Does Ken Cuccinelli go down on his wife?

Republican hypocrisy on sex is so tiring. I’d written yesterday about Republican gubernatorial candidate in Virginia, Ken Cuccinelli, and his ongoing effort to make it a felony for adults, straight and gay, married and single, to give or receive oral sex in the privacy of their own bedroom.

Today we’re asking: If Ken Cuccinelli is so hot on banning sodomy between consenting adults – and remember kids, sodomy includes anal and oral sex, straight and gay, giving and receiving – then it’s long past time for someone ask Mr. Cuccinelli if he’s ever gone down on his wife.

Cuccinelli goes down in the annals of repressed Republican history along with Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia, who famously decried in 2003 that states were losing their ability to ban masturbation.

Ken Cuccinelli by Gage Skidmore.

Ken Cuccinelli by Gage Skidmore.

Yes, when the Supreme Court ruled in Lawrence v. Texas that states could no longer ban sodomy between consenting adults in the privacy of their own bedroom, GOP Justice Scalia bemoaned the fact that this might mean the end of state bans on masturbation.

Here’s Scalia:

State laws against bigamy, same-sex marriage, adult incest, prostitution, masturbation, adultery, fornication, bestiality, and obscenity are likewise sustainable only in light of Bowers’ validation of laws based on moral choices. Every single one of these laws is called into question by today’s decision; the Court makes no effort to cabin the scope of its decision to exclude them from its holding.

After that little debacle, Scalia was famously asked at a public event “Do you sodomize your wife?” :)  The Daily Beast zinged him as well:

daily beast to scalia: Do you sodomize our wife?

How does Republican rising star Cuccinelli feel about masturbation? Pro or con? Does it depend on the style?

This isn’t a “cute” gotcha point.  GOPer Cuccinelli wants to make it a felony for all adults, straight and gay, married and single, to perform or receive oral and anal sex.  And we’re to believe that Ken Cuccinelli has never received a BJ?  Really?  And that’s he’s never gone down on a woman?  Really?  If he has, it’s a felony (in the Virginia law the Supreme Court struck down, but Mr. Cuccinelli wants to resurrect – so morally, in his book, it’s a felony).

Has Ken Cuccinelli ever participated in this felony?  Will Ken Cuccinelli vow never to feloniously fellate again?

Inquiring heart and minds, and mouths and loins, want to know.

Is it just me, or does Lawrence O'Donnell look like he's about to commit a felony?

Is it just me, or does Lawrence O’Donnell look like he’s about to commit a felony?

I’m taken back to a few years ago – 2006 in fact – when we sic’d our readers on members of Congress who were the biggest “defenders of traditional marriage” to make sure they were defending their marriage against sodomy, since traditional marriages don’t commit the felony of sodomy.

My two favorite reports back were from VA Senator George Allen’s office and Idaho Senator Mike Crapo, both Republicans.

George Allen

Good morning, Senator Allen’s office
Yes I’m calling to see if the senator supports traditional marriage.
Yes he does, he supports the bill.
Okay, and he’s divorced?
Uh (uncomfortably) yes sir.
Yes, okay,
(she quickly adds) But he’s remarried.
What was the cause of his divorce? Do you know the reason? Is his wife remarried?
I don’t know, it was a long time ago sir.
Okay, could you tell me if the senator masturbates?
I’m sorry, I can’t answer these questions.
Can you tell me, do you masturbate?

Mike Crapo

Is Senator Crapo in favor of traditional marriage?
Yes he is, he’s a cosponsor of the bill.
He is? Can you tell me if he masturbates?
I could not tell you that.
Can you tell me, do you masturbate?
I cannot tell you that either.
Can you tell me, does he commit sodomy, analingus, cunnilingus or fellatio?
What is the purpose of this questioning?
It’s regarding his views on traditional marriage.
Okay, he supports the bill.
Yes, but could you tell me does he commit sodomy?
I could not give you an answer on that.
Is he willing to pledge that he has not or will not commit sodomy?
I could not answer that.
Has he ever had sex before or outside of marriage?
Again, sir, what is the point of this questioning?
It’s regarding traditional marriage and how far his support goes.
Any one of those questions I could not answer.
Have you ever had sex outside of marriage?
Again, I will not answer that.
It’s nobody’s business, right?
That’s right.
Okay, thank you.

Here’s Lawrence O’Donnell with the same question (h/t Badash):

“So when the Republican candidate for governor finds himself in a campaign debate, is it not reasonable to ask him if he has violated that law that he supports?”

