Video: Larry Craig – “I’m not gay!”

He may not be, but one thing for sure is, he’s resigning. I did learn more than I ever wanted to know this week about cryptic bathroom stall signals. Worthless knowledge filling our brains.

I wonder if he’ll restate his sexuality tomorrow from the floor of the Senate. He could be a real hero for Gay rights if he didn’t hate himself for being Gay.

Being gay is not the problem. Soliciting sex from a stranger in a mens room is the problem.

I’m gonna play the devil’s advocate and suggest that he might be bisexual.

He’s not gay! Just the guys he has sex with are.

Gay sexual behavior just makes it worse in a ‘relative way’.
Here we have one of the leaders of our country, a person that should behave as an example to our society, apparently indulging in random sexual encounters in inappropriate places.
It’s the same as those politicians that prattle away about family values, yet engage in sex with women other than their wife (hookers / lovers / staff). Or political voices that cover their microphones in spittle roaring away about family values, yet they themselves have been married multiple times.

Geez, why don’t you say what you really think Mr. M.?

Mister Mustard. You hit it right. The guy is a scum bag and I’m glad he’s gone. Hope more follow. He would have been better off if he just left a young girl to drown after a drunken party.

I didn’t get the whole story here – not being in the US – is the bumping of the feet along with the hand under the stall a signal for sex?

I read the transcript and it seems that LC didn’t ask for anything…so gestures can get you arrested now?

So if I sit down on a toilet and someone bumps my feet and say I give the other guy the finger from under the stall I can get arrested? Is this how it works?

I can understand engaging someone in a dialogue about sex but from the transcript there seems to be something I am missing so please let me know.

Cheers

#17,
Think about it. Has it ever occurred to you to actually nudge someone’s foot and then reach under a stall??? It wouldn’t be the first thing a straight American guy would think to do.

Even if you nudged someone’s foot, the first thing you’d do is say, “Excuse me” then rapidly remove your foot, quickly finish up and leave. You wouldn’t reach under the stall!

I think these gay social conservative republicans just get aroused from the risk of exposure, the high from risking it all.

I’d like to take a quick survey of the guys here:

Have you ever, even once in your life :

1) Stared through the crack in the door for a minute or two, to see if the stall was in use.
2) Accidentally touched your foot with the guy in the next stall?
3) Ever picked up a piece of toilet paper that was on the floor?

These were the action that Craig claimed the cop misinterpreted.

1) Nope. Takes literally milliseconds, as you walk by, to detect the presence of someone in a stall and to move on.

2) Nope. Maybe I’m just not a ‘wide stance’ kinda guy…

3) Nope. They have janitors to do that. Wipe oneself with something that’s hit a public restroom floor? No thanx.

Most men tend to avoid picking a urinal / stall adjacent to an occupied one anyway…

As far as is it reasonable to think other do these t’ings;

Done one of those things? I’m sure many have.

Two of those things – on the same occasion? Mebbe, mebbe not, but my money’s on mostly ‘not’.

All three – on the same occasion? Pfffft.

“Misinterpreted” Ya. In a restroom already notorious for gay hookups. Of course. An honest mistake. Officer, he had no idea.

Oh, brother…

Greg Allen

“…I think sex in public bathrooms is more than “naughty”… I think it should be illegal. …young children… should not have to encounter anything sexual.”

And therein lies the rub. You believe sex is something to be hidden from tender minds. I would argue I’d rather a child witness a sex act than a murder. Children are exposed to violence in the American diet of TV and games. What’s the issue with a kid seeing a blow job in the stall? The child might ask “What’s that, Dad?” Or he might emulate it with a schoolmate. Was anyone killed? Not unless some homophobic freak stabs the children with a crucifix.

Perhaps Larry Craig is a self loathing individual seeking further humiliation for his choice of sex partner… but in a world where sex isn’t dirty and being gay not a “sin”, the worst the guy is guilty of is an odd location for a liaison

As a friend once opined: “What’s more obscene: a bare breast or a sucking chest wound?”

And in the words of Frank Zappa-:”What’s the ugliest party of your body? Some say your toes, some say your nose… I think it’s your mind.”

>>3) Ever picked up a piece of toilet paper that was on the floor?

Ah, but THERE WAS NO PIECE OF TOILET PAPER ON THE FLOOR. The “honorable” Senator was making some kind of kitchie-kitchie-koo motion under the stall partition that was meant to indicate that if his neighbor had a boner that needed servicing, he was his man.

