"It's Gary Condit's Thread"

Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share
1

"This is the theme to Gary’s thread, the opening theme to Gary’s thread . . . "

OK, the only other one I saw was in the Pit, and it seemed to be going nowhere. Got home from the Dopefest just in time to see this little train wreck of an “interview.” “Did you sleep with her?” “No!” “Did you sleep with her?” “No!” “Did you sleep with her?” “No!”

When will politicians learn that if they just shrug boyishly and say, “yep, I got caught out and I’m the world’s unluckiest adulterer,” people will FORGIVE them? I can’t think of a worse tack for him to have taken than his Richard Nixon “I am not a crook” act of last night. Now I can’t figure out what Chandra was THINKING, having an affair with this creepy, aging, lying scarecrow!

2

I lived down south long enough to pick up the attitude expounded by a Southern lady of a certain age explaining why Clinton shouldn’t tell anybody anything about Ms Lewinsky:

“A gentleman doesn’t talk about his ladies and a lady doesn’t talk about her gentlemen.”

This doesn’t reduce Condit’s creepiness, though.

3

I was just reading a transcript of the debacle, since I had no desire to watch in last night. I couldn’t make it past his 3rd declaration of being married for 34 years. ick ick ick ick

Of course, I’m not big fan of Connie Chung either… couldn’t a REAL interviewer have talked to him??

4

Now I’ll have that song going thru my head all day…:slight_smile:

5

That was some of the worst Damage Controll I have ever seen. The serial killer who did Chandra in has got to be laughing his ass off.

6

Just for you Vanilla—

This is the theme to Gary’s thread, the opening theme to Gary’s thread,
Connie called him up and asked if she could ask him questions—
It’s almost halfway finished, can you believe that weasel?
This is the theme to Gary Condit’s thread.

This is the theme to Gary’s thread, the opening theme to Gary’s thread
This is the music that you hear as you watch him sidestep.
We’re almost to the part of where he “didn’t love Chandra,”
Then we’ll post on “It’s Gary Condit’s Thread.”

[sound of Connie whistling while Gary evades questions]

This was the theme to Gary Condit’s thread!

7

I agree with the above statement, but I don’t think he’s a gentleman, judging by the whole “cheating on his wife” thingy.

I also liked the “creepy, aging, lying scarecrow” quote. It’s perfect.

8

I didn’t watch the interview because I knew it was going to be complete bullshit. When I saw Connie Chung asking, “Did you make an attempts to silence anyone?” in teaser commercials, I knew it would be a waste to watch. What’s he going to say? “Yeah, actually, I did try to suppress it as best I could. I threatened a few people, met with my damage control, blah blah blah…” :rolleyes: HE’S A POLITICIAN! He’s learned the OJ defense–deny it, no matter how suspicious things look or how guilty you are.

FWIW, I have no idea if he had anything to do with her disappearance. However, him lying his ass off about his relationship–and about trying to save his own butt–makes me want to throw rotten tomatoes at him at the next congressional meeting.

9

I wish I could find a link, but back during Clinton’s Zippergate crisis, Bill Maher did a monologue during Polically Incorrect titled “What Clinton Should Have Said”. It was hysterical, and I think it started off something like “My fellow Americans, Yes, I got h**d from Monica and let me tell you, it was fantastic”

10

Regardless of whether he was in collusion, or directly involved with the disappearance of Chandra (ain’t no way this maggot was completely uninvolved), he merely comes across as pure unadulterated, USDA ranch style, prime grade AAA, Heinz 57 Varieties of gold plated slime. This jack@ss can’t even lie convincingly. I hope someone manages to put his stones on the fire for a good grilling. If this @ssclown is somehow able to get re-elected, I’ll eat one of my twenty different hats.

11

Now that I’ve seen him close-up, I’m trying to decide what looks less convincing: his claims of innocence, or his toupee.

Believe it or not, it’s a toss-up.

12

:slight_smile: <----- charming smile. I hope your post goes somewhere, Eve. I’ll be interested to see what folks say.

13

I never knew who he was before all this, didn’t care then or now. I generally ‘disapprove’ of marital infidelity (ie, if some one asks for my opinion on the subject, I tell them I disapprove, if I know about it I tend to think less of all those conducting themselves in that manner etc, but, also generally consider it under the topic of ‘gossip’).

However, I’ve not come up with a single answer to this question:

How would Condit’s public admission of an affair lend any assistance to the search for what happened to her?

Note, this is not ‘should he tell the cops’. This is ‘why should he be forced to say it on TV?’ What earthly good would come of that? (other than the folks saying, well, now he’s ‘come clean’. So what? does this help find Ms. Levy? nope. would this hurt Condit? don’t care. Would this hurt Condit’s wife? probably. Would this help the Levy’s? can’t think of a way that it would. )

Re: the cops. When the Levy’s contacted the cops in the first place (“our daughter is missing”), they apparently believed at the time that there was a relationship between Condit and their daughter (hence the phone call to his home, the direct question Mom says she clearly remembers asking). If you believe the Levy’s are being truthful, I find it absolutely unbelieveable that they did not say anything to the cops about the possability/probability of a relationship between Condit and their daughter. For the cops to now claim that they ‘had no knowledge’ about it until Condits 3rd interview means either that the Levy’s made no such claim (something I find to be incredible) or the police are lying/stupid (lying = Levy’s told them and they’re denying it now, stupid = Levy’s told them and they didn’t believe it, or Levy’s didn’t tell them, and they didn’t notice the incredible amount of information and interest shown by this congressional figure).

