Craig Now Absurdly Claiming Constitutional Violations
Self-loathing homosexual and pathological liar (oh, and United States Senator) Larry Craig has concocted yet another way to not go quietly into that bad night:
Craig will argue before an appeals court that Minnesota’s disorderly conduct law is unconstitutional as it applies to his conviction in a bathroom sex sting, according to a new court filing.This is the first time Craig’s attorneys have raised that issue. However, an earlier friend-of-the-court filing by the American Civil Liberties Union argued that Craig’s foot-tapping and hand gesture under a stall divider at the Minneapolis airport are protected by the First Amendment.
As I’ve blogged previously, one can only de-legitimize the criminalization of Craig’s conduct by ignoring or misrepresenting what that conduct actually was:
–Craig peered into a closed bathroom stall, to the point where the undercover officer could see the color of Craig’s eyes. This is constitutionally protected conduct — how?
–Craig reached under the divider so deeply that the officer could see Craig’s wedding band. This is constitutionally protected conduct — how?
–Craig physically touched, without consent, another person. This is constitutionally protected conduct — how?
The fact that the person in the other stall was an undercover police officer does not negate the fact that the person in the other stall was a person — a person in the most private zone in the universe.
There is no First Amendment right to be a Peeping Tom. There is no First Amendment right to intrude upon another human being’s most private bodily functions. There is no First Amendment right not to care whether another person might be neither a cop nor another consenting cretin before intruding upon his most inhibited zone of privacy.
Yes, it is all about rights — the right not to have to deal with perverts in a public restroom. The right not to have to worry if your child wants to “act grown up” and go to the toilet unaccompanied. The right to insist that self-loathing gays accept the consequences of their self-loathing. The right to mock the mockworthy.
Those are the only rights at issue here.
Similar Posts:
- Larry Craig Epilogue (For Now)
- More Thoughts on Larry Craig
- On the ACLU on Larry Craig
- Craig Resigns
- Where’s Jim Naugle When You Need Him?
Filed under: Uncategorized
Craig didn't do anything until the policeman responded by tapping his own foot. If the officer did not respond none of the the other responses would have occurred. Is he a hypocrite or a pragmatist. Could a gay person living in Idaho be elected to the Senate? I don't think so.
Doesn't it strike you as insane that a policeman would spend an 8 hour shift sitting on a toilet seat waiting to hear the sound of one foot tapping?
Absolutely — as I have mentioned in previous blogposts in this chain. But that is completely irrelevant to the question of whether Craig’s conduct was properly proscribable or whether he has a legitimate appeal.
I am not sure whether he has a legitimate appeal or not. This will be decided by the courts. It's like tax law you don't always know what is legal until it is ruled on. Do you think Craig is really going to this effort because he wants to run again? I don't.
I think when you've been dumped on by your former friends you are not going to go quietly just to make it easier for them.
I really urge you to go to the links I mentioned.
This is a clear PR offensive on Sen.Craig's part (in my opinion.) Changing the punchline of the joke from himself to the cop is what I'd advise a client of mine to do. Besides the pictures are really funny.
Much more imaginative than what I've seen before. They're first rate PR I wish I'd come up with them myself. I'd love to hear what you think.
Debbie