Mike Rogers (Blogactive) is now on Ed Shultz, outing gay Senator

[originalpckelly]

tune in here:
http://www.bigeddieradio.com/listen/index.asp

[wicket]

1. "Without a doubt in my mind" - his sources are correct

n/t

[annarbor]

2. Says the news is coming from Idaho...

Senator Larry Craig!!!!

[TheDonkey]

11. Not surprised it's Craig! LOL

Hope this blows up.

[cali]

25. If this is going to blow up,

odds are that it will blow up right in our faces. This could, imo, hurt dems.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

40. Blow up how?

We now bank on voter homophobia and the Christian rights' unhealthy hate for gays to win our races?

[Marnieworld]

73. It used to be in politics

That voters don't like liars and hypocrites. It remains to be seen if that is the case still.

[wicket]

3. He says it's Larry Craig

n/t

[maseman]

5. Not very familiar

I want proof though

[originalpckelly]

4. Larry Craig - Definitely...

How interesting.

[endarkenment]

13. Larry Craig:

Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.

Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes.

Rated 25% by the ACLU, indicating an anti-civil rights voting record

I say he's fair game.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Larry_Craig_Civil_Rights.htm

[LSparkle]

6. Bingo! There you go!

[Johnny Appleseed]

7. It's Craig!

[kevinbgoode]

8. OMG. . .is this going to blowup in Idaho?

How long has Craig been in the Senate?

[eleny]

9. He let Craig's office know beforehand

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. wow

http://craig.senate.gov/keyport.cfm


A lot people on this site have lousy Gaydar...

[malaise]

18. I hope someone called his wife and children

He is married to the former Suzanne Thompson. They have three children: two sons, Mike and Jay, a daughter, Shae, and nine beautiful grandchildren.

[Dr Fate]

28. "nine beautiful grandchildren" Are you pasting this from his website bio?

And what does having children who can haver other children have to do with being gay?

[KoKo]

31. What we need to find out is whether Craig's Children/Grandkids are HIS

Did she marry late in life and marry "into" these children and grandkids.

I haven't done any research on this...just what I got from his Website...which makes him sound like he and his very attractive wife have been married for YEARS with the Children/Grandchildren.

What if it's a "late marriage of convenience." He does have a whole link devoted to adopting children ...from Asia and India as well as the US...

It's hard to know....someone needs to flesh this out more with some research?

[pnwmom]

34. None of these speculations matters the least little bit.

Many gays have very long marriages with bunches of children before they finally come out. I've talked to lots of the "kids" on a list-serve. I'm one myself.

[KoKo]

65. I don't agree with you there.............There's something that would

verify this "outing" somewhere. If he was wrongly outed...we should know that. :shrug:

[pnwmom]

80. What don't you agree with me about? Did you read beyond the subject line?

Having several natural children means nothing! It certainly wouldn't prove he was straight. Or even bi. Gay men -- men who are predominantly oriented toward other men -- can father children with women, especially in their younger years. Brokeback Mountain should have opened people's minds to that.

[cally]

71. He was single in 1983, according the video on blogactive

If the children are his, they had children in their late teens or they married spouses with children.

[KoKo]

75. Yeah...that's a long time ago....There's missing stuff with his BIO...

what could that mean? Manufactured by the GOP? Or Innocent?

[malaise]

39. Zilch but the fact that

he is married speaks volumes about hypocrisy.

[Dr Fate]

45. How do you know they are "beautiful"? Why was that even added?

???

[KoKo]

66. The poster got if from another site other than his official Web Site....

so...it's not really important...the "beautiful children" part, is it?

More important is whether he married someone who ALREADY HAD CHILDREN AND GRANDCHILDREN! Wouldn't 'ya think? :shrug:

[annarbor]

38. I wonder....

If he had my wife and children in mind when he voted the way he did. I know it sounds kind of smarmy, but I wonder if he's capable of thinking of those that he's harmed....

Ann Arbor

[Brundle_Fly]

46. ahahahaahahahah ahahahahahahaah

:rofl: :yourock:

[Mabus]

57. Not all of us

Mike promised to give us this information a long time ago and now he's making good on it. See
http://www.blogactive.com/2006/01/mister-senator.html

****

I say, "go west young man."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=364&topic_id=2407851&mesg_id=2409050

Of course, it helped that Mike himself told me back in June who it was.

[Sammy Pepys]

12. Kind of a yawner, really....

Now if Craig comes out and addresses these charges, then we've got something.

[Dr Fate]

17. Or if the media or DEM activists go on TV and make an issue of it.

And foprce him to confrim or deny.

That is,if we even have proof. Do we?

[Sammy Pepys]

22. Not yet enough to make a convincing case...

...and no one is going to care enough anyway.

