What are you waiting for? Click ‘em and start makin’ me some money!

But hey, if you choose to bring about legislation that restricts a communities’ rights depending on their sexual preference (which the Senator has had a voting record of), then you should fully expect your sexual preference to be in the spotlight if it’s not of the kind that you espouse.

Just like a certain Malaysian politician that is now speaking against the sowing of racial hatred to gain political support when he’s pretty well-known for wanting to bathe a keris in the blood of a certain race. Sure, I thought he was a racist before, but now I’m enraged because he’s now also a blatant hypocrite.

BTW, I don’t quite understand which gay individuals should be at fault for this kerfuffle. None of the reports of his previous kiss-and-tells were taken seriously by the media, and it took a political newspaper (with no LGBT agenda) for this issue to come to light.

That is true, Andrew. I’d thought he was just another senator toeing the Republican hard line against gay rights.

I think schadenfreude is behind the publicity of falls of men like Senator Craig and Ted Haggard. People who work to build the hate machines elicit little pity when their own machine consumes them.

There’s just something about seeing the “morally high-minded” eat their own without a glimmer of remorse or contemplation that seems to prove all our assumptions.

It also may not be fair to assume that Senator Craig is a good senator because of a long political record. In American politics, longevity does not always equate quality.

Your comments on America’s fascination with homosexual sex lives make me think of a weird Today show segment where Matt Lauer is interviewing John Cusack about the movie “Must Love Dogs.” (There’s a link on this page: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/8645142).

Lauer starts the interview with “How hot is Diane Lane?” and then proceeds to suggest every man would jump at the chance to star with her in a romantic comedy.

Cusack mentions a) that Lane is married and he wants not to offend her husband and b) that certain men might not jump at that chance. Lauer asks “Weird men?” Cusack then says something like “Some men don’t swing that way.”

In this case, I think Lauer’s rampantly hetrosexually-oriented interview is not only boorish and alienating to much of his morning show’s primarily female audience, but it also shows the other underlying problem of America’s public ideas on sexuality: a complete assumption of homogeneous national sexual identity despite ample evidence otherwise.

Schadenfreude indeed.