Senator Larry Craig should resign.
He shouldn’t wait for the Senate Ethics Committee to review the case, let Idaho voters decide his fate or even wait to hear what advice his attorney has to give. He should resign and do so immediately.
The reason is simple: our elected officials need to be held to a higher standard than the average person. Whether or not we agree with their politics, elected officials represent us; and, at the very least, we should expect them to follow the laws of the land and not put themselves in compromising situations.
Craig made a stupid decision in a moment of weakness. And though we all make mistakes, Craig was entrusted by the people of Idaho with a special position of trust and responsibility and should be held to a higher level of conduct.
What if the person in the other stall hadn’t been a cop but someone looking to blackmail Craig? What would the Senator have done? From his actions, it’s obvious Craig wished to keep the matter from reaching the public. It’s worth considering what the Senator might have been willing to give a blackmailer to keep the incident under wraps.
Craig now claims his actions in a Minneapolis airport restroom were misconstrued by the arresting officer. But that doesn’t matter anymore. Craig pled guilty to a lesser charge: disorderly conduct. With the guilty plea hanging over his head, Craig can no longer be an effective U.S. Senator. This issue will continue to follow him throughout the rest of his political career. When he speaks in public or on the floor of the Senate, his message will be diluted and lose its effectiveness.
Over the years Craig has been a champion of many good causes. Until his arrest, Craig had served Idaho and his country well: 10 years in the House of Representatives and 17 as a Senator. That’s nothing to be ashamed of. His moment of weakness in a bathroom was unfortunate; but with his position of power and authority entrusted to him by the voters in Idaho, he should have been aware of the possible consequences of his actions.
Article comments
— go to most recent comments1 - Dr Dreadful
Jeez, what a tempest in a beverage container.
One has to wonder what the police officer in the next stall was actually doing in there. I doubt it was just Craig's bad luck that he "happened" to be a cop.
On the other hand, Craig should probably come clean. "Misconstrued", my bum. The least he could do is shed some light on what the hell the deal is with gay men and public restrooms (cottaging).
He may as well. He's from Idaho. He's not going to be running for his seat again no matter what, after this.
2 - Clavos
Resign hell. Execute him.
But, they'll probably let him resign instead; the rest of 'em don't want to face execution if they're caught one day.
And no, I'm NOT talking about gays; I'm talking about philanderers, which probably encompasses 80+ % of those bums in congress.
Family values my ass.
3 - Dr Dreadful
Politics scetion's been quite the last couple of days. It's not the same without Stan to come on and tell us it's all bollocks.
Am I right in thinking he's probably winging/winged (wung?) his way to Portugal as we speak?
4 - Dr Dreadful
scetion s/b section
quite s/b quiet
Bloody keyboard dyslexia...
5 - Clavos
Aye, mate, I think he is, the lucky dog. Portugal's a beautiful and interesting country.
I think the cop in the next stall was probably looking to catch someone just like Craig.
Ft. Lauderdale's Mayor, Jim Naugle has been on a tear about sex in public bathrooms, lately. Says a friend showed him a gay tourism guide that indicated (in a section about same) that the men's room in Ft. Lauderdale's principal kid's park was a "hot spot" for gay pickup sex.
Dunno if that's true or not, but Ft. Lauderdale does have a substantial gay population, and they're really pissed off at Naugle right now; as is the Tourism Development Council, which would rather keep such publicity hush-hush, so they've booted Naugle off their board and are demanding he shut up.
Carl Hiassen doesn't get even half of it....(4)
6 - Alec
RE: His moment of weakness in a bathroom was unfortunate; but with his position of power and authority entrusted to him by the voters in Idaho, he should have been aware of the possible consequences of his actions.
Too bad he hasn't fessed up to this "moment of weakness," but instead insists that he is not gay and does not cruise even though he apparently knows the secret handshake and top tap code for extra special bathroom goodies -- which also suggests that he has had more than a few ... moments.
But although I would never had voted for him, or think much about his record, it seems to me that it is up to the voters in his state to determine whether or not he should resign. The Republican leadership may be right in stripping him of his committee assignments (and he might well enjoy being stripped), but I don't see that his fellow Republicans, or Democrats, or anyone else except the people who put him in office, have a right to insist upon his ejection.
His crime is a misdemeanor. He has not stolen public funds, traded his vote for favors or otherwise seriously abused the public trust. He also pleaded guilty, paid a fine and is under probation. In short, he has paid for his crime.