[Dr Fate]

26. I'm not so sure about no one caring- but we agree that we need proof.

If they had photos or tape recordings- or several compelling witnesses- I think lots of trash-TV watchers (AKA swing voters) would tune in and lap it up.

But we agree that this requires some hard proof for it to stick.

[Sammy Pepys]

84. So to come back to this topic....

Apparently Larry Craig was canoodling in a Union Station bathroom?

I find that extremely hard to believe. You couldn't pick a less private place. Craig would've been better off having the trysts in his office.

Moreover, the guy outing Craig isn't coming forward with any of his sources.

[Dr Fate]

85. No debate from me- I too want hard proof. n/t

n/t

[endarkenment]

30. Here's a link

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Larry_Craig_Civil_Rights.htm

[Stand and Fight]

52. Democrats should stay far, far away from this...

This whole thing stinks. It will only serve to harm us.

[Dr Fate]

61. If there is no proof, I agree. If there is, I do not- see post 59. n/t

n/t

[pnwmom]

82. We're not doing this. Why should it harm us?

We've never had the votes of the gay haters, so we can't lose them now.

[brentspeak]

54. A Democratic activist would be doing the party a disservice

by making these kinds of claims, or trying to create an echo chamber to broadcast them. Skullduggery is a GOP specialty, and one of the things that separates us from the Repubs.

This is Mike Rodgers' deal, not the Democrats'.

[Dr Fate]

59. Says the"strategists" who lost the last 3 elections. Ive heard this before

This is what we are told anytime the GOP could be exposed- whether it be Jeff Gannon, the DSM, any of literally hundreds of lies Bush has told, Bush's national guard record (BEFORE Rove let Rather botch it), Foley, etc,etc.

I would not expect the "strategists" who lost the last 3 elections to treat this potential bombshell any differently.

I was merely stating a hypothetical way to keep it in the news- I realize that we are too frightenmed of our shadows to do anything to keep ANY story that is damaging to Bush in the news.

[brentspeak]

60. Am I one of the "strategists"?

[Dr Fate]

64. I guess not-you just agree with them- at least in this instance.

I've heard the whole "let's not make the Democrats fight and go after this one-KEEP YOUR POWDER DRY" plenty of times- those putting forth that type of "strategy" have been wrong in nearly every single instance.

[brentspeak]

68. If I "agree" with them, it's a coincidence

I have no idea what anyone else has said about this issue. I rely on my own conclusions.

[Dr Fate]

70. I did not mean to suggest you were literally a DEM strategist.

I was making the point that they get it wrong everytime- and that I am POSITIVE that these same strategists who lost the last 3 elections would agree with you on this one.

Your postition of non-aggression sounds just like the stuff they have been handing to us during every election cycle they lost.

[brentspeak]

72. You're equating "fighting" (good) with "mud-slinging" (bad)

And it's a faulty comparison. Howard Dean fights, but he doesn't sling mud; Karl Rove slings mud, but he's too chicken to fight (he has surrogates cover his tracks).

[Dr Fate]

79. I'm not suggesting we lie about them- only that we tell the truth.

In the case of the DSM, Gannongate, Bush's guard service, literally hundreds of Bush lies, etc, etc,etc- the DEM "strategists" who lost the last 3 elections were too frightened to even go after the truthful allegations.

I'm not talking about "mud slinging" like they do it- I'm talking about factual allegations with proof.

But dont worry- even if this story turns out to include autheniticated, signed & notarized leather jockey S&M movies with Bush himself in the mix, no DEMS would go on TV and say a damn thing about it.

I'm sure we DO agree that if we were to go after this, we would need plenty of proof. (I'm not sure we have it)

Where we dont seem to agree is going after it if there is proof.

[Dr Fate]

14. Do we have proof? If so, what is it? If not, then this is no good.

n/t

[Trouser Trout]

15. Is he up for re-election in '06 ? n/t

[wicket]

20. No

n/t

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. Voted YES on constitutional ban of same-sex marriage.

http://www.ontheissues.org/Domestic/Larry_Craig_Civil_Rights.htm

[Dr Fate]

19. Then it's okay to out him- IF we have some proof- DO WE?

?

[annarbor]

21. Oh my Gawd!

Mike to Ed: "I've got a couple more so I'll be in touch!"

God, October's turning into a good month....

[originalpckelly]

24. I know...outing hypocrites is actually quite fun...

Larry Craig is a good catch too, because he is so very anti-gay.

[annarbor]

27. Let's see how many start coming...

out of the woodwork. Mike said that he's told enough people where and who his sources were. Good thing he did...
As you all say on DU, "Stay out of airplanes!"

Ann Arbor

[OPERATIONMINDCRIME]

23. A Big "Grow The Fuck Up" Comes To Mind Upon Reading Some Of These Replies.

Just occured to me: We need a finger-wagging-tsk-tsk smiley.