I find that to be beyond believable (the cops not knowing about the relationship), certainly the amount of time and energy the cops themselves focused on Condit from day one gives credibility to the idea that they indeed believed there was a relationship.

From the evidence that has been leaked, Condit neither spoke to Levy nor saw her for at least 24 hours before her disappearance. So, unless he conspired with other people to take some action, it is very unlikely that he had anything to do with her disappearance.

I have much sympathy for the Levys. However, I have more sympathy for the thousands of other parents of other children who’s kids have disappeared, and whose cases are not given the amount of time this one has.
All that being said, I wanted to bitch slap both Condit and Connie last night. Poor job on both their parts, and I believe that Condit has seriously trashed any chance of resurecting his career. (he should have just said “Connie, the people who are investigating the disappearance have full information about the relationship. I fail to see how disclosing any further details in public will aid in her recovery. So, let’s talk about how best to find her” )

14

You mean he bought hair that looks like that? :eek:

Eve, I love your thread title and song!

15

I hope his first action upon waking up this morning was firing his image consultant, his interview coach, and anyone who had any hand in either “preparing” him for this interview or not talking him out of it.

Then I hope his second act was a call to apologize to Chandra’s parents for being an ass an all over again.

I am a social buffoon without an ounce of grace in me, but even I could have done better. In my opinion, he should have steered the conversation back to this being a “serious issue of grave concern, a young woman with a bright future seeming to have disappeared…” And then said he’d sincerely regretted not being proactively cooperative with investigators from the get-go. His excuse on that could have been “Since I had nothing to do with her disappearance, I concluded that I had nothing to offer the police. In retrospect, now I wish I’d made that first call and if I had to do it over again, I would. I had ever reason to think she’d gotten on that train for home, and no reason in the world to think she wouldn’t emerge again, on her own, in a few days after the news reported her missing, with a sheepish explanation and an apology to her parents. I so deeply regret that I was wrong in that hope.”

Granted, I am sure that would all be a big fat lie, but he should’ve invested more energy into trying to sound like someone gravely concerned about a young woman’s fate and less like an arrogant jerk trying to cover his ass.

Sadly, I think that’s his real hair.

16

eve, that was brilliant!! i almost fell out of my chair when i read that…

he does look like the scarecrow from wizard of oz dressed in a suit…

is that his real hair or not? i am absolutely baffled by it…

and i swear he is the oldest 53 year old i have ever seen. ill bet he lied about his age too.

17

He did so badly really do not understand why he gave the interview. I thoughtConnie Chung did pretty well though…

18

The thing I found odd (and creepy) was that he had obviously memorized answers to some (I thought) uncomplicated questions. Some questions that SHOULD have been no brainers to answer. “Was Chandra pregnant?” No-brainer answer SHOULD have been “I have no idea” or “I don’t know”. Not “I had no indication of that” or something equally weird and stilted. And when another interviewer from a local CA station asked him the same question, he gave the same (or simular) stilted, memorized-sounding answer. He even soundling like he faltered a bit before he said it, like he had to dredge up his memory for the correct phrase to use. Why?

Maybe it means absolutely nothing, but I swear - I found that extremely odd. And there were a few other “no brainer” answers that got strange, no-answer answers that sounded like they were carefully crafted by his lawyers and handlers. Alarm bells rang off for me. One of the “non-answers” he gave was when he was asked if he had any knowledge of how she disappeared, or something like that. I cannot remember the exact question, but it was in direct relation to her disappearance. And his answer was “We never had a cross word”. THAT’S NOT AN ANSWER!!! WHY answer like that? Why wouldn’t a simple “No!” do? Very very odd. Maybe it means absolutely nothing. I still find it hard to fully believe that he actually was involved in her disappearance. But after these interviews - I almost am starting to think he has more to hide than an embarrassing affair.

As for Connie Chung, she did better than I anticpated. She didn’t softball him. And since she was only allowed a half-hour “as live” (no editing, no follow-up questions) Condit SHOULD have had the definite advantage. But she did OK.

19

I thought Connie could come up with some more questions, she kept asking the same question over and over and over. It almost made her look incompetent. He wasn’t gonna answer, so why keep asking? Then she asked teh same question, but in a different way. Give up already.

Then I saw what Dubya said the day after, how it’s all about Chandra, he doesn’t want to hear about the gossip, etc. Hate to say it, but I agree with Dubya, he’s absolutley right. All this wasted time making him confess publicly to doing something we all know he did, and finding Chandra is what really matters.

Don’t get me wrong, Condit’s scum.

20

Sing it, Zenster!

I also believe Condit was involved somehow. Reminds me of Chappaquidick.