Strict Constructionists, Take Note

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2007/10/craig_to_argue_foottapping_a_constitutional_right.php

Larry Craig's lawyers to argue that wide stances, foot tapping and hand gestures are constitutionally protected by the first amendment. And the ACLU agrees. True bi-partisanship.

You'll also note that his lawyers are preparing oral arguments.

 

Strange bedfellows, so to speak.

 

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=119423&title=headlines-larry-craigs-matt

Larry, no one is stupid enough to buy this argument.

 

The grossest part of that interview was Mrs. Craig saying she knew that the descriptions of an area only she knew were wrong on three counts. I totally understand why Matt Lauer didn't go for the follow-up on that one. It would have been the most uncomfortable discussion about private parts since Michael Jackson's complaint about the police taking pictures of his penis.

 

Ba-dum-bum.

 

Dear Larry,
You pled guilty, you knew what you were doing.
Get over it, get out and move on...

 

I believe Craig is hoping that there is a more lenient penal code in Minnesota.

 

How the hell do you have a "wide stance" if your pants are around your ankles, or knees, or pulled down? Isn't that a physical impossibility? I mean, how the hell does this argument pass muster, even in his mind?

 

Jon Stewart scores again. So much for damage control, Senator.......

 

These are the people we keep electing. The best and the brightest, indeed.