And as to the “wide stance”, HAW HAW HAW. Unless the “honorable” Senator weights 1400 pounds, there’s just no way he was so “wide” as not to be able to keep his feet in his own stall. I’ve been in the bathrooms at the MSP airport, and I never had any trouble keeping my feet in my own stall. In fact, you’d have to be a gymnast to get a loafer in each of the adjoining stalls.

Buh-bye, Larry. I hope you get an HIV test before you have sex with your wife again.

Re: #25 & #28

I’m a liberal but I think what BobH says is totally off-base. I’m pretty sure the vast majority of liberals feel the same way.

Yes… OF COURSE… I’d rather my 7 year old son see a blow job than a murder, but both are damaging and he should be subject to neither.

Sex acts in public rest rooms are appropriately illegal. It is just wrong if my wife sends our child into a rest room and he has to risk seeing extremely inappropriate sexual behavior by a bunch of Republicans.

#24…BobH….Ted Kennedy should at the least been charged with criminal negligence. That girl died because of his behavior and lack of balls, nothing more.
As to your theory that blow job trauma is acceptable to a child….I think you need long and intensive therapy yourself.

Neither party has a lock on pervs in the ranks, we are going through a Republican storm at the moment, but it will change again, it always does.
Craig is supposed to resign on Saturday, so he should find God and forgiveness by Weds at the latest.

I certainly do enjoying lobbing red meat to lions; but damn, I wish we could chuck in a few Christians just for splatter sport.

Lauren the Ghoti —

“pair-bonded, affectionate couple engaging in conventional sexual activity”

70% of whom will end up in divorce and fellating the next fellow who comes. BTW, love that PC “pair bonded” BS. Code for “NOT QUEER”.

Greg Allen —

“inappropriate sexual behavior”

If it was inappropriate, you wouldn’t ask your wife to do it. And if you don’t ask you wife to do it, you should. Sword swallowing has been acceptable since the first cave coupled figured out it was fun. Note: I don’t differentiate between heterosexual or homosexual spelunkers.

Rape and child molestation are and should be against the law. More importantly, those specific statutes should be enforced. The rest of the “moral” code is religious prejudice and has no place in the world today.

“sanity and common sense”

Give me a break. You’re spouting Christian claptrap. Just because you believe it does not make it real.

joshua

“That girl died because of his behavior and lack of balls, nothing more.”

You do NOT know the facts; however you are welcome to your belief pending release of the accurate information. Suffice to say I agree with you on one point: a girl died.

“blow job trauma is acceptable to a child….I think you need long and intensive therapy yourself.”

Thank You for your diagnosis. Alas, I’m dismayed to discover you find a blow job traumatic. Something you’d like to share?

#25, Bob,

I agree. Well made argument.

#28, Lauren,

“What’s the issue with a kid seeing a blow job in the stall?”

How about because exposure to dysfunctional sexual behavior in childhood can permanently imprint dysfunctional associations?

If you don’t think 98% of kids that understand what a BJ have not also seen one performed via the internet, you are truly missing something. If merely witnessing a BJ will permanently imprint a person’s sexuality, then there is a whole mess of screwed up people out there.

Do I really want my eight yr old daughter to watch a couple of old gays blowing each other? Of course not. She will discover it happens from the school yard. She will be exposed to sex accidentally via email. The only way to prevent it is to put her in a convent.

#31, joshua,

As to your theory that blow job trauma is acceptable to a child….I think you need long and intensive therapy yourself.

Are you speaking from personal experience? Didn’t you once claim to have a healthy sexual attitude?

Neither party has a lock on pervs in the ranks, we are going through a Republican storm at the moment, but it will change again, it always does.

The difference is the Republicans go to such lengths to decry such behavior while Democrats accept people different than them.

A short while ago you claimed in one of your posts that Democrats were worse than Republicans when it came to corruption. I’m glad you are changing your tune.

wow, it makes me some sort of Christian prude because I would like to be able to use a public mens room without encountering people having sex?

geez, and here I thought I was teetering between atheism and agnosticism.

And for the record, given the choice of witnessing that or a murder, I would prefer to witness Closeted Republican Fun-Time. Fortunately, that is a false choice – murder should not be happening at all, and neither should be happening in public.

Get a room.

