Tuesday, August 28, 2007

Mike Roger's and Pam Spaulding's Statements on the arrest and guilty plea of Senator Larry Craig

The following comes from Proud of Who We Are (http://www.proudofwhoweare.org/story11.html). I also suggest that readers check out Pam Spaulding's commentary on why closet cases like Craig need to be outed. Here's a portion of Mike Roger's statement:
WASHINGTON, Aug 27, 2008- Proud of Who We Are President Michael Rogers, who broke the story in October 2006 of Sen. Larry Craig's sexual encounters with men, issued the following statement Monday regarding Craig's arrest:

"Larry Craig should stand up and be honest with the citizens of Idaho about who he is," said Rogers, the country's top gay activist blogger. "Tonight is a historic opportunity for Senator Craig to run for re-election as a proud gay American. What a great turning point for one of the most conservative states in the country to be represented by an openly gay Senator."

"Senator Craig's situation is exacerbated by the fact that he has a voting record that is counter to the interest of lesbian and gay Americans. All too often, closeted men like Senator Craig use their voting record to hide their truth from the American people. With this news now out in the open, I call upon Senator Craig to reevaluate his votes on issues like the Federal Marriage Amendment, Don't Ask Don't Tell, and the Defense of Marriage Act.

"The Minnesota arrest is not a one-time occurrence," Rogers added. "Last October, I reported on three other encounters that Senator Craig had with men – including one in a bathroom in Washington's Union Station. What's troubling about this is Larry Craig's hypocrisy: he repeatedly votes against the gay community during his day job, while engaging in same-sex encounters as extra curricular activity. Now is a good time for Larry Craig to join millions of other Americans and be proud of who he is."

On October 17, 2006, Rogers broke the story of Craig's sexual encounters with men. Rogers independently interviewed three Craig sexual partners, two in the Pacific Northwest, and one who lives in Washington, D.C. The Washington source told Rogers that he and Sen. Craig had oral sex in two different bathrooms of Union Station, the train depot within sight of U.S. Senate Office Buildings. Rogers said the sources each independently described something unique about the senator that could only be known to someone who had had sexual contact with him.
Here are portions of Pam's comments on the pathology of the closet:
We're not only talking about elected officials. This closet is full of campaign managers, fundraisers and legislators in the corridors of power, ready to elect homophobic officials with homo-hating tactics, and pass anti-gay measures, even as they enjoy homosexual activities themselves under the cover of anonymity. These folks are addicted to access and power, and know that publicly kicking the closet door open will jeopardize that power in the gay-hating, gay-baiting wing of the GOP that currently rules the roost.
However, there is a subset of these hypocrites that are truly self-loathing homosexuals -- the Schrocks [and Craigs] of the world -- cruising for homo-sex in the shadows, hating themselves the next day and atoning for their "sin" by casting votes against taxpaying citizens that choose to live their lives honestly and openly. As long as their anti-gay boss treats them well personally, it doesn't matter that they work together to deny civil rights to LGBT citizens.
As I've said before, they all need to be exposed because some of them are clearly unfit to lead, particularly those that fall in the latter category; I think those folks will never see the light. (you can hear recordings of Schrock's calls to a male sex pickup phone line)

3 comments:

Anonymous said...

Rogers had best be careful, as it is one thing to "out" hypocrisy, it is unethical to "out" gay men or lesbians for "sport." Rogers had crossed that line too many times. Like Hedda Hopper of "out" gossip mongers spreading tales about private tail. It probably strikes some people as positively improbable, but not everyone has to "launder" their lives before the entire world. Not everyone feels a need to be an Anna Nicole Smith car wreck public persona. Some people have demons, skeletons in their closets, that they want hidden. And, frankly, some of those demons should be sealed-off.

It is one thing to act gay for toilet sex and another to deny gays and lesbians equal and civil right, and to do so representing constituencies. OUT the bastards for their hypocrisy, double standards, and claims of exemption for standard decency. Those who wish to remain private should have their privacy respected. But if HYPOCRISY is the criterion, and I sure hope it is, more than Toilet Sex Fag Republicans lurk in those environs, including Rogers' own backyard.

What did the maxim state: "People who live in glass houses should not throw stones?" One hypocrite outing another hypocrite is fine by me, but let's OUT ALL OF THEM for whatever hypocrisy, not merely their clandestine potty sex.

Anonymous said...

It might also be well to remember that Sullivan was "outed." Not for being "gay," but for his HIV+ soliciting bareback sex. Justified? Yes, because he was a menace to others. Self-righteous? I'll let others judge that for themselves. Hypocrite? Absolutely. Conflicted? I sure hope so, what other explanation would allow someone to harm others? To cover that malfeasance, he's now in favor of marriage. He was when he was barebacking others, without disclosing his status. Husband hunting by duplicity does not strike me as the clarion call of righteousness.

But then, I'm an ethics-based, not morality-based, individual. Ethics has none of these conflicts, because the most excellent is always the pleasantness of first choice. Our actions simply follow. Sorting, serosorting, goats and sheep must help some sleep, but it tires my imagination keep those divisions up. Yes, the IN / OUT divisions, too. How Jesus-like (seriously, it is).

Michael-in-Norfolk said...

I agree that no one should be outed for sport. From what I have seen, Rogers has used the hypocrisy standard fairly consistently. If you are a politican who votes anti-gay and are in the closet, then they are open game. The same goes for oppotunistic closeted staffers who work for anti-gay politicians and closet case Christianists. He certainly applied it in the case of Ed Schrock, who was formerly my Congressman when I lived in Virginia Beach.

Everyone else should be free to decide if and when they want to come out so long as they do not pursue any agenda to deny gays equal civil legal rights.