And Lawrence O’Donnell makes an especially important point in the video: Cuccinelli opposed changing the sodomy law to exempt consenting adults in their privacy of their own bedroom.  So he made this an issue. Let him answer the question.

And in order to cleanse the palate after all this talk of Ken Cuccinelli performing cunnilingus on, and/or receiving fellatio from, his wife, here’s a puppy because cute:


Follow me on Twitter: @aravosis | @americablog | @americabloggay | Facebook | Instagram | Google+ | LinkedIn. John Aravosis is the Executive Editor of AMERICAblog, which he founded in 2004. He has a joint law degree (JD) and masters in Foreign Service from Georgetown; and has worked in the US Senate, World Bank, Children's Defense Fund, the United Nations Development Programme, and as a stringer for the Economist. He is a frequent TV pundit, having appeared on the O'Reilly Factor, Hardball, World News Tonight, Nightline, AM Joy & Reliable Sources, among others. John lives in Washington, DC. .

Share This Post

76 Responses to “Does Ken Cuccinelli go down on his wife?”

  1. BillFromDover says:

    Seriously, how can “The Cooch” be against oral sex?

  2. BillFromDover says:

    Or a bagger… assuming that they can still get it up?

  3. BillFromDover says:

    What the hell is it, anyways, with these perverts that believe having sex just for the joy of fucking (or whatever) is morally wrong?

    And all this time I thought that it was just Santorum being a creep!

    Now, I believe that it is the entire bagger movement… hell, even animals enjoy sex.

    Whoops, did I just hit on something here?

  4. Cavendish says:

    This seems to be the same pattern that a lot of Islamic countries follow; as long as the morality police don’t see it, you can do anything. If it’s of any condolence these people don’t even believe this stuff, it’s all about control and corruption. Breaks down to if I can bribe, extort and make money off of people. Not actually about the morals part. Bottom line, they’re crooks looking to make an extra buck.

  5. recon says:

    ottay buckwheat!

  6. UncleBucky says:

    Well, then we played dirty filthy rock and roll records and looked at dirty filthy pictures and said dirty filthy words!

    Right? :)

  7. UncleBucky says:

    That person would run out of money regularly. Which means, in the world of crime, where there is a lot of cash flow, such an officer would….

    Yada yada yada a situation…

  8. recon says:

    semper fi…get some!

  9. recon says:

    ask this man how he is spells HONESTY? H.ow a good cop O.n N.ight E.nforcement S.pecops T.ries to make a good community!

    its not easy, especially when my kid wants to go to Duke!

  10. recon says:

    semper fi counselor!

  11. recon says:

    ps. this goes back to the seat belt law, a great tool! ask any officer! but…must be used by an appropriate, seasoned, quality, well paid, motivated, honest, and outstanding officer!

  12. recon says:

    if i stop what i in my best assessment seems to be an act of prostitution, immorality, lack of code and honor, and damaging to the community…absolutely!!!!! yes! correct! no felatio and no cuninlingus! but i am still not taking them to jail unless I can get a higher charge… so if I can slap a felony on… then that builds the case… and the law can attempt to reform these people (good luck with that by the way). (on initial stop i should add only a police interview to verify this by knowledgeable officer can determine this by law)…so bottom line on this…jails are overcrowded…lower crimes are getting off easy…incarceration reform is in shambles!


    If I see what seems to be a normal, law abiding, conservative human being of any gender or race engaged in felatio or cunnninglingus they go home! (police interview to verify this by knowledgeable officer! NCIC DCI check on CPU and interview!)


    chances are there is an open container, controlled substance, or wrap sheet on the first case and not on the second example! hello! let’s keep it together!

    what kind of police officer do you want for 40k a year anyway?

  13. HelenRainier says:

    And only for procreation — certainly not for fun.

  14. HelenRainier says:

    I’ve come to the conclusion that these guys are so pissed they never get any and thus they want to ban sex (including oral and anal sex) so noone else can enjoy the best things in life — great sex.

  15. FieryLocks says:

    And only for procreation…no fucking for fun.

  16. FieryLocks says:

    Conservatives want government so small it can fit under your bed…what pervs

  17. HolyMoly says:

    It’s not as if the penal system (what a pun THAT is!) isn’t already overloaded with nonviolent
    offenders, who come out of prison with a different, more violent outlook on life.

    He might as well campaign to make unemployment and poverty a crime as well. Free (slave) labor to work on the roads and such.

