Who did Sen. Larry Craig hurt? I mean, let’s say everything that reportedly happened in that Minneapolis airport restroom happened. Let’s say the distinguished gentleman from Idaho WAS “cruising” for a good time. Let’s say his actions WERE an invitation for the police officer squatting on the throne next door to join him in a little romantic liaison. So what?
All the police officer had to do was say “No” or “Leave me alone.” Had the senator persisted or tried to force himself on the man in the neighboring stall, fine. But arrested for a few simple amorous gestures toward another adult? Come on.
I’m not saying this wasn’t stupid, especially for a public figure. Indeed, I’m not saying trying to pick up a guy in a public toilet isn’t disgusting. I mean, the smell alone!
Nor am I saying that pleading guilty to a lesser charge without consulting an attorney after being an elected official for almost three decades isn’t the very definition of “stuck on stupid.” But stupidity isn’t a disqualification for serving in Congress. Indeed, it often appears to be a REQUIREMENT.
In any event, what the heck does cruising in an airport john have to do with “Lewd Larry’s” senatorial duties? It’s not like he was hitting on underaged congressional pages who worked in his office. And it’s not like the FBI found $90,000 in small bills wrapped in aluminum foil in his freezer.
Seriously. Assuming everything reported about this incident is true: So what? Should the man be kicked off his committee assignments and be forced to resign? Why are Republicans having such a cow over this and throwing the guy under the bus? Isn’t this a matter best left to Idaho voters?
And would someone PLEASE explain to me why in the world an undercover police officer was assigned to sit on a toilet and wait for someone to stick a foot under his stall? Are there no murderers, gang-bangers or thieves left to arrest in Minneapolis? We’re always hearing that taxpayers need to have their taxes raised to pay for more cops. For this?
Posted on August 30th, 2007 by Chuck Muth
Filed under: National
Does your standard apply both ways? Are you willing to apply the Craig standard to the Clinton-Lewinski situation (the extra-marital affair in the Oval Office part, not the perjury and obstruction of justice part)? Are you willing to say, “Clinton was pretty stupid, and his choice of women was pretty lousy (which we already knew from our experiences with Hillary), but SO WHAT??? And didn’t the federal government have better things to do than spend millions of dollars on Ken Starr’s investigation of something like this???”
If Lewd Larry can’t keep his commitments to his wife, why should we believe in any commitments to his country? He’s just like Clinton. “I did not have sex…” blah, blah, blah
Whether naive or not, there’s something many Americans feel our reps should have. It’s called morals. And they do have an affect on our country.
The truly frightening thing is how little “evidence” it takes to deprive an American, Lewd Larry or you or I, of his liberty. The thought police now rule. God Help Us.
John,
Very good observation!
Hey shithead, for once you’re right about something.
Gotta love Sestamibi’s command of the English language. I can’t help but feel drawn to his rational, unemotional arguments that cut straight to the heart of the issues. This guy definitely has too much class to engage in ad hominem attacks.
Excellent posting, Sestamibi. I eagerly await evidence that your vocabulary extends beyond the word “shithead.”