#39. As it was said in ‘The Onion’ – I don’t know what the Republicans are so damn mad about, its not like Sen Craig was trying to MARRY the guy.

#41, doug,

And for the record, given the choice of witnessing that or a murder, … (snip) … neither should be happening in public.

Very true and I agree. Yet so many people are pretending that there was some “hanky panky” going on in that washroom. There wasn’t. There was a touching of feet and a hand under the stall wall that the cop somehow found to be a sexual solicitation. There was no reported sex.

If there are two guys going at it in a public washroom, then by all means bust them. Please, however, don’t confuse what Craig is accused of with there being actual sex. In no way can any of that be considered lewd behavior.

#42. You don’t have to peek to know that two people are having sex in a stall. Plus, what if you have to USE the stall, eh? It is the height of discourtesy to others in addition to being something that people going about their ordinary business should not have to encounter.

Get a room.

#43. Oh, yeah – Craig wasn’t actually having sex, but Bob suggests that would have been no problem at all. That’s what I was addressing.

Frankly, I am used to hypocritical politicians – to paraphrase Captain Willard, “Calling politicians hypocrites is like handing out speeding tickets at the Indy 500″ – but this takes it to the next level.

The funniest part of this whole episode is how shocked, SHOCKED the cop was that a United States Senator would be LYING to him. “People vote for you!”

I didn’t know they let 6-year-olds onto the force in Minneapolis.

Doug

“Plus, what if you have to USE the stall, eh?”

“Try the next door or wait till they finish. That said, if you must enter, keep in mind three’s a crowd. You might consider adding colorful, blow-by-blow commentary.

#5 – hhopper,

Why is that a problem? No one is alleging rape. No one was under age. If it was his wife in a stall would it matter? It’s just sex people. Get over it. I always like it when hypocritical republicans resign.

However, this case should not be a case at all. If a crime was committed, then it is the law that is in error. Some people like sex in bathroom stalls. I do not understand that. However, it’s none of my damn business.

Of course, being a bigot and a hypocrite, a lying hypocrite at that, is a good reason to get someone out of office. However, none of this should ever have seen the light of day.

If there’s no victim, there’s no crime. Someone show me a victim.

OK, the guy is actually a hypocrite and a liar. I’ll stop defending the bastard now.

#9 – Anonymous Coward,

The quote from the T-Shirts is “I’m not gay, but my penis is.” So, perhaps only his penis is gay.

#21 – Greg Allen,

1) Doesn’t take more than a second, let alone a minute or two.
2) No.
3) No.

And, I’m not even homophobic.

#25 – BobH,

Very well said, thanks.

#28 – Lauren,

But to think that witnessing mentally unhealthy strangers compulsively engaging in deviant sexual behavior in a public place doesn’t place a prepubescent child at high risk of major psychological trauma is beyond idiotic, it’s borderline criminal.

What part was compulsive, deviant, or mentally unhealthy?

All commenters on teh #25 thread:

And, where did anyone say that a child witnessed any of this? If the stall door is closed, it’s private. If not, we need better public rest rooms. OK, actually, we do need better public rest rooms.

Does anyone here think it makes a difference whether this is gay or straight? Stranger or wife? I certainly hope not. As long as it was consensual with no one under age and the stall doors closed, it’s just one of many odd fetishes to like sex in a rest room stall. No one gets hurt. There is no victim. There is no crime.

Too bad we don’t have any politicians, especially on the right, that would stand up and say, “Yup. I just like same sex sex in the rest room. That should be everyone’s right.” Of course, this whack job is publicly against such behavior when he’s not engaging in it, so I’ve got little sympathy.

#50 – hhopper,

Would you be more specific about the problem? Are they making a mess? Are they not using stalls? Not closing doors? Not being quiet?

What do you propose the solution is? Outlaw homosexuality? Outlaw promiscuity?

Who are the victims of this problem?

>>Does anyone here think it makes a difference whether this is
>>gay or straight?

Only to the extent that the “honorable” Senator has spent his life trying to criminalize, marginalize, and culturally exterminate gays in the name of his hallowed “Family Values”. All the while, he’s cruising gay pickup spots looking to suck some anonymous dick.

I don’t think that sort of shit should be a crime at all (unless it involves children); I would have been satisfied with a YouTube video “outing” the hypocritical lying sack of shit as he took a load of hot cum on his face. No charges necessary; just replay the video for his holy-roller constituents and let them decide. If it had been Barney Frank who was caught, I’d say who cares? But a homophobic “Family Values” champion from the right wing? Now THAT is news!