  18. HolyMoly says:

    Oh, boy, I remember the good old days. If you ran out of gas on a Sunday, you’re S.O.L. until Monday (here in Virginia).

    Nothing was open except for grocery stores and churches, and TV programming succckked! Nothing but Benny Hinn, Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, Jim and Tammy Bakker. And VCRs didn’t exist, so it’s not like you could watch anything else.

  19. Skeptical Cicada says:

    More likely, she wants him to go down on her, but he wants to go down on a cock.

  20. eahopp says:

    If that is the case, then we’re all felons now!

  21. eahopp says:

    Don’t forget passing laws against handing out business cards in the airport johns.

  22. Monoceros Forth says:

    Why not introduce other measures to protect the public morality while he’s at it? Closing all grocery stores on Sundays, prohibiting the use of blasphemous language in public, nailing up a copy of the Ten Commandments in every park–these are all laws (natural laws of course) that demand promulgation. Do it for the children!

  23. bejammin075 says:

    What about HJ’s?

  24. Naja pallida says:

    No, probably prayjamas. I mean, those knee pads probably would come in handy.

  25. tedhayes says:

    The question is not whether he goes down on his wife. His problem more than likely stems from the fact that she doesn’t go down on him. And if he doesn’t experience it, then he wants no one else to either.

  26. Ninong says:

    As will Governor Ultrasound.

  27. cole3244 says:

    anyone who isn’t in favor of oral sex is either dead or a liar.

  28. karmanot says:

    Porno Cooch will soon be in the sink for corruption charges.

  29. Ninong says:

    I think the problem is that I was originally only addressing your comment about the age of consent being 15. I thought you were talking about the age of consent for sexual intercourse, which is 18 in Virginia. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

    I just wanted to add that the actual age of consent for marriage in Virginia, with parental consent, is 16, although there are exceptions for pregnancy.

    Becca, I thought I addressed your point above when I said that yes, I believe that the exsiting laws on the books in Virginia could be read to make consenting ‘sodomy’ between married couples under the age of 18 illegal. I think that’s the way Ken Cuccinelli sees it. Unless you go with the assumption that marriage automatically confers emancipation, making both spouses legal adults and therefore protected by Lawrence v. Texas.

    However, those Virginia laws are still on the books. Prior to Lawrence, it actually was against the law for even married couples to engage in ‘sodomy’ in The State For Lovers.

    The Virginia statutes need to be rewritten but they don’t need to be rewritten the way Cuccinelli wants them rewritten.

  30. BeccaM says:

    I think you’re delving into hair-splitting here and not actually refuting my point.

  31. Ninong says:

    Virginia Is For Lovers*

    *Offer applies to married opposite-sex couples only and only if the loving is done in the missionary position.

  32. Ninong says:


    I believe the minimum age of consent to marry with parental consent in Virginia is 16, not 15. There are exceptions for pregnancy but the girl must be examined by a doctor:

    § 20-48. Minimum age of marriage with consent of parents.

    The minimum age at which persons may marry, with consent of the parent or
    guardian, shall be sixteen.

  33. Ninong says:

    Virginia Is For Lovers*

    *Offer applies to married opposite-sex couples only and only if the loving is done in the missionary position.

  34. Rob Dowdy says:

    The amount of time these people spend working themselves into a righteous froth (some kind of froth, anyway) over what other people are doing with their naughty bits is pathological.

    I can’t fathom what it must be like to have one’s worldview informed by the kind of narcissism that makes you believe you know what’s best for EVERYONE IN THE WORLD.

    I mean, seriously? What kind of mind thinks, “I feel a certain way about a certain thing that MOST OTHER PEOPLE disagree with. It is imperative that my personal views be codified and imposed on EVERYONE EVERYWHERE for the good of all humanity.”

    That’s just … sick. Literally sick. Perhaps he believes he is doing god’s work? Because the all-powerful holy creator of the entire universe needs you to be his glorious avatar and stand firm against the filthy, sinful, unclean masses.

    Which is just more deluded narcissism, the hallmark of the entire Republican party.

    What do they believe, after all? The human body should be subject to the most stringent regulation — no gaying it up, no sex outside the marriage bed and in the missionary position for the purposes of being fruitful and multiplying; and if you could go ahead and sign over the deed and title to your uterus, that’d be just awesome. You know in your hearts that if they could find some way to outlaw the female orgasm (which good Republican women only conceive of in scandalous theory, anyway) they would.

