Reverend Haggard's in trouble.
Having been caught with his hand, and God knows what else, in the proverbial cookie jar (he's admitted to "some" of the allegations), he has retreated to the last resort of a scoundrel or bottomed-out alcoholic, total denial:
'Late Wednesday, Haggard told KUSA-TV: "I've never had a gay relationship with anybody, and I'm steady with my wife, I'm faithful to my wife."'
Which is, technically, true. He HAS never had a "gay relationship" with anybody. What he had were blowjobs and butt-f*cking with a rent boy.
And since he's probably never gotten blowjobs from nor butt-f*cked Mrs. Haggard, then he probably thinks he didn't, actually, have sex with that rent-boy, either.
Just like President Clinton didn't have "sex" with Monica Lewinsky! (because BJ's don't count!)
All that's missing is the cum-stained dress. Maybe somebody will turn up with a pair of cum-stained assless chaps, instead! That would be highly entertaining on the evening news!!!
So, this is where we've arrived in America.
I certainly understand now what I've always intuitively suspected... that 100's of thousands of the bible-thumping loudmouths who ranted and raved against the evil homosexuals were, themselves, hanging around drunk in adult bookstores on Saturday nights looking to get their rocks off in whatever mustachioed orifice that appeared on the other side of the glory hole.
Which is why, to this day, they claim that it's a matter of choice.
Yeah. In their cases. They oughta know because it's something they choose every single day.
Whereas people like me, who've never harbored a heterosexual thought in our lives, are left out to dry (in Republican parlance, "collateral damage"), rightless, nationless, disenfranchised outsiders who've been made to feel like freaks our entire lives by a theocracy posing as a self-righteous democracy.
I remember, way back in the 90's, being upset by, and suspicious of the motives of, ACT-UP, and their tactic of outing people. I really thought that public people were entitled to their private lives. I even defended that view, much to my shame now, in a Compuserve forum where I wound up offending someone whom I now love dearly, while thinking I was defending someone who turned out to be a self-serving louse.
Thank God I now know.
Anyway, my feelings have changed 180 degrees on the subject. I now feel that if anyone puts themselves into a position whereby they are publicly critical of someone else's life in any way, shape or form, they'd better be damned sure that their house is utterly spotless first.
All the politeness is now removed from politics. All that's left are the "ics."