Christian" Right and condone immorality. And then, at the same time the "Christian" Right does not move effectually to remove someone who has tarnished their "worldly image".

I am a Christian and will draw the point that the "Christian" Right will not. A relation with Christ is PERSONAL.

This MEANS that we have a PERSONAL OBLIGATION to follow the precepts of:

To love God with all of our hearts and to love our neighbor as ourselves. Then spread the news that Jesus Christ died for the redemption of all of our sins and was raised from the dead so that we may also walk in newness of life. That is ALL that I am supposed to do under the New Covenant.

This DOES NOT MEAN that we must force our neighbor (by laws) to follow our precepts (I have enough trouble by myself in dealing with my own sin...How can I correct my brothers and sisters?). As a matter of fact the World does not follow our precepts. Thus we are SEPARATE from the World.

So we, as Christians, must promote the Peace, Love, and the other attributes of our Forgiving Father. By demonstrating our joy at finding this, the World will see and also want to enjoy what we have.

However, that is not what the "Christian" Right promotes. They are just as "bad" as the World...Look at the hell that Larry Craig has promoted and is enduring? Doesn't the World see this? That is the hypocrisy.

Chirstians want love and peace for ALL (even those heathen Muslims...Humorous Intent) Please see this as a plea for Christianity.

I, and my Father in Heaven, are saddened by the wars, killings, hatred, and strife are engulfing and destroying mankind. I know that He does not support ANY of this. That is NOT WHAT CHRISTIANITY IS ABOUT!!!

If someone is Gay...PRAY FOR THEM that they see the light. If someone hates another...PRAY FOR THEM.

Jesus told me to pray for my enemies and do good to those that persecute you. He did not tell me to KILL them.

Personally I am PRAYING for all that are tearing us apart. Liberals and Conservatives...The "Christian" Right and the "Immoral" Left.

This is NONSENSE. In the name of God...PLEASE STOP and endeavor to work PEACEFULLY with oneanother so that we may prosper and grow.


Posted by: Tom | October 5, 2007 1:03 PM | Report abuse

By Anon: "Bars - with their legal-aged clientele and private restrooms - are publicly accepted and commonly known playgrounds for hooking-up; therefore, one can EXPECT to be a hit-ee or a hit-or in a bar. That expectation is absent in a public restroom - airport, shopping mall, library..."

Not exactly. It is the "expectation" of the right of privacy in the restroom stall. Not the expectation that you will not be hit on in a restroom.

The ACLU argued that Craig didn't commit a crime, essentially saying he had the freedom of speech right to solicit sex in the restroom, and so it cannot be disorderly conduct. Porter's response is NOT that it is illegal to ask someone in a restroom if they want to have sex (or just hit on them). Instead, he writes that the ACLU "argument in the context of this case is inapplicable and potentially misleading, because S.L.J. focuses only on the verbal 'language' portion of the disorderly conduct statute, whereas in the present case, the Defendant is charged under the non-verbal 'conduct' portion of the statute." Porter also does NOT say that solicitation in and of itself is criminal. Instead, he states clearly that "the criminal behavior is the Defendent's entry into an occupied stall with his eyes, hand, and foot."

You do NOT have that expectation of privacy outside the stall, or away from the urinal, and it is perfectly legal for someone to hit on you (ask you out on a date or whatever) elsewhere in the restroom... or the airport, or the shopping mall, or the straight bar, or the gay bar, or...

adian rossa: "I haven't seen the grounds upon which the judge based his rejection of Craig's petition to withdraw his guilty plea. Probably the fact that Craig knew what he was doing, or should have known, when he pleaded guilty played in the judge's decision. The truth according to law seems to be that Craig did no wrong in legal terms. He committed no crime. The fact that he pleaded guilty does not make a crime what in fact was not criminal conduct. Technicalities are importan in the law world, certainly. But fairness and justice are, or should be, not less important. I think that Craig is not a honest man. He has lied repeteadly. He does not bring any luster to the Senate nor to the US political world. But that was not the crime he was charged with. In fact, there are quite a number of liars and dishonest men in Congress, from both parties. So, in my opinion, Craig should have given the opportunity to withdraw his guilty plea and given his day in court."

Then perhaps you should read the grounds Porter rejected Craig's petition. How can you disagree with his reasons when you don't even know what they are! Porter decided the original plea was accurate, voluntary, and intelligent. And sorry, the "truth according to law" is that "the evidence supports [Craig's] conviction for disorderly conduct" (page 23).

Posted by: proxli | October 5, 2007 1:52 PM | Report abuse

the senator from brokeback mountain should stick around for a while; he's a great diversion from more significant issues like brittney spears' panties

Posted by: Anonymous | October 7, 2007 11:47 AM | Report abuse

Laud Humphreys published his Ph.D. dissertation, Tearoom Trade (1970), an ethnographic study of anonymous male-male sexual encounters in public toilets (a practice known as "tea-rooming"). Humphreys asserted that the men participating in such activity came from diverse social backgrounds, had differing personal motives for seeking homosexual contact in such venues, and variously self-perceived as "straight," "bisexual," or "gay." He received his Ph.D from Washington University in St. Louis.[2]

Because Humphreys was able to confirm that over 50% of his subjects were outwardly heterosexual men with unsuspecting wives at home, a primary thesis of Tearoom Trade is the incongruence between the private self and the social self for many of the men engaging in this form of homosexual activity. Specifically, they put on a "breastplate of righteousness" (social and political conservatism) in an effort to conceal their deviant behavior and prevent being exposed as deviant. Humphreys tapped into a theme of incongruence between one's words and deeds that has become a primary methodological and theoretical concern in sociology throughout the 20th and 21st centuries (Deutscher, 1966).

So it seems that closeted bay or Bisexual men hide themselves in cloaks of homophobia and hate of gays!

Seem like an easy case then....Craig is GAY, or at least Bisexual!

Posted by: FAG | October 8, 2007 2:06 PM | Report abuse

Sure everyone have a good laugh at the Sen expense. This man is not "gay", he's just "bi-curious".

I heard that their still going induct Craig into the Idaho STALL OF FAME.

Posted by: Ed Feeney | October 8, 2007 5:52 PM | Report abuse

Mr. Craig, for you have lost the honor of the title 'Senator', 'Congressman', Dog catcher, or bottomfeeder, leave. You are an embarrassment to all lifestyles and this nation and its citizens. Go Away
Sergeant Major

Posted by: archaeologytoday | October 9, 2007 8:05 AM | Report abuse

The Hon Senator Larry Craig suffers from a case of RTL syndrome (Restless Third Leg Syndrome).

Posted by: alzach | October 9, 2007 1:53 PM | Report abuse

Hello, nice site :)

Posted by: Brin | December 4, 2007 2:26 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company