...about our lawmakers...
...you'd think that someone whose responsibility, as a member of the highest political forum in this country -- the Senate, to understand, interpret, write, and enact laws, would not be in the pickle he is currently in.** You would think that a person of this stature, and with this length of time in that office, would certainly understand that the senator from the great state of Idaho, was admitting to having violated a law in Minnesota by signing whatever form he signed, by speaking freely with the arresting police officer, and by his willingness to pay a fine...all without having consulted with his attorney.
**I wrote this before he resigned, but I still believe this to be true. Again, the question is not whether or not he's gay. I could care less. Behavior unbecoming a public official is the issue. I know that over the years my father, my brother, my husband and my son have all used public bathrooms. Their combined years using a public bathroom probably exceed Senator Craig's years by several decades. None of them have ever been in a situation where their behavior in a public bathroom could have been even slightly misconstrued. So, read on, if you wish.
The charge of soliciting for sex is the crime; he wasn't charged with being gay. I don't think anyone (except his spouse, I imagine) particularly cares what his sexual orientation is. And I imagine there are plenty of men out there (if you believe what you hear on the Jerry Springer Show) who are married, yet still find the need to "bond" with other men. Wait a second, didn't that happen not too long ago, with Mark Foley, and Virginia's own State Representative Ed Schrock?
The police officer didn't do this to Senator Craig, he put himself into this position by trolling/soliciting. I didn't know anything about the gay-men's-bathroom-come-on, so I have found the newscasts quite informative. But I watch enough of COPS to recognize when a girl, in a micro-mini-something, is trolling the streets, trying to lure a customer. That is illegal. The senator violated a law by soliciting. I just don't understand what's so hard to understand about that. And I don't understand why during his recently televised "denial" speech, he spent more time saying that he isn't gay, than he did explaining why he violated a law, or apologizing for having done so.
Personally, as a woman, I've been in many public bathrooms in my lifetime. In fact, I was just in one at WalMart today. I used a public toilet at a baseball park about month ago. Actually, I've used quite a few airport bathrooms recently; in July I flew from Virginia to Tucson, AZ and back, with pit stops at the Norfolk, Dallas-Ft. Worth, and the Tucson airports. First of all, we ladies usually simply look for an opened stall door..this generally indicates vacancy. Sometimes, however, the doors do shut by themselves. However, one need only look below the door for the appearance of shoes. Shoes generally indicate OCCUPANCY. One need not look in the crack of a closed door and make eye contact with the person sitting on the throne to recognize that the stall is, indeed, OCCUPIED! I know I don't EVER want to glance toward the crack in a toilet stall while I'm trying to concentrate on trying to do number two, and see someone watching me. Grrrross!
In all of the years I have used a public toilet, I can honestly say that I have never had the need to place either one of my feet anywhere near the stall next to mine. And the closest my hand ever got to the stall next to mine was once, many years ago, when a woman in the next stall asked if I could give her some toilet paper. See, I always check before I go into a stall to use a toilet to be sure there is plenty of toilet paper. If not, I use another one, so I've never had a reason to slide my hand along the bottom of a stall trolling for toilet paper. Maybe this is what the senator was doing...trying to get toilet paper. However, in my experience, the airports are generally very good about keeping the bathrooms well-stocked with soap, paper towels, and toilet paper. But I'm trying to give the Senator the benefit of the doubt, okay?
