One of the things which has struck me about is how the media has become saturated with sensationalistic* stories of Senator Craig. When I e-mailed my Pajamas piece on the Senator’s lack of judgment to my Mom, she wrote back, praising my piece and noting how “sick” she was of “hearing about Larry Craig. . . it was all over NBC New followed by CNN.” While working out at my gym, it seemed every time I looked up at a television news channel, it was either reporting on the Senator’s indiscretions or running some report in the scroll at the bottom of the screen.

The story headlined the news on Yahoo! as well as AOL. I’m sure it made the front page of many papers.

I wonder if the saga of former New Jersey Governor Jim Greevey saturated the news media as this story has. Unlike the latest sensationalistic story of gay sex and politics, that story, as Scheie noted, also included a “financial scandal.” The Garden State Democrat used state money to pay off a lover (or as that alleged beloved contends, a man the Governor wished were his lover) (Via Instapundit).

Perhaps this story has generated more coverage because Craig has denied being gay while McGreevey came out as a “gay American.” Or because Craig is a Republican and McGreevey a Democrat.

I mean, it’s generated far less coverage than did the assault and battery charge against Democratic Congressman Bob Filner of California.

Perhaps, if Filner were a Republican, the media might pay more attention to his airport antics. But, then, the media didn’t entirely ignore McGreevey despite being a member of the press’s preferred politcal party.

I think we have seen saturation coverage of the Craig affair for a variety of reasons, one of which it that it allows the MSM to downplay stories of success in Iraq. But, let’s face it, the real reason is that sex sells.** The media’s been ever eager to explore the private lives of politicians, particularly if they’re Republicans.

But, this story has an added wrinkle which makes today’s media increasingly interested. It’s a story they want to tell, exposing the supposed hypocrisy of social conservatives. At least since the publication of Elmer Gantry eighty years ago, the chattering classes seem to believe that those who preach traditional values use their faith as window dressing to cover their own sexual indiscretions. Members of the media (and cultural) elite seek to dismiss the social conservatives’ defense of such values as mere subterfuge, concealing a sinister agenda to subjugate the non-believers. Or some such nonsense.

(more…)

In my first post on Larry Craig which I had to write in a rush as I was chairing a meeting that evening, I wrote that I expected I’d have “more to say about this at a later time.” Well, as I was collecting my thoughts, Pajamas Media asked me to write a piece on the situation which is now up on their web-site.

To whet your appetitie, I’ll give you the first paragraphs and then encourage you to read the rest at Pajamas:

When I first read about the arrest of Senator Larry Craig in a restroom at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Aiport earlier this summer, I was stunned. I wondered how a man in his position could have shown as little judgment as he had.

Ten months ago, he was the subject of rumors in the blogosphere, talk radio, cable TV and even a few mainstream newspapers that he had engaged in sexual acts with other men in restrooms at Union Station in Washington, D.C. At the time, I was skeptical of the claims, but also thought that if they were true, the Senator, realizing that his restroom activities were not as anonymous as he had assumed, would have ceased seeking them out.

Last October, he escaped the public humiliation he is experiencing today. Indeed, his local paper, the Idaho Statesman had followed up on the allegations against him, but until this Monday, “had declined to run a story about Craig’s sex life, because [it] didn’t have enough corroborating evidence and because of the senator’s steadfast denial” (Via Hugh Hewitt). The paper even interviewed the Senator. He was thus well aware that people knew about his actions.

Just click here to read the full piece.

So I’ve been traveling since 4am on Tuesday.   So as I spent yesterday away from TV and the internet, the most I knew about the world was that both Sen. Larry Craig and QB Michael Vick had admitted guilt for respective crimes.  End of story (for now), I assumed.

And then last night at a work event, I turned to a colleague who is also politically-connected and asked, “So what do you think about Larry Craig?”   He just shook his head and said, “Wasn’t his press conference today unbelieveable?”

My jaw dropped. 

“No he did NOT!”, I protested.    My friend: “Oh yes he did.  He must have said ‘I’m not gay’ three times.”

“No he did NOT!”, I said.  This time I continued:  “And let me guess, his wife was standing next to him?”  Well, of course!

I just shook my head.  “So by the end of the week, I bet he is an alcoholic, goes to rehab, and was molested by his priest,” I deduced.   Unreal.

Mark Steyn has a similar reaction to Craig’s unending stupidity.

Yes, I feel sorry for Mrs Craig and the family, too, but come on, the Senator’s statement in Boise this afternoon invites only a wholly deserved contempt. What was all that stuff about there being a “cloud over Idaho”? There’s no cloud over Idaho, there’s a cloud over him. The State of Idaho wasn’t in the stall of the men’s room at Minneapolis Airport, and the State of Idaho didn’t choose to cop a plea. If you’re going to dissemble, at least try not to be so pompous and narcissistic when you’re doing it.

And what was all that business about blaming it all on the “strain” brought about by The Idaho Statesman? What kind of excuse is that? “I wouldn’t have wound up in that men’s room if you guys hadn’t been investigating my secret gay sex life.”

This was a ridiculous performance.

The funny thing was, not having even watched or known about the press conference last night, I concluded the same thing!

The other immediate thought I had was… don’t these Washington politicians understand that this isn’t the 1960s and 1970s where people were either scared or in awe of US Senators and Congressmen?   Now, we have a collective borderline hate/disdain for them all…. so there ain’t no one gonna protect ‘em anymore.

My next revelation, along those same lines, was:  “Hmmm… if Ted Kennedy drove home drunk, wrecked a car, and left a body at the scene of the crime in 2007…. he’d not only be out of the Senate, but most likely in jail.”

Ah, the 21st Century.  Good times.

[Related Story:  A great internal debate by the Slate editors over the Craig foot tapping revelation.]

-Bruce (GayPatriot)