The restrooms I referred to were in local city and county parks. There were many gay guys meeting there. After a number of busts, they decided to close them. That sort of sucked for the public (no pun intended.)

Damn Scott, you’re trying to get me into a major debate here! OK, I think the problem is a bunch of perverts hanging around in restrooms and the stupid city and county commissioners close them instead of facing the problem.

#57 hhopper – And the reason these city and county commissioners are powerless to do anything about this is echoed on this thread. “How dare you tell me I can’t suck another man’s dick in a public restroom! If you don’t want to see this then you and your kid can look the other way. You must be a bigot and you are taking away my rights! Hello, is this the ACLU?” A much better solution is to simply close the facilities then to face that.

#44, MM,

No, there was solicitation of hanky-panky. When the cops bust some guy for soliciting prostitution, they don’t wait until he actually hides the salami. In a known gay cruising spot, I think playing footsies, prolonged peekie-boo into the guy’s stall, and making the secret hand motions underneath the stall partitions qualifies.

Bullshit. I’m a traveler. I don’t know that is a “gay hot spot”. I also have no idea what “gay solicitation signs” are. NO effen idea other then a “Hey, ya wanna blow me”.

If you want to suggest that some of these possible innocent actions are “gay solicitation” then fine. But until Craig or some other person actually asks for a sexual favor or makes some comment about money then there has been no solicitation. This is a bullshit charge where the vast majority would plead guilty just to make it go away because the public knowledge would ruin him. As happened with Craig.

Do you want some cop deciding some innocent action you just made is a covert invitation to commit a sex crime? How are you going to fight it? You let this stand then next time it will be some kid being arrested because a high five is the new gang banger sign.

Greg Allen

“The inappropriate sexual behavior, IMHO, is sex in a public place.”

You’ve led a sheltered life. Add some spice: try “under the boardwalk”… or did you think they were singing about another matter? That’s odd, the rest of us understood the lyric so well it made the top 10 in 1964.

>>Bullshit. I’m a traveler. I don’t know that is a “gay hot spot”.

Well, I guess you’re not a GAY traveler, then. Those kind of places are well known. They even have “cruising” web sites that tell gay travelers, so inclined, where to go in various cities to engage in public anonymous sexual activities.

>>If you want to suggest that some of these possible innocent
>>actions are “gay solicitation” then fine.

Any one of those actions COULD HAVE BEEN construed as innocent in isolation. But all three, done in a predetermined order, in a well-known gay cruising spot, but a guy who has been suspected of being a closet homo for 20 years?? Come on! Do you have any interest in making a down payment on the Brooklyn Bridge??

>>This is a bullshit charge where the vast majority would
>>plead guilty just to make it go away

Your approach to the criminal justice system must differ from mine, then. If I had been cited in the “honorable” Senator’s “shoes”, I would have pled not guilty with all my might. I don’t cruise for sex, gay or otherwise, in public facilities. If anyone tried to arrest me for doing otherwise, I would use every legal means at my disposal to beat the charge. And I CERTAINLY would not resign my job. Of course, I would be innocent. It’s unlikely that the same thing can be said about the “honorable” Senator.

As I say, I don’t think this sort of thing should be a crime in the first place. Gay, straight, three-way; whatever goes on in somebody else’s crapper stall is not my business. I’m not going to shed any tears over the outing of a lifelong hypocritical hatemonger though. What’s good for the goose is good for the gander, and if he wants to spend his career crucifying gays and calling Bill Clinton a “naughty boy” for his sexual indiscretions, he’ s got to expect that his own gay shenannigans and sexual indiscretions may come back and bite him.

That “wide stance” nonsense is right up there with “heckuva job, Brownie” and “I don’t recall, I can’t recall, Senator at this time I can’t recall that” as fodder for late-night comedians. “Wide stance”?? HAW HAW HAW!

#65, MM

Please stop !!! You are being a total armpit.

Change the name and situation. Now Bush decided that upon his suspicion Joe Blow is a terrorist. Sheet, Blow hangs out with other possible terrorists. He flies on airplanes, a known terrorist tool. Blow also has carried around a brown liquid in a container, ostentatiously sipping from it occasionally. Someone with a very similar name is on the terrorist watch list. Yup, Joe Blow meets the criterion to be a terrorist, arrest him.