[Imagevision]

76. K&R!!!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

29. When I Was Younger I Used To Sell Real Estate...

There was this older couple (in their seventies) who were selling their home because they were getting divorced... It was quite sad and even naive me knew something wasn't right...

Low and behold, several months later I read on the front page of my local newspaper that the man I met was killed by a much younger man he picked up in a "gentleman's club"...

Larry Craig seems to be about the same age as that guy...


I feel bad for his family...

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. Voted NO on adding sexual orientation to definition of hate crimes.

What if someone beat his ass because he's gay?

[tishaLA]

33. I sent Sen. Craig an email

and pretended to be from Idaho. I asked him how he could have the positions he has had when he's been having gaysex for so many years and presenting himself as something he is not.

[onenote]

35. Did Rogers indicate how he knew this to be so?

Just throwing out an accusation without any substantiation not only is unconvincing, it also likely to rebound against us.

Without proof a lot of people will react as follows: "How dare they tear this guy down without any proof. What would keep them from doing the same thing to me?"

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. I Suspect One Of His Sexual Partners Spoke Up...

I don't think he's stupid enough to go on the record without proof. Do you?

[onenote]

43. Did Rogers say anything to indicate how he knew

I'm not saying there isn't proof, just wondering what Rogers said. I hope he wouldn't be stupid enough to go on the record without proof.

Realistically, Craig could respond in two ways (assuming he doesn't admit it):

He could deny it

He could deny it and file a libel suit.

There's little to be gained from filing a libel suit: it will take a long time and open up his entire personal life to scrutiny. If he just denies it, he forces the burden back onto Rogers to come forward with some credible substantiation. If Rogers doesn't have it, Democrats should disavow him in a hurry.

[originalpckelly]

48. Rogers has been 100% right in the past +plus many of Craig's parters...

spoke to him, they are not in Idaho either. So this isn't just one person. Mike is right.

[onenote]

50. Did Mike say that?

Again, I'm not challenging you, I'm just trying to understand what was said on the show and what is speculation. Did he say that many of Craig's partners had spoken with him?

[Hell Hath No Fury]

37. It's my understanding this is the guy...

that was caught on tape in Union Station.

[ProudToBeBlueInRhody]

41. Thought it would Hatch......

Which would be a bigger bombshell, if you are into this sort of thing.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

42. Hatch Is Just Foppish

eom

[AlCzervik]

44. "Foppish" lol!!!

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. So Was Patrick Moynihan May He Rest In Peace

eom

[Mayberry Machiavelli]

49. Um.. if no evidence is offered, isn't it a nonstory?

[Dr Fate]

51. Exactly- Media only moves w/o proof if it is a scoop that helps the GOP

See SBV, etc- no proof required to present as fact.

But If *we* are going to have the media repeat stroies about the GOP, we need proof.

[brentspeak]

55. Who's "we"?

[Dr Fate]

69. People who oppose the GOP. And I dont mean frightened elected DEMs.

Of course we cant expect them to go on TV and say a damn thing about much of anything.

I mean whoever is up for it- be it a Liberal activist, a DEM activist/pundit with guts, a rennegade reporter, whoever has media access who would not be too frightened to do it.

[B Calm]

63. He said he has proof.

[onenote]

77. he better be able to produce it

Just saying you have proof isn't much proof.

[eleny]

53. In Mike Rogers' own words today after his appearance on Ed Schultz....

"I have done extensive research into this case, including trips to the Pacific Northwest to meet with men who have say they have physical relations with the Senator. I have also met with a man here in Washington, D.C., who says the same -- and that these incidents occurred in the bathrooms of Union Station. None of these men know each other, or knew that I was talking to others. They all reported similar personal characteristics about the Senator, which lead me to believe, beyond any doubt, that their stories are valid."

http://www.blogactive.com/

[brentspeak]

56. The same thing was said about Tom Cruise

Men who claimed they had sex with Cruise, but who later turned out to be lying.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

62. Tom Cruise Sued Them...

Will Larry Craig sue?

[onenote]

58. My prediction: story sinks without a trace

If all Rogers can say is that he's talked to people, but is unable to produce a live witness to come forward and make the allegations, this story is going to go nowhere.

[Dr Fate]

67. Yup- unless we were GOP- then the media would repeat it as fact...

...proof or no proof.

If DEMS are going to throw mud, it has to be factual and there has to be PROOF.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

74. Unless One Of His Partners Publicly Come Forward This Is Not Productive

eom

[KoKo]

78. If what you think/say is TRUE...then Mike Rogers is GOP PLANT

who is "Outing Gays" to destroy Dems? :shrug: Is that what you think might be going on here?

[onenote]

81. Not necessarily. He may just be someone who likes attention

Or maybe he really believes it. But unless he can put up, he should shut up.

[KoKo]

83. Well..."Put Up or Shut Up" sounds good to me..........n/t