I know Larry Craig is probably old news by now, and I’ve certainly beat the dead horse off…uh…too many puns… Anyway, I hadn’t given the matter any further thought, even despite my recent trip through several airports. Today, however, Barbara Ehrenreich raised a point that had not yet occurred to me:

Short of some undisclosed evidence that the 9/11 killers were closeted Wahabist gays, you may wonder, as I do, why – with the “threat level” at an ominous orange – agents of the law are being deployed to detect people of alternative sexualities. Larry Craig was apprehended by a man apparently consigned to spend his entire day on the can, watching for errant fingers. Possibly this fellow has some intestinal issues which made this a necessary posting. But, sphincter control permitting, could he not have been more usefully employed, say, interviewing passengers as to their willingness to blow themselves up to score some theological point?

How long, exactly, did this vice cop spend on that particular can, just waiting for somebody to tap their feet and do something with their fingers? How many superiors did this cop have to piss off to get this duty? And what happens if, say, he spends an entire eight-hour shift sitting in a stall…waiting…waiting…and no one taps their feet or does anything to invite attention–what kind of impact will that have on that officer’s self-esteem? I mean, eight hours and nobody wanted to give him a bathroom hummer??? That has to be hurtful on some level, be it professional or personal.

There actually is a more serious point to make here. The “threat level” does seem to still be hovering around orange, meaning that we should all be generically afraid and thank Bush for the safety we have–but given that “high” risk, can we afford to lose even a single law enforcement officer to “stall duty”? Unless, of course, the next terrorist plot is to unleash a mass public fellating in men’s rooms everywhere.

Just when I thought all the news this week was going to be dour political crap, here comes yet another not-so-shockingly pervy Republican to dominate the headlines (but, really, he’s not gay. I honestly don’t care if he is or not.)

To be clear: I feel no sympathy for this guy’s plight at all. People who make a career out of trying to control other people’s lives behind closed doors generally don’t get my sympathy. But, really, what exactly did he do that was illegal? (h/t to Volkh Conspiracy)

It’s hard to work up much sympathy for Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho). He had a perfect legislative score from traditional-values groups, a zero rating from gay civil-rights groups, supported the Federal Marriage Amendment, and refused even to commit to non-discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation in hiring for his own Senate staff. But what exactly was criminal about his conduct in that Minneapolis airport bathroom?

From the arrest report, here’s what Craig allegedly did: (1) put a duffel bag at the front of his stall; (2) peered through a crack into an adjoining stall; (3) tapped his foot; (4) moved his shoe over until it touched an officer’s; and (4) ran his fingers along the underside of the stall divider. That’s it.

Given the long history of police fabrication of evidence and entrapment of gay men in these sting operations, there should be no presumption that the officer’s version of events is correct. But assuming for the sake of argument that Craig did everything the officer alleged, how was it the basis for a criminal charge that could get him a $1,000 fine and/or ten days in jail?

I don’t get it–what exactly was the crime here? Sure it was lacking in panache (I think that word fits here), but how exactly is that a crime? If he’d run something other than his fingers along the stall divider, sure, but give me a break. The officer should have said thanks but no thanks and marveled at how effective his shoes must be at getting dudes’ attention. No harm done.

Honestly, my libertarian concerns here even seem to trump my Schadenfreude over the poor Senator.

Anyway, thanks for taking my mind off things for a bit.

UPDATE – Lawyers, Guns & Money has some good commentary & links.

UPDATE II – From Whiskey Fire, sweet, sweet hypocrisy. And insanity.

I’m fascinated by politics. I’m fascinated (flummoxed?) by hotties. I don’t think, however, that hotties in politics is the most pressing issue of the day. I guess Chris Matthews doesn’t think he has anything better to do.