Now lets put some facts to this scenerio. Joe Blow is four. Half the kids in his daycare have ADD. His parents have taken him to Disney World and to visit Gramma and Grampa a few states over. His mother gives him apple juice and sometimes chocolate milk in a sippy cup.

BUT JOE BLOW MEETS FOUR CRITERIA !!! Should he be arrested and be charged with being a terrorist?

Short form response. Long form to follow – after I go get a large coffee.

To the sensible, rational people here – ON THIS ISSUE, OK? – Thank you, in chrono order;

Hop, Mustard, Awake, Greg Allen, joshua, doug. And KevinL for #59.

Thanx 4 the grinz + a year’s supply of smilies to Rob Nee, Anon Cow & NappyHeadedHo.

Brickbats and raspberries to pathetically misguided extremist-liberal-party-line PC excusemakers Fusion and M. Scott. Since you’re standing behind BobH and his militant-homo PC rhetoric, as I proceed to address his line of horseshit, feel free to consider yourselves included…

But first, an infusion of various alkaloids and sucrose in aqueous suspension, then let’s put BobH’s lame-ass so-called “arguments” to a well-deserved death.

Bad news, Fusion. I hate to have to be the one to break this to you – maybe you should take a deep breath and sit down.

Orenthal James Simpson murdered Nicole Brown Simpson and Ronald Goldman. A jury rendered a verdict of ‘not guilty.’ That does not mean that reality retroactively changed to align with what a panel of gullible dupes and black racists declared.

If you can actually entertain the thought that there is the faintest, slightest, most remote chance in Hell than anybody other than OJ murdered those people, you really need to go take a seat over there, with your fellow credulous fools – the 9/11 conspiratists, the IDers, the religious fundies, the AIDS deniers, the Flat Earthers…

Lauren the Ghoti

“death” to opinion is your objective.
I believe sex is a natural act.

And you think I’m over the top?

I welcome you to blather on with spittle and foam flowing from your face; however as your mental effluent reeks of the expired version of your namesake, this post will be my last word on the subject.

Larry Craig: “I’m not gay but my d*ck is.”

>>As I posted above, some reporter wrote it.

No, the POLICE WROTE IT. What part of “in the police report” don’t you understand?? Maybe if you took the time to read the police report (http://tinyurl.com/2ezr89), you would realize that this is what the undercover police officer reported that Craig said to him IN THE FUCKING BATHROOM, not during the post-arrest interrogation. But hey, why let the facts get in the way. If you repeat “a reporter made it up”, maybe some people will be foolish enough to believe you.

>>Sheet !!! What about YOUR rumored gayness?

Guess what, Pumpkin, there are no rumors of my gayness. In large part, perhaps, because I’m not gay. And if I WERE gay, there would be no need for rumors, because I would admit it. Unlike Larry Craig, I am proud of, and comfortable with, my sexual orientation.

And do you know why that is, Fuserino? Because I’m not a hatemongering, lying, hypocritical sack of shit, who bashes gays in public (and in the legislature) and sucks hard dick in private.

#62 – Mr. Fusion,

I agree wholeheartedly.

#65 – MM,

Um … innocent until PROVEN guilty, no?

#68 – MM,

Unfortunately, and remember, I despise the views of this particular shithead, it’s not about what I believe. It’s about what gets proven beyond a reasonable doubt in court. Also, please ask yourself if you think this situation would be playing out the same way if it had been straight sex.

#70 – Mr. Fusion,

You know as well as I that just being charged will kill any politician’s hope of continuing their career.

I mostly agree with your posts on this thread. However, let’s not forget about special cases like Marion “bitch set me up” Barry or David “I forgot about the New York taxes” Dinkins.

#72 – MM,

It’s the HYPOCRISY that rankles. Barney Frank takes it up the ass all the time, and nobody’s calling for HIS resignation; he is re-elected every term by a handy majority. The difference is that he admit’s he is gay, and doesn’t take every opportunity to marginalize, criminalize, and extinguish gays in society.

Here Here!! But, we must remember about the little thing called proof. I’d love to see the scumbag go, but don’t like the idea of doing so over something unproven.

Lauren and Mustard,

I really think the OJ case is a little off track here. One is a case about sex. The other is a double homicide. One is illegal for no good reason. The other is illegal for very good reason. One is obviously and almost objectively immoral. The other is a normal biological act.