    At the same time that they are fighting for more and more regulation of the human body (other people’s anyway), they tell us that corporations — which they apparently believe to be people, oddly — should be free from cumbersome regulation. Because corporations are the only “people” who can be trusted to behave in a just and moral manner without being subject to a bunch of tedious, restrictive rules.

    What a twisted, Escher-esque mess their mental landscape must be …

  35. caphillprof says:

    I’m not sure Virginia is “in this country.”

  36. karmanot says:

    Do you think she sleeps in pearls and heels?

  37. Mike_in_the_Tundra says:

    There are a lot of right wing men who think about dick a lot more than I do. I have never understood that.

  38. Zorba says:


  39. BeccaM says:

    Here’s another cleansing mental image… actually a livestream of the bears at Brooks Falls in Alaska, in Katmai National Park.!/live-cams/player/brown-bear-salmon-cam-brooks-falls

  40. arcadesproject says:

    Well if he doesn’t like it OK but a felony? Is the governor actually insane?

  41. Skeptical Cicada says:

    Only with his boyfriend. ;)

  42. Skeptical Cicada says:


  43. Skeptical Cicada says:

    LOL at “Fat Tony.”

  44. Skeptical Cicada says:

    I think it’s long past time to ask him if he’s ever gone down on a guy. He’s more fixated on cock than most gay men are!

  45. Ninong says:

    Actually I wasn’t talking about marriage at all. I was simply addressing your comment: “It is statutory rape for an adult to have sexual relations with anyone under the age of 15, which is Virginia’s legal age of consent.” I guess I missed your point entirely but just wanted to clarify that “the age of consent in Virginia is 18.” I thought you were talking about the age of consent for sexual relations, not marriage. Sorry.

  46. BeccaM says:

    Not quite. The ‘age of consent’ to which I was referring was the legal age at which a young person can consent to marry, which in Virginia is 15.

    Furthermore, the VA code as it reads carves out a specific exception for a married couple where one or both members are under 18.

    (Weirdly enough, it also carves out exceptions for children and grandchildren…but in this case, not being a lawyer myself, I’m assuming it’s because they want to ensure that incest remains a felony under other statutes and isn’t left as a misdemeanor).

    If you’re suggesting an under 18 married couple can be convicted of felony sodomy, whereas if they’re 18 or older, it’s not applicable, that makes no legal sense.

  47. Ninong says:


    The age of consent in Virginia is 18. There is an exception which allows teenagers 15, 16 and 17 to engage in sexual relations but only with a partner younger than 18. (P.S. — I see you have fixed that comment in your post.)

    The problem in Virginia is that they describe sexual relations as ‘fornication’. Anything other than penile-vaginal penetration is described as ‘sodomy’.

    “Any person, not being married, who voluntarily shall have sexual intercourse with any other person, shall be guilty of fornication, punishable as a Class 4 misdemeanor.”

    “Crimes against nature” states in part; “If any person carnally knows in any manner any brute animal, or carnally knows any male or female person by the anus or by or with the mouth, or voluntarily submits to such carnal knowledge, he or she shall be guilty of … felony…”

    Clearly their “crimes against nature” statute was invalidated by Lawrence v. Texas. Actually, it’s absurd to think that any state in this country would still have laws on the books criminalizing sexual relations between consenting adults but Virginia still does.

  48. Indigo says:

    Thank you for that mental image. I’m going to go perform several purification rituals now and possibly resort to misogi.

  49. BeccaM says:

    Let’s be clear here: Even though at times Cuccinelli has cited Virginia’s anti-sodomy law as being necessary and the only bulwark to protect children from sexual predator, he’s lying. It is statutory rape for an adult to have sexual relations with anyone under the age of 15, which is Virginia’s legal age of consent. A felony, and a sexual offender one at that.

    Above the age of 15, it’s the misdemeanor “contributing to the delinquency of a minor.” One likely reason for this, of course, is so that if a 19 year old marries a 17 year old — legal in Virginia — it is not automatically a felony.

    If Cooch has a problem with this, then he needs to get that age of consent changed. And as I remarked yesterday, 15 years old is creepy-low.

    However, when he was pressed on why he opposed the Virginia state bill in 2004 which would’ve fixed the state anti-sodomy law overturned by Lawrence v. Texas, he invariably stated it was because he felt it was immoral and unnatural to be a gay person. Or rather, he couched it in the usual bigot meme, that he didn’t object to gays as people, he just wanted to make gay sex illegal because he thinks it’s icky.

  50. Tor says:

    The puppy saved the day – and my lunch.

  51. obiwan says:

    Boy, good luck with that one. Most people are heterosexual, not asexual.

