» OLD MESSAGE ARCHIVES «
The Pop Culture Information Society...
Messageboard Archive Index, In The 00s - The Pop Culture Information Society

Welcome to the archived messages from In The 00s. This archive stretches back to 1998 in some instances, and contains a nearly complete record of all the messages posted to inthe00s.com. You will also find an archive of the messages from inthe70s.com, inthe80s.com, inthe90s.com and amiright.com before they were combined to form the inthe00s.com messageboard.

If you are looking for the active messages, please click here. Otherwise, use the links below or on the right hand side of the page to navigate the archives.

Custom Search



Subject: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 02/13/08 at 8:21 pm

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080214/ap_on_go_co/craig_ethics

Did we expect they were going to say, "Never mind, Larry, everything's cool."
:D

The panel also admonished Craig for showing the arresting officer a business card that identified him as a U.S. senator. Craig has been reported to have told the officer at the time, "What do you think about that?"

I'm too sexy for my hat
too sexy for my hat
What do you think abut that?

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Reynolds1863 on 02/13/08 at 11:31 pm

The problem with Larry is that despite over whelming evidence he still chooses to be a pompous ass.  Had he done what he promised there would have been nothing much said.  It's not the gay thing that has people ticked it's the fact that he has scat for brains.  ::)

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Rice_Cube on 02/13/08 at 11:34 pm

Senator Craig was late to his ethics hearing because he had to go to the bathroom.

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Reynolds1863 on 02/13/08 at 11:52 pm


Senator Craig was late to his ethics hearing because he had to go to the bathroom.


The Ethics Committee does not bend the rules for members "sex breaks"  OOPS, innocent until proven guilty. My bad.  :)

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Rice_Cube on 02/14/08 at 12:07 am

^ Aww c'mon, he just had to have a little wee :P

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Foo Bar on 02/14/08 at 12:41 am


Senator Craig was late to his ethics hearing because he had to go to the bathroom.


No, he was late because he was still coming from the bathroom.


Did we expect they were going to say, "Never mind, Larry, everything's cool."


I kinda did.  I'm not sure what Larry was expecting, but pretty sure he was hoping for something more along the lines of "You've been a very naughty Senator."

Reminds me, I've been waiting to dig this one out of the vaults:

Q: What's the difference between Senator Craig and a $20 hooker?
A1: The hooker she's doing you a favor.
A2: You pay the hooker $20, not the other way arou--no, wait, that wasn't Craig, umm, not Haggard, the campaign manager from Florida...

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Rice_Cube on 02/14/08 at 12:42 am

Touche.

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Foo Bar on 02/14/08 at 12:59 am


Touche.


Hey, y'all set 'em up, I just knock 'em down.

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: CatwomanofV on 02/14/08 at 2:01 pm

This should be filed under A DUH!!!!!



Cat

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 02/14/08 at 7:24 pm


This should be filed under A DUH!!!!!



Cat

The big "DUH" I didn't know about was the part where Craig showed the cops his business card as if that would intimidate them.  Not terribly bright, especially when he got caught with his pants down (literally).

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Foo Bar on 02/15/08 at 12:56 am


The big "DUH" I didn't know about was the part where Craig showed the cops his business card as if that would intimidate them.  Not terribly bright, especially when he got caught with his pants down (literally).


Exactly.  That's not a bad move for someone who's got at least some reason to believe he's above the law.  Problem is, the cop didn't exactly say "Aaw shucks, I'm sorry Senator, never you mind", and the Senator failed to realize that he wasn't above the law.

The big mistake (especially if you read the hilarious transcripts of the interrogation) is in realizing that after the business card gambit failed, that he wasn't above the law.  If the answer to "Am I under arrest?" is ever "yes", the only response to any other question is "I would like to contact legal counsel", "I need to speak to my lawyer", or something similar.  Craig's clueless continuation of his attempts to bargain his way out of the situation gave the cop the opportunity to correctly apply a variation of the Reid technique to extract a valid confession.  The cop did it right, which is light-years ahead of anything Craig did that day.

That's not to say that had Craig demanded counsel that he would have gotten off (oh, come on, I'm not letting that line go by!), but he could have stalled things long enough for his backers to at least try to pull the proper strings to keep it off the front pages and resign for "personal reasons" a few months down the road.

(And people still think COPS! on FOX! isn't educational. Sure, I keep track of "suspects' mistakes" in the form of a drinking game, but that doesn't mean it's just about taking a swig of beer and yelling "FAIL!" while watching morons talk themselves into tazings, but that doesn't mean it's completely mindless entertainment.)

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Reynolds1863 on 02/15/08 at 7:39 am


The big "DUH" I didn't know about was the part where Craig showed the cops his business card as if that would intimidate them.  Not terribly bright, especially when he got caught with his pants down (literally).