Now, his claim that the arresting officer misconstrued his actions and that he is not really guilty does not pass the smell test, and is little more than a low-grade version of the "Scooter Libby really didn't do anything illegal" nonsense that Republican quislings have used before in an equally lame attempt to get out from under their supposed respect for the rule of law. And the Smoking Gun and other web sites has a copy of the plea agreement that he signed, which clearly has a statement that he cannot agree to the plea if he thinks that he is innocent of the charges. If Craig really presses this aspect of things, one might suspect that he is too ignorant of the legal process to be left in charge of being a competent lawmaker. But again, this is for the people who voted him into office to consider.
Of course, he could always ask Bush for a pardon.
7 - Clavos
Doesn't matter whether he is gay nor not. He violated the trust of his wife, the person to whom he most owes his allegiance and respect, so how would he treat the trust of the voters.
Execute him.
8 - Dr Dreadful
Ft. Lauderdale's Mayor, Jim Naugle has been on a tear about sex in public bathrooms, lately. Says a friend showed him a gay tourism guide that indicated (in a section about same) that the men's room in Ft. Lauderdale's principal kid's park was a "hot spot" for gay pickup sex.
And a rather bewildered local police department indicated that, far from Naugle's alleged epidemic of u-bend benders, they've actually only dealt with four such incidents in the last three years.
Local politicians do seem to be splendidly uninhibited when it comes to making complete buttocks of themselves in public.
9 - bliffle
Actually, I think the Senate Ethics committe is only entitled to charge him if he has a Conflict Of Interest or is being openly bribed, or,perhaps, if he stands to profit from a deal he is judging.
Anyway, whatever ethical lapses are associated with his hetero or homo sexlife are irrelevant to the Senate.
In theory.
But we know how much the repubs are indebted to the Christian Right that it seems right that the repubs do whatever necessary to chastise their own man.
10 - Alec
RE: Doesn't matter whether he is gay nor not. He violated the trust of his wife, the person to whom he most owes his allegiance and respect, so how would he treat the trust of the voters.
We don't know anything about his marriage, his wife, or the character or quality of their marriage, or what they know about each other's private lives. Also, so far, she is sticking to the script that he is not gay and has done nothing wrong, so she has not claimed that he has violated her trust.
As an aside, the worst cynics are noting that Craig and his wife got married around the time that some gay accusations about him started floating up, and although she has three children from an earlier marriage, they do not have any children together.
The family values crowd don't seem to understand that the more vehemently their candidates insist on a phony rigid moral code which they feel that they can violate and wiggle their way out of whenever they desire, the more they invite close scrutiny and ridicule.
By the way, in the past, Americans seemed to understand that there is no simplistic correspondence between a person's obligations to a spouse and that person's public duties. Alexander Hamilton's affair with Maria Reynolds is a case in point. He kept detailed records that he made available to his political enemies which demonstrated that his affair with her did not involve any public corruption or delivery of favors to Reynolds' husband. Hamilton's wife stood by him, although she undoubtedly was hurt by the whole mess, and more when he published a confession of the affair that the entire American public could read and comment upon. Still, as foolish and self-defeating as Hamilton's actions were in many ways, his scrupulous attempts to execute his public duties honorably is still something to consider.
11 - daryl d
I love it when a neocon bites the big one (literally). I'm convinced that the entire Republican party has become one big disco lovin' gay bar (Jerry Seinfeld-not that there's anything wrong with it.) But when you want to crucify a group of people for being a little bit too much like yourself, I think the criticism is definitely valid.
12 - Doug DeLong
Well, whaddaya know? Another conservative Republican homophobe caught with his pants down in the men's room. This is the same man, by the way, who publicly denied having any involvement in the 1982 Congressional page scandal, even though he had not been accused.
But not to worry, Craig assures us in a rather Nixonian moment, "I am not gay. I have never been gay." Oh, I see. Thanks for clearing that up.
Ah, I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning! This guy has spent his days voting against anything vaguely related to gay rights, while spending his nights looking for blow jobs in bathroom stalls.
Of course, if he didn't have such a neanderthal view of sexuality, if he believed in letting people be who they are, without judgement, he wouldn't have to sneak around to get some action, and he wouldn't be watching his long career come crashing down around him.
My favorite headline (From Slate.com): Craig's Lust
13 - Clavos
"By the way, in the past, Americans seemed to understand that there is no simplistic correspondence between a person's obligations to a spouse and that person's public duties."
Call it simplistic if you wish, but philandering is hardly a sign of good character. It also leaves the practitioner vulnerable to pressure and blackmail (though obviously not in this case), and is not, or shouldn't be, acceptable in a United States Senator.
