Strict Constructionists, Take Note

  • Thread starter Thread starter zeke12
  • Start date Start date
Sports Journalists Forum – Media, Newsroom & Reporting Talk

Help Support Sports Journalists Forum:

Zeke12 said:
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.

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.
 
Dear Larry,
You pled guilty, you knew what you were doing.
Get over it, get out and move on...
 
As an Amazon Associate we earn from qualifying purchases. Product prices and availability are accurate as of the date/time indicated and are subject to change.
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?
 

Latest posts

Back
Top