That is pretty dumb.  He should have zipped up his fly, said nothing.  When he got into the police station then called an attorney.  Also if you want to be perceived as a Family Values, Conservative Republican showing your business card as your being arrested send the exact opposite message. 

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: CatwomanofV on 02/15/08 at 1:18 pm


That is pretty dumb.  He should have zipped up his fly, said nothing.  When he got into the police station then called an attorney.  Also if you want to be perceived as a Family Values, Conservative Republican showing your business card as your being arrested send the exact opposite message. 



Too bad he couldn't have been convicted for the crime of STUPIDITY!!!!




Cat

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Dagwood on 02/15/08 at 3:03 pm



Too bad he couldn't have been convicted for the crime of STUPIDITY!!!!




Cat


If that were to happen, we wouldn't have many people left in government. ;D

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Rice_Cube on 02/15/08 at 4:33 pm


If that were to happen, we wouldn't have many people left in government. ;D


I'll take the job!  I need a pay raise :D

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 02/15/08 at 7:10 pm



Too bad he couldn't have been convicted for the crime of STUPIDITY!!!!



If stupidity was a crime, I'd be serving 25 to life! 
:o


I'll take the job!  I need a pay raise :D

That's what Craig was looking for--a raise!
;)



The big mistake (especially if you read the hilarious transcripts of the interrogation) is in realizing that after the business card gambit failed, that he wasn't above the law.  If the answer to "Am I under arrest?" is ever "yes", the only response to any other question is "I would like to contact legal counsel", "I need to speak to my lawyer", or something similar.  Craig's clueless continuation of his attempts to bargain his way out of the situation gave the cop the opportunity to correctly apply a variation of the Reid technique to extract a valid confession.  The cop did it right, which is light-years ahead of anything Craig did that day.


I never regretted anything I didn't say.  Keeping your mouth shut is underrated.  Perhaps this is a good thing, but lots of criminals now in prison would be off scot-free if they'd just kept their mouths shut.  Killed the man, no credible witnesses, only circumstantial evidence, but you had to boast about it to your cellmate during trial and he cut a deal with the DA for early release, and now you're screwed!

Oh, and if you're a homophobde and you get caught soliciting an HJ in the toilet stall, don't run out in front of the cameras and go, "I'm not gay, I'm not gay, I'm not gay!" 

That's a dim bulb for ya!

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Foo Bar on 02/15/08 at 10:01 pm


I never regretted anything I didn't say.  Keeping your mouth shut is underrated.  Perhaps this is a good thing, but lots of criminals now in prison would be off scot-free if they'd just kept their mouths shut. 


For that matter, a lot of innocent people in prison would also be off scot-free if they'd kept their mouths shut.  Although the Reid technique can be used to extract a valid confession, it can also be used to extract false confessions.

Get a load of how hungrily Craig chomped onto the "honorable alternative" bait, which comes straight out of the textbook.  The cop had Craig practically begging to plead guilty to a charge, any charge, as long as the words in the charge didn't have anything to do with sex.  You'd think a politician (who's in the business of verbal/psychological manipulation) would recognize it when he sees it -- but that's why putting the subject under stress is also a key component of the interrogator's toolbox.  The cop let Craig's stress do all the work for him.  Just build a rapport with the subject, keep feeding the rope out, and when the time is ripe, give the subject the opportunity to hang himself on it.  The cop did it perfectly, and extracted a valid confession and a guilty plea.  No torture required, and no trial required either.  Win.

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: Reynolds1863 on 02/15/08 at 11:44 pm


If that were to happen, we wouldn't have many people left in government. ;D


Truly smart people don't go into government.  I'm not talking about just IQ.

Subject: Re: Senate Ethics Committee scolds Larry Craig

Written By: MaxwellSmart on 02/16/08 at 8:46 pm


but that's why putting the subject under stress is also a key component of the interrogator's toolbox.  The cop let Craig's stress do all the work for him.  Just build a rapport with the subject, keep feeding the rope out, and when the time is ripe, give the subject the opportunity to hang himself on it.  The cop did it perfectly, and extracted a valid confession and a guilty plea.  No torture required, and no trial required either.  Win.

Even bigger reason for keeping your mouth shut.  If I was charged with something, I'd only establish rapport insofar as civility is concerned.  I wouldn't spit on the floor and yell, "I ain't talkin,' pig!"  Name, rank, and serial number,* and then I'd clam up until my lawyer got there.  Of course, I don't have any money, so I'd end up with the lame-o court-appointed lawyer who'd counsel me: "Look, bud, just tell these people what they wanna know!  It's almost 2:00, gotta get down to titty bar!"
::)

*OK, that's from the war movies, but you get my gist...

Check for new replies or respond here...