  52. I assure you, English Canada is fully in favour (with a “u”) of oral sex. It’s how we get through the winter.

    And, yes, Hue-Man, More Bigger Government in Your Bedroom does seem the opposite of freedom and liberty, doesn’t it? Your GOP in action, go figure.

  53. S1AMER says:

    What campaign idiot came up with an idea that could be mocked as “GOP Candidate Opposes, Criminalizes BJs”?

    Yeah, the Cooch is supposed to be seen as the protector of little kids from sexual predators, and the Macker as, I guess, the guy who wants to procure little kids for those predators. Or something. I don’t know.

    But all you’re seeing today is people mocking the Republican who wants to criminalize most heterosexual Americans (not to mention all gays and lesbians). Lawrence? Who’s Lawrence?

    So I repeat: What campaign idiot came up with this?

  54. Naja pallida says:

    Since when have Republicans cared about a Supreme Court ruling that wasn’t entirely in their favor? They’re still fighting judicial decisions made a generation ago.

  55. ComradeRutherford says:

    In order to ensure Freedom®™ the state of Virginia will use Big Government to install video cameras in the bedrooms of every home in Virginia to ensure compliance.

  56. Leota2 says:

    I’m thinking Mrs. Cooch (I shall not refrain) has TMJ—-so her husband is bitter.

  57. Jon Maas says:

    There’s no question Ken Cuccinelli’s wife has never gone down on him, which is ironic considering what a big dick he is.

  58. SkippyFlipjack says:

    “Is it just me, or does Lawrence O’Donnell look like he’s about to commit a felony?” — hahhaha

  59. Zorba says:

    And they make appointments for sex. “How does three weeks from tomorrow, at 9:15 PM sound to you, my dear?”
    And he’s probably a premature ejaculator, too.

  60. Houndentenor says:

    The Supreme Court already ruled on this. Is this really a campaign issue? REALLY?

  61. Hue-Man says:

    I’ve seen enough “smug Canadian” comments but this seems a very CONSERVATIVE idea. Other than Talibangelicals, who would want “the State” to break into your home to arrest you for doing something that is not violent, consensual and affects no one else? They truly are descendants of Puritans who wanted to make sure that no one else had any joy in their lives. (I assume The Cooch only wants to prosecute those icky gay people.)

    I know you don’t care, but in answer to some of the questions posed to “traditional marriage” conservatives, Yes! I’ve seen John’s comment below and would characterize this as a Canadian value not isolated to Quebec!

  62. nicho says:

    I’m guessing that any sexual congress between Mr. and Mrs. Cooch is ancient history. He’s probably trying to put a damper on the extracurricular activities between her and Brad, her 26-year-old tennis coach

  63. Naja pallida says:

    I’m sure they have individual twin-sized beds separated by a night stand.

  64. Oh, I thought you were going to say Canada was in favor of oral sex (I’ll bet the French half is :)

  65. jomicur says:

    Absurd as this is, I’m guessing that if it passes, Mrs. C. will give enormous thanks to Jesus.

  66. Stev84 says:

    Canada has always been and will always be 20-30 years ahead of the US on social issues. Same with gays in the military (ban repealed right when DADT was introduced) and same-sex marriage.

  67. I refrained from Cooch jokes, with much difficulty.

  68. Stev84 says:

    The same question Antonin “Fat Tony” Scalia refused to answer

  69. Hue-Man says:

    “The state has no business in the bedrooms of the nation.” Justice Minister Pierre Elliott Trudeau, December 21, 1967. Reformed homosexuality, abortion, and divorce laws. Still valid 45 years later. BTW, (wiki) “Trudeau attended the prestigious Collège Jean-de-Brébeuf (a private French Jesuit school)…” Video

  70. dcinsider says:

    Thanks for the visual, John.

  71. Jeffrey Karter says:

    That’s the priest position.

  72. Dave of the Jungle says:

    Women shall wear a smock during reproductive acts.

  73. nicho says:

    They probably only use the missionary position

    You mean with an altar boy in a confessional box?

  74. karmanot says:

    And a bundling board!

  75. Zorba says:

    Well, if he and his wife have never had oral sex with each other, they must have the most boring sex lives on the planet.
    They probably only use the missionary position, too. And only in their bedroom. With the lights out. And their pj’s mostly on.

  76. Ninong says:

    “Does Ken Cuccinelli go down on his wife?”
    Isn’t that why they call him “the Cooch?”

© 2019 AMERICAblog Media, LLC. All rights reserved. · Entries RSS