Next point: I cannot imagine the contortion needed for a tall man to get his lower leg bent at the angle needed to actually get his foot under the stall divider, to the point where it would touch the foot of the man in the next stall. As a matter of fact, I took a break right after typing the previous sentence, so I could do my own unscientific research. I tried sticking my leg under the edge of my computer desk with my pants pulled down to my calves and ankles (I left my panties up), just to see how far under the desk I could stick my foot. Had this been an actual toilet stall, my foot would have gone under about eight inches. However, this chair is more comfortable than an actual toilet, so I'd say that in real life, I would have only made a six-inch incursion. Usually, one tries to keep one's body parts far, far from anything in a public bathroom...even feet with shoes on. As I read it, the senator had dropped his pants, sat down on the toilet, presumably to go doo-doo, and somehow, with his pants draped around his calves and ankles, he managed to spread his legs apart far enough to slip his foot at least a foot (or more) to be able to touch the shoe of the next-door occupant. And without getting a huge cramp in his thigh! But why??!! The toilet stalls aren't designed for comfort or for long-term occupancy, but they're generally roomy enough so that one doesn't need to overlap into neighboring stalls. Even if one is supersized. The senator said he was a large man. Large, maybe, but not fat. Fatter people (I am in that category, so I can speak from personal experience) may have to spread their legs a little bit wider to, and there's no prissy way to say this, wipe. As I recall, from seeing the images of the senator on the news, he may be a tall man, but I don't believe he is wide enough to actually have to hold his legs spread-eagle to wipe his heinie.
And as for picking up a piece of paper from the floor of the toilet stall...unless he is suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder, there should be no reason for him to be picking a piece of paper up from the floor. Not unless it has the portrait of a president in the middle of it. Yuk! And double yuk!!
His hand moving along against the neighboring stall? If I saw something like that while trying to relieve myself in a public bathroom, my first instinct would be to smash those fingers with my shoe. If those fingers were not preceded by a voice asking if I had a square to spare, they'd be broken. What kind of a freak goes into a public bathroom, where one would supposedly go to do one of the most private things a person can do, and violate someone else's personal space by sticking feet or hands where they don't belong? The poor cop! I know he was in there doing his job, and yet I admire his restraint. Had I been in his shoes, it would have taken every bit of internal fortitude I had to keep myself from smashing those freaking knuckles to smithereens with the handle of my gun while simultaneously stomping on his expensive shoe with both of my feet. Not for being gay. For being a jerk.
And what's up with his constituents? They support him? A lawmaker who violates the law? Knuckleheads, all.
Tune in next time when I rant about Michael Vick.
Thanks for letting me get this off my chest.
**I wrote this before he resigned, but I still believe this to be true. Again, the question is not whether or not he's gay. I could care less. Behavior unbecoming a public official is the issue. I know that over the years my father, my brother, my husband and my son have all used public bathrooms. Their combined years using a public bathroom probably exceed Senator Craig's years by several decades. None of them have ever been in a situation where their behavior in a public bathroom could have been even slightly misconstrued. So, read on, if you wish.
The charge of soliciting for sex is the crime; he wasn't charged with being gay. I don't think anyone (except his spouse, I imagine) particularly cares what his sexual orientation is. And I imagine there are plenty of men out there (if you believe what you hear on the Jerry Springer Show) who are married, yet still find the need to "bond" with other men. Wait a second, didn't that happen not too long ago, with Mark Foley, and Virginia's own State Representative Ed Schrock?
The police officer didn't do this to Senator Craig, he put himself into this position by trolling/soliciting. I didn't know anything about the gay-men's-bathroom-come-on, so I have found the newscasts quite informative. But I watch enough of COPS to recognize when a girl, in a micro-mini-something, is trolling the streets, trying to lure a customer. That is illegal. The senator violated a law by soliciting. I just don't understand what's so hard to understand about that. And I don't understand why during his recently televised "denial" speech, he spent more time saying that he isn't gay, than he did explaining why he violated a law, or apologizing for having done so.
Personally, as a woman, I've been in many public bathrooms in my lifetime. In fact, I was just in one at WalMart today. I used a public toilet at a baseball park about month ago. Actually, I've used quite a few airport bathrooms recently; in July I flew from Virginia to Tucson, AZ and back, with pit stops at the Norfolk, Dallas-Ft. Worth, and the Tucson airports. First of all, we ladies usually simply look for an opened stall door..this generally indicates vacancy. Sometimes, however, the doors do shut by themselves. However, one need only look below the door for the appearance of shoes. Shoes generally indicate OCCUPANCY. One need not look in the crack of a closed door and make eye contact with the person sitting on the throne to recognize that the stall is, indeed, OCCUPIED! I know I don't EVER want to glance toward the crack in a toilet stall while I'm trying to concentrate on trying to do number two, and see someone watching me. Grrrross!