His public persona as a "family values" advocate and supporter doesn't square well with this incident, either.
Don't we already have enough sleaze bag elected officials in this country? It's no wonder that the voters' opinions of congress have never been lower than they are now. I say it's high time we start weeding out ALL the bums.
Or, perhaps the presence of all the hypocrites, thieves, liars, and corruption in congress is merely a reflection of the country at large these days.
14 - Dave Nalle
I hate to be saying the same thing on two threads, but again, Craig is maintaining that he is innocent and that what he's accused of did not happen. What ever happened to the principle of presumption of innocence? Maybe he deserves a chance like any other accused person to defend himself?
Again I see the left in America trying to do away with this basic right. Apparently it only applies to street thugs and not to politicians with an R after their name.
Remember Mark Foley? Hounded out of office for his horrible acts of paedophilia? Except that from the very beginning it was clear that he had not actually broken any laws. Nonetheless he was forced to resign and his name has been permanently smeared. Do any of you even know that the investigation concluded last week and no charges wer ever brought against him? The media covered the hell out of the accusations that ruined him, but they've shown little or no interest in the actual facts of the case or the fact that most of what he was accused of turns out not to be true.
Dave
15 - Dr Dreadful
Dave,
Clavos, who is hardly a raving lefty, is the person on this thread calling most loudly for Craig to be hung out to dry.
In the opinion of little ol' left-leaning moi, on the other hand, the motives of the cop in the next stall seem far more suspect than Craig's.
16 - REMF
"Again I see the left in America trying to do away with this basic right. Apparently it only applies to street thugs and not to politicians with an R after their name."
Um, Dave, could that have anything to do with the sanctimonious, self-righteous, judgmental, arrogant, superior, overbearing nature of those with an "R" after their name?
(MCH)
17 - Lee Richards
A guilty plea usually includes a question from the judge to the effect, "Are you in fact guilty?" which the accused answers in the affirmative to enter his plea.
Hard to see any violation of the presumption of innocence in that.
And plea bargains are made because an accused person doesn't want to, and chooses not to, defend himself against a more serious charge.
It has nothing to do with evil leftist schemes or rightist paranoia.
18 - Alec
Dave - RE: I hate to be saying the same thing on two threads, but again, Craig is maintaining that he is innocent and that what he's accused of did not happen. What ever happened to the principle of presumption of innocence? Maybe he deserves a chance like any other accused person to defend himself?
Huh? What are you talking about? Have you followed this case at all? Craig's case has gone far beyond the accusation stage. He admitted his guilt. His subsequent claim that he was not really guilty would be tantamount to a confession that he perjured himself in order to "resolve" the charges against him. The Smoking Gun and other sites displays copies of the plea agreement that he signed, which contains the following:
From the "Petition to Enter a Plea of Guilty-Misdemeanor"
I have reviewed the arrest report ...
I understand the charges against me in this case, which are Disorderly Conduct, ... a Gross Misdemeanor....
I understand that the court will not accept a plea of guilty from anyone who claims to be innocent.
I now make no claim that I am innocent of the charge to which I am entering a plea of guilty.
The entire document can be found here
Is there a Republican alternate universe in which one can simultaneously plead guilty and be presumed innocent?
Clavos - RE: Call it simplistic if you wish, but philandering is hardly a sign of good character. It also leaves the practitioner vulnerable to pressure and blackmail (though obviously not in this case), and is not, or shouldn't be, acceptable in a United States Senator.
Life is what it is. Aside from this, my main point is that it should be up to Idaho voters to decide Craig's fate. In 2004, a Hawaii Republican representative, Brian Blundell, was arrested for groping an undercover police officer. Even though the governor supported his re-election, the voters did not return him to office. Seems fair enough to me.
RE: Or, perhaps the presence of all the hypocrites, thieves, liars, and corruption in congress is merely a reflection of the country at large these days.
Mark Twain on Congress:
"It could probably be shown by facts and figures that there is no distinctly native American criminal class except Congress."
"I never can think of Judas Iscariot without losing my temper. To my mind Judas Iscariot was nothing but a low, mean, premature, Congressman."
"Fleas can be taught nearly anything that a Congressman can."
"All Congresses and Parliaments have a kindly feeling for idiots, and a compassion for them, on account of personal experience and heredity."
19 - Doug DeLong
What ever happened to the principle of presumption of innocence?
Uh, I believe he gave up that presumption when he pleaded guilty. Now he says, "Oh, did I say guilty? I meant not guilty. I just forgot to say 'not'." Now he wants his lawyer to get it reversed. Not bloody likely.
