Can he unframe himself? He could have if he'd thought quickly enough: I wasn't tapping my foot at you, I was shaking a cramp out of my leg; I wasn't tapping my foot at you, I was taking my mind off my constipation; I wasn't tapping my foot at you, I was trying to get my pants on.

The problem is, he admitted he tapped his foot, and that he placed his foot under the cubicle to touch the officer's foot. So that pretty much wrecks that particular reframe.

I think he's going to have to reframe his whole life if he's to resurrect any sense of self-respect or public respect. The man is either gay or bisexual and what he could do is to admit that, admit that the reason he resorted to toilet sex is that he, like most non-heterosexual people have been intimidated into repression of their identity and into unhealthy sexual expression, and begin to lobby and fight for decent treatment for that significant section of our society.

Honesty and integrity - now that's a hell of a reframe.

Christine,

I love the one about taking his mind off his constipation. Now we just have to explain away (aka reframe) the hand gestures that followed. LOL

Yes, honesty and integrity - what a political reframe.

There is a lot he could have done. Now, as I predicted, it cost him all he had worked for. And in the end, all it would have taken is some humility along with sincerity and honesty.

The problem is, he admitted he tapped his foot, and that he placed his foot under the cubicle to touch the officer's foot. So that pretty much wrecks that particular reframe.

I think he's going to have to reframe his whole life if he's to resurrect any sense of self-respect or public respect. The man is either gay or bisexual and what he could do is to admit that, admit that the reason he resorted to toilet sex is that he, like most non-heterosexual people have been intimidated into repression of their identity and into unhealthy sexual expression, and begin to lobby and fight for decent treatment for that significant section of our society.

Honesty and integrity - now that's a hell of a reframe.

... So I do hold that it is possible for a person to actually "confess" or admit "guilt" to something they did not do. There is enough case law in this country that would allow us all to agree to that statement.

Great article in so many other ways and the overall premise is sound. The bottom line is if your actions don't match up with your behavior don't match up with your words...then tag you’re incongruent.

Great points Rodney. Thanks for bringing that up.

Hi Kenrick,

I agree with your take on LC's misteps 100%.

Right now, he should do damage control and change people's focus-- get them to focus on what's more important to them as it relates to his office/position. That is, he needs to minimize the damage his stupidity has created and change the focus to all the good things(?) he's done so far for the people of his state, and even more importantly what he can DO for them in the future. I don't know the details of his situation, but I believe this is quite doable.

What do you think? How would you frame it? Heck, I believe he'd better hire you to help him get out of this mess!

Warmly,
Jack

Jack - unfortunately, his efforts now may be too little, too late. If he wanted to make some headway, he should begin talking about who he is, not who or what he isn't. You are right on in your assessment.

I saw a representative from Idaho say that "he underestimated the people of Idaho. They don't care about his orientation, they care to hear the truth." She is absolutely correct.

His problem is that once he stood against "immorality" and for "family values", then signaled for a sex with the now infamous foot taps, he painted himself into a corner. If he admits he made a mistake, he admits he does not have the morals he said he had. If he doesn't admit a mistake, everyone sees he is lying. He's damned if he does and damned if he doesn't.

I believe we'll see a resignation soon or at least he'll be completely discredited and lose all positions he holds now. He will be gone soon.

The question is... was a hand job (or whatever he was going for) worth his career?

"He doth protest too much"!!
The politician from Idaho needs a coach. I thought it was pretty clear he was trying mislead anyone who would listen.
My other thought was, if he is not "gay" why did he need to say it twice-with such emphasis?

"I'm going to say it again - I did not have sexual relations with that woman."

Will their BS ever stop?

I'm so fascinated by the foot signals... one tap for a coupling, two for a blow job, three, the British are coming...wow... And his explosive denials of gayness...that ought to make him the Grand Mizmo in the Gay Pride Banner Day Parade.......what a wonderful world, indeed.. (come out, come out, wherever you are!) xxx Julie

Ha Ha - I found the foot tapping to be really funny too, Julie. And I love your take on it. .

Maybe there will be a resurgence of Amature Radio operators learning Morse Code to communicate more adventurous requests. LOL

I agree with your take on LC's misteps 100%.

Right now, he should do damage control and change people's focus-- get them to focus on what's more important to them as it relates to his office/position. That is, he needs to minimize the damage his stupidity has created and change the focus to all the good things(?) he's done so far for the people of his state, and even more importantly what he can DO for them in the future. I don't know the details of his situation, but I believe this is quite doable.

What do you think? How would you frame it? Heck, I believe he'd better hire you to help him get out of this mess!

Warmly,
Jack

1. An innocent man doesn’t plead guilty. An innocent man puts up a huge fight, doesn’t get any sleep, rages about his innocence. (This is not to say that guilty people don’t also use this same tactic.)

It immediately brought to mind the infamous "Central Park Jogger" case and the "confessions" of the young men originally tried and convicted of the crime. They originally "confessed" to the brutal crime committed on Tricia Meili.

Well it was later found that the "confessions" were not true and that another person entirely was guilty of the crime. DNA and other evidence later proved that to be absolutely true.

Now those original young men had been out that night doing things they should not have been doing so they were guilty in some respect just not of that crime.

So I do hold that it is possible for a person to actually "confess" or admit "guilt" to something they did not do. There is enough case law in this country that would allow us all to agree to that statement.

Great article in so many other ways and the overall premise is sound. The bottom line is if your actions don't match up with your behavior don't match up with your words...then tag you’re incongruent.