I noted below that Senator Larry Craig should just resign. Whether he resigns because he's a guy who likes to have sex in public bathrooms or because he's an arrogant ass who believes his position puts him above the law is immaterial to me. He just needs to go with what dignity he can muster, do good works or whatever and stop sullying the Senate with his presence.
In case you agree with me, the message form for his Senate office can be found here.
Here are some quick tips for adding simple Textile formatting to your comments, though you can also use proper HTML tags:
*This* puts text in bold.
_This_ puts text in italics.
bq. This "bq." at the beginning of a paragraph, flush with the left hand side and with a space after it, is the code to indent one paragraph of text as a block quote.
To add a live URL, "Text to display":http://windsofchange.net/ (no spaces between) will show up as Text to display. Always use this for links - otherwise you will screw up the columns on our main blog page.
I thought he did resign, effective September 30th.
Mike
"He just needs to go with what dignity he can muster..."
The fact that he's staying means that my prayers have been answered. Thank the Lord and pass the lube.
I agree, he needs to fade away for all sorts of reasons.
Can't you let him fade away also, please?
Okay, now I gotta go wash my hands.
It's gonna be a fun year!
I thought he did resign, effective September 30th.
Nah, now it's on hold until after the judge decides to accept or reject the guilty plea. I could see it being on hold while, say, other (mysterious) options are investigated, since appeals take so long to wind through the court system. Then again, maybe he'll give it up when the judge rejects it.
I wonder if you can appeal a guilty plea... Never heard about it, but it would be interesting. I guess giving up the right to appeal is usually in the text.
Seriously though. Resigning for abuse of power is perfectly OK by me, and I left that message in the past. Disorderly conduct isn't enough to go(sadly), and I have yet to find a coherent argument about Vitter's prostitutes vs. this from a high moral standard perspective.
Disorderly conduct isn't enough to go(sadly), and I have yet to find a coherent argument about Vitter's prostitutes vs. this from a high moral standard perspective.
I can make one. The prostitute thing was at least theoretically a consensual business arrangement handled entirely in private. It was only after the records were confiscated that the truth came out.
But Craig was acting gross in public. He annoyed a cop. Very different thing.
Also, I see no reason to think that the FBI didn't already know about Craig's homosexuality. There's every reason to think they've been blackmailing him since he first took office. So that's an argument for him to stay, and to get real vocal. What does he do differently after his reputation is already ruined? Will he tell us the truth about anything now? Will he vote differently?
I'd like to see as many blackmailed politicians as possible get exposed, and then see what they do next.
Faster, please.
I think it is very important for both Vitter and Craig to remain in office. They serve as a constant reminder, along with Ted Kennedy, of the type of hypocrites that grace our Senate. The fact that any of these men are supported by their senate colleagues astounds me. But it does give us an insight into the type of people who hold office in Washington.
This clown brought this upon himself.
Is it just me or has shame been driven out of our national psyche. Now we always have an excuse for our behavior instead of taking responsibility. And even when someone claims they are taking responsibility, they don't.
The real point here is that Craig's legal position depends first on demonstrating that he was too stupid about legal matters to have inteligently entered the plea. And he wants to continue making laws in the interim.
He oughta go back to managing his list.
:-)
But seriously, the nice thing about having Larry Craig around is that it reminds me things aren't that bad...
The real point here is that Craig's legal position depends first on demonstrating that he was too stupid about legal matters to have inteligently entered the plea.
Did he perhaps assume that it would be hushed up?
Perhaps similar things were hushed up for him in the past, consistently?
If he suddenly got double-crossed you can hardly blame him for being surprised.