The crime, if there is one in this whole thing, is the attempt to legislate away homosexuality. Perhaps that is what Craig should be charged with. Perhaps he should be charged with the crime of unreasonable intrusion into people’s personal lives or with failing to honor his oath to upload the constitution regarding a person’s right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. These are things that can be verified and actually should be criminal.

>>Also, please ask yourself if you think this situation would be playing
>>out the same way if it had been straight sex.

No, probably not. But very few politicians spend their entire career trying to implement a constitutional ban against heterosexual marriage, voting against a bill to make hate crimes against heterosexuals illegal, or denying their own sexual orientation. Although if Craig had his way, it would have “played out the same way” with Bill Clinton, even though he never did anything illegal with Monica (unless that cigar was illegally imported from Cuba).

As I say, it’s the hypocrisy. If you want to suck dick, fine; just don’t spend your life and political career railing against the immorality of sucking dick.

>>I don’t care whether someone engages in gay sex on the sly.

I don’t care if they do either. As I said, it’s the hypocrisy of the neocon “family values” assholes that I object to.

Other than that, I agree with you.

Good riddance, Larry. I hope you can get “the cure”, like Ted Haggard.

#77, MM

Guess what, Pumpkin, there are no rumors of my gayness.

That post was directed at Lauren the Ghoti, not you. The statement about his “gayness” was exactly as it reads. A point. I neither know nor care about Lauren’s sexual orientation, that is his and his alone business. Although as I say that, I have no reason to question or claim to know one way or the other but I do reserve the right to think I do whenever he pisses me off.

However, now that your rabid homophobia is out in the open, your vehement denial, your love of god and fellow man, your pseudomasculine moniker, …

Anyone up on how Pastor Ted is getting along?

>>As I posted above, some reporter wrote it.

>>Now read that carefully. Craig didn’t say it. THE COP SAID IT.

Gee, Fuster, you’re even more confused than Craig. I hope you at least know to call a lawyer if you’re arrested!

>However, now that your rabid homophobia is out in the open

Heh heh heh. Good one. I guess you have as much trouble reading and understanding posts on this blog as you do police reports.

>>And the jury in his trial agrees with my position.

Only one of the trials, Pumpkin. In the other one, the jury unanimously declared that Simpson was guilty of killing his wife and her “friend”, and ordered him to pay $8,500,000.00 in compensatory damages, and later to pay $25,000,000.00 in punitive damages to the families of his wife and “friend”. I guess they didn’t buy the “if it doesn’t fit, you must acquit” defense theory.

In any case, WIde Stance admitted his guilt, thinking the conviction could be swept under the rug. Bad choice, Lar. Just like trying to go for a quick gay blow job between flights, after spending a life bashing gays and their lifestyle.

BobH wrote >> You’ve led a sheltered life. Add some spice: try “under the boardwalk”… or did you think they were singing about another matter? That’s odd, the rest of us understood the lyric so well it made the top 10 in 1964.

I guess I did think that song was more about making-out than actual sex but I haven’t really given it much thought. I did a quick check of the lyrics and it does say “on a blanket… falling in love” rather than “under a blanket making love.”

Sheltered or not … I strongly believe that a 7 year old boy should not have to see Republicans giving each other blow jobs when he has to use the bathroom.

I take if from your posts that you’ve probably had a blow job or two in a men’s room. So, I have to ask.. .why in a public place? Why not “get a room” as someone else here suggested? Or at least a very out-of-the way place?

I, personally, find anonymous sex unappealing but I don’t think it should be illegal or anything like that.

But why do you support doing it where children (or me, for that matter) can run into it and distress them?

#89 – Greg Allen,

Sheltered or not … I strongly believe that a 7 year old boy should not have to see Republicans giving each other blow jobs when he has to use the bathroom.

That could be corrected with real walls and doors for our stalls, like the civilized world has.

Personally, I would have shortened your sentence though. I’d have left it as:

I strongly believe that a 7 year old boy should not have to see Republicans.

They’re just sooooo repulsive!! I couldn’t resist. Actually, I think that among the constituency, many are just horribly misguided. Among the actual politicians though, they have long since thrown away any semblance of the old Republican ideals. I’m not really for those ideals either. But, they were never as repugnant as the current Republican platform. Back then, they just wanted small government and unbridled capitalism so that the rich could get richer at the expense of the poor. They still like that, but have added much that is even worse.