Remember Mark Foley?
Oh, yeah, wasn't he the guy who had this IM conversation with an underage page on the fine art of masturbation. What a stand-up guy. I can't believe he's not still in congress...
Maf54 (7:47:11 PM): good so your getting horny
Xxxxxxxxx (7:47:29 PM): lol...a bit
Maf54 (7:48:00 PM): did you spank it this weekend yourself
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:04 PM): no
Xxxxxxxxx (7:48:16 PM): been too tired and too busy
Xxxxxxxxx (7:50:57 PM): i dont do it very often normally though
Maf54 (7:51:11 PM): why not
Maf54 (7:51:22 PM): at your age seems like it would be daily
Xxxxxxxxx (7:51:57 PM): not me
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:01 PM): im not a horn dog
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:07 PM): maybe 2 or 3 times a week
Maf54 (7:52:20 PM): thats a good number
Maf54 (7:52:27 PM): in the shower
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:42 PM): just cause i shower in the morning
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:47 PM): and quickly
Maf54 (7:52:50 PM): in the bed
Xxxxxxxxx (7:52:59 PM): i get up at 530 and am outta the house by 610
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:03 PM): eh ya
Maf54 (7:53:24 PM): on your back
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:30 PM): no face down
Maf54 (7:53:32 PM): love details
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:34 PM): lol
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:36 PM): i see that
Xxxxxxxxx (7:53:37 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:53:39 PM): really
Maf54 (7:53:54 PM): do you really do it face down
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:03 PM): ya
Maf54 (7:54:13 PM): kneeling
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:31 PM): well i dont use my hand...i use the bed itself
Maf54 (7:54:31 PM): where do you unload it
Xxxxxxxxx (7:54:36 PM): towel
Maf54 (7:54:43 PM): really
Maf54 (7:55:02 PM): completely naked?
Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:12 PM): well ya
Maf54 (7:55:21 PM): very nice
Xxxxxxxxx (7:55:24 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:55:51 PM): cute butt bouncing in the air
Maf54 (7:57:05 PM): i always use lotion and the hand
Maf54 (7:57:10 PM): but who knows
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:24 PM): Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:24 PM): i dont use lotion...takes too much time to clean up
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:37 PM): with a towel you can just wipe off....and go
Maf54 (7:57:38 PM): lol
Maf54 (7:57:45 PM): where do you throw the towel
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:48 PM): but you cant work it too hard....or its not good
Xxxxxxxxx (7:57:51 PM): in the laundry
Maf54 (7:58:16 PM): just kinda slow rubbing
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:23 PM): ya....
Xxxxxxxxx (7:58:32 PM): or youll rub yourslef raw
Maf54 (7:58:37 PM): well I have aa totally stiff wood now
Maf54 (8:01:21 PM): i am hard as a rock..so tell me when your reaches rock
20 - Alec
By the way, apparently it is other Republicans who are taking the lead in condemning Craig, even though, according to some, Craig should be presumed innocent despite his own guilty plea to the disorderly conduct charge. For example, Mitt Romney, from a recent AP story:
Republican presidential hopeful Mitt Romney said Thursday that Larry Craig's conduct was "disappointing and disgraceful," but stopped short of calling for the Idaho Republican to resign from the Senate….
"I think it's appropriate when there's been conduct that we think is disappointing and disgraceful to indicate that. I don't think there's a responsibility to try to gild the Lilly in a setting like this," said the former Massachusetts governor. "I think individuals across the country expect us to have the same expression that they feel, which is disappointment."
For myself, I think that Craig is sad. If he really is a closeted Republican, then trying to live up to an inane and self-defeating “family values” creed in which he must deny his identity in order to be a viable Republican politician only insures that he will have to sneak around to satisfy his desires, and only made it more likely that he would end up in situations where he would liable for arrest for indecency violations.
21 - Doug DeLong
Dr. Dreadful: In the opinion of little ol' left-leaning moi, on the other hand, the motives of the cop in the next stall seem far more suspect than Craig's.
The cop was just on the job, apparently the low man on the totem pole at the station house. There had been complaints of public sex in that particular rest room, so he was there running an undercover sting operation. Probably had no idea he would land such a big fish.
22 - Dr Dreadful
Should have been clearer: I meant not his personal motives, but those of the police chief whose agent he was.
23 - Doug DeLong
Either way, I think the cops were just doing their job, responding to complaints. What do you think their motivations were?