In all of the years I have used a public toilet, I can honestly say that I have never had the need to place either one of my feet anywhere near the stall next to mine. And the closest my hand ever got to the stall next to mine was once, many years ago, when a woman in the next stall asked if I could give her some toilet paper. See, I always check before I go into a stall to use a toilet to be sure there is plenty of toilet paper. If not, I use another one, so I've never had a reason to slide my hand along the bottom of a stall trolling for toilet paper. Maybe this is what the senator was doing...trying to get toilet paper. However, in my experience, the airports are generally very good about keeping the bathrooms well-stocked with soap, paper towels, and toilet paper. But I'm trying to give the Senator the benefit of the doubt, okay?
Next point: I cannot imagine the contortion needed for a tall man to get his lower leg bent at the angle needed to actually get his foot under the stall divider, to the point where it would touch the foot of the man in the next stall. As a matter of fact, I took a break right after typing the previous sentence, so I could do my own unscientific research. I tried sticking my leg under the edge of my computer desk with my pants pulled down to my calves and ankles (I left my panties up), just to see how far under the desk I could stick my foot. Had this been an actual toilet stall, my foot would have gone under about eight inches. However, this chair is more comfortable than an actual toilet, so I'd say that in real life, I would have only made a six-inch incursion. Usually, one tries to keep one's body parts far, far from anything in a public bathroom...even feet with shoes on. As I read it, the senator had dropped his pants, sat down on the toilet, presumably to go doo-doo, and somehow, with his pants draped around his calves and ankles, he managed to spread his legs apart far enough to slip his foot at least a foot (or more) to be able to touch the shoe of the next-door occupant. And without getting a huge cramp in his thigh! But why??!! The toilet stalls aren't designed for comfort or for long-term occupancy, but they're generally roomy enough so that one doesn't need to overlap into neighboring stalls. Even if one is supersized. The senator said he was a large man. Large, maybe, but not fat. Fatter people (I am in that category, so I can speak from personal experience) may have to spread their legs a little bit wider to, and there's no prissy way to say this, wipe. As I recall, from seeing the images of the senator on the news, he may be a tall man, but I don't believe he is wide enough to actually have to hold his legs spread-eagle to wipe his heinie.
And as for picking up a piece of paper from the floor of the toilet stall...unless he is suffering from obsessive-compulsive disorder, there should be no reason for him to be picking a piece of paper up from the floor. Not unless it has the portrait of a president in the middle of it. Yuk! And double yuk!!
His hand moving along against the neighboring stall? If I saw something like that while trying to relieve myself in a public bathroom, my first instinct would be to smash those fingers with my shoe. If those fingers were not preceded by a voice asking if I had a square to spare, they'd be broken. What kind of a freak goes into a public bathroom, where one would supposedly go to do one of the most private things a person can do, and violate someone else's personal space by sticking feet or hands where they don't belong? The poor cop! I know he was in there doing his job, and yet I admire his restraint. Had I been in his shoes, it would have taken every bit of internal fortitude I had to keep myself from smashing those freaking knuckles to smithereens with the handle of my gun while simultaneously stomping on his expensive shoe with both of my feet. Not for being gay. For being a jerk.
And what's up with his constituents? They support him? A lawmaker who violates the law? Knuckleheads, all.
Tune in next time when I rant about Michael Vick.
Thanks for letting me get this off my chest.
posted by Cinnabitch | 4:42 PM
2 Comments:
Did you read that this pervert is thinking about hiring Michael Vick's attorney?
Too bad his career and his love life both kinda stalled
Man, I love these guys.
No way!! However, I was mulling over Senator Craig's words from his "speech" yesterday...he said his "intent" is to retire effective September 30th. "Intent" is the operative word. That leaves some wiggle room for him; I know this, yet again, from personal experience. I "had intended" to lose 30 pounds during the summer, HOWEVER, there was a big change of plans when my Schmoopies and I spent every day baking and having tea parties or going to tea rooms. So, it remains to be seen, come September 30th, whether Senator Craig actually has followed through with his "intent."
Post a Comment
<< Home