24 - Alec
Dave " RE: Remember Mark Foley? Hounded out of office for his horrible acts of paedophilia? Except that from the very beginning it was clear that he had not actually broken any laws. Nonetheless he was forced to resign and his name has been permanently smeared. Do any of you even know that the investigation concluded last week and no charges wer ever brought against him? The media covered the hell out of the accusations that ruined him, but they've shown little or no interest in the actual facts of the case or the fact that most of what he was accused of turns out not to be true.
Apparently President Bush was taken in by the evil media, since he called Foley’s behavior disgusting. Mitt Romney apparently was taken in as well, noting in a recent interview:
“I think it reminds us of Mark Foley and Bill Clinton. I think it reminds us of the fact that people who are elected to public office continue to disappoint, and they somehow think that if they vote the right way on issues of significance or they can speak a good game, that we’ll just forgive and forget. And the truth of the matter is, the most important thing we expect from elected"an elected official is a level of dignity and character that we can point to for our kids and our grandkids, and say, `Hey, someday I hope you grow up and you’re someone like that person.’ And we’ve seen disappointment in the White House, we’ve seen it in the Senate, we’ve seen it in Congress. And frankly, it’s disgusting.”
Are the Republicans who have disavowed Foley and Craig fools or cynics?
In any case, Foley was not hounded from office. The Republicans forced him out in order to cover their own asses, as various news reports show:
"Mark, I don't know how you can go on in this race," said Fordham. "Do you really want to spend the next 40 days of the campaign running around your district explaining sexually explicit e-mails to pages to your constituents?"
Fordham thought he made it clear that his old boss needed to quit, but Foley couldn't bring himself to do that. The N.R.C.C. headquarters was around the corner, and Fordham made it his next stop. There he found Representative Reynolds and Speaker Hastert. But before he could finish relaying the awful news, Reynolds's face got purple and he began to shout, "He needs to resign, and he needs to do it right now!" The Speaker just sat there, silent, according to Fordham: "He didn't react at all. This was weeks before the election, and they're thinking how this is going to impact us."
Everyone agreed that Foley needed to resign. They weren't sure how. A lawyer was called in and advised that Foley sign a letter to be delivered to Speaker Hastert on the floor of the House. Just then, Fordham was alerted that Foley's sister Donna Winterson had arrived at the congressman's office, totally unaware of the meltdown. He ran over and found Winterson sitting on the sofa, "looking like she was in a coma." Her life, having been devoted to her brother's campaigns, would be crushed, too. It took Fordham five minutes to get her composed enough to walk back to the house, where they would finally have to swallow the bitter pill.
"You have to get out," Fordham told Foley.
"You mean I have to drop out of the re-election race?
"No, you need to resign your seat in the House. Today. Now."
Fordham says that Foley dissolved into hysterics. His sister wrapped her arms around him, and they rocked together, in tears.
-- Vanity Fair, “Don’t Ask, Don’t E-Mail,” January 2007
As for the investigation itself, The August 30 Sun-Sentinel reported the following:
“State and federal law enforcement officials began investigating the online messages almost immediately. An FBI investigation has so far not moved beyond a preliminary stage, an FBI source said. It was unclear if that investigation would proceed if Florida officials brought no charges against Foley.
Earlier this week, Florida Department of Law Enforcement officials said they asked to review federally owned computers Foley used during his 12 years as a congressman. But House officials blocked the release of the computers and the documents contained in them, citing a court decision that protects congressional working papers. Authorization to review such documents must be granted by the individual lawmaker involved, House officials said.”
And David Roth, Foley’s attorney is reported to have said the following: [Foley] "does not blame the trauma he sustained as a young adolescent for his totally inappropriate e-mails. He continues to offer no excuse whatsoever for his conduct.".
Were the instant messages, such as one in which Foley presses for details about a page’s genitalia and his sexual habits, illegal? Maybe not. Were they unethical? Ask the parents of the pages. Ask the pages. Republicans are free to embrace Foley again, as they reclaimed Trent Lott, for example; and voters can decide whether they want a man in office who sends suggestive messages to Congressional pages.
GOP presidential candidates should be asked in all future debates whether they think that Foley should be re-instated. I would be very interested in hearing their answers.
25 - SonnyD
If every politician with some issue in his private life that he didn't want made public were to resign, there wouldn't be any government left. Senators are the worst of the lot. They all think they should be president even though very few of them have ever been qualified for the job they have.
Creepy as the public restroom scene is, the public should be more concerned about the secret deal making, corruption, and misuse of taxpayer dollars that goes on all the time.