Thursday, September 6, 2007

Craig, the Sin-ator

So, this senator, Craig, from the great state that brings you potatoes and nuclear power research gets caught in the bathroom tappin' toes with an undercover officer.

While this sounds like the intro to a joke, the comedy doesn't begin until he starts trying to fight his conviction, declare that he isn't gay, and tries to retract his declaration that he will do the honorable thing and resign.

I don't think that Sin-ator Craig understands that even if he fights and manages to get his conviction overturned (which could only pretty much happen on a technicality), America is still convinced of his guilt. So, pretty much what I'm getting at, Mr. Craig, is that even if you are found to be legally absolved of this, that even if you aren't "gay" and weren't soliciting gay sex in the bathroom of an airport (man--and I thought the hassle you got in the security lines was bad, but The Man is hassling us in the john now? heheh, john.) I'm afraid that we in the Public, have decided your guilt.

And about the whole gay thing. If you like the cock, I have news for you, Sinator, you're gay. Perhaps they didn't cover that during Senate Orientation Day, but this includes Congressional Pages, as well as undercover police officers. Nowadays, times being what they are, you probably would have done better just to admit you like taking it from a dude. The Public would have been kinder.

Of course, for them to just forget about you and let you slip into anominity, you would have had fallen on your sword, like you promised. You would have slipped quietly into the back pages of the newspapers as just another morally corrupt politician. Your retraction of your promise to resign is not only dishonorable, but repulsive.

You are a man in High Office, and as such, you are expected to demonstrate a level of integrity that I would be proud to use as an example to my son. If our leaders cannot be role models to our children, they have no business being our leaders. You apparently have no integrity, and in my opinion, are not deserving of the sacred trust the voters of Idaho have given you.

It is not your closeted homosexuality that offends me. It is your lack of integrity. You are an example of what is wrong in government today.

3 comments:

ChGM said...

Before we make too many hasty conclusions about the man involved in this incident. We have to take a look at the larger picture of the media's role in this affair. Senator Craig's sexuality is not the point--the point is how the liberal mainstream media uses homosexuality as a way to criminalize and ostracize behavior. While I am not condoning airport bathroom rendezvous, I also do not condone using homosexuality as a means to a humiliating end. For liberals who claim to be the champions of the marginalized, I find this to be another instance of them showing their true colors. Why is it that it is always liberal bloggers who viciously “out” conservatives as if it is a form of sick hunting? Why would they do it unless they believed it would inflict harm and shame? What does that tell you about their views on homosexuals. It was a liberal blogger, a gay activist, Mike Rogers, who tried to “out” Senator Craig back in 2006. After all, let’s seriously suspend reality for a moment and ask ourselves, “what if he was a democrat? how would this be handled in the media?” I have an honest answer. I think he would be looked at as a victim and as a hero. I believe he would have be paraded around as a show of how “conservative” government oversteps their “moral” boundaries to harm the “innocent”.

What’s more is that this brings up another issue close to conservatives’ hearts—government intrusion. I worked in media. I know how facts are “accidentally left out” or “turned” and I know we are not getting all the details. I want to know the level of entrapment here. What actually happened? We may never know. However, if I was using a public restroom in an airport in an unfamiliar city, how would I know that it was a local gathering grounds for sexual activity? I wouldn’t. Once more, take a look at Senator Craig’s age. I think that if my grandfather was in the bathroom and another gentlemen in stall next to him tapped his foot or performed any other benign gesture (whether or not it had been co-opted by a group engaged in illegal activity) such as reaching a hand under the stall, that he might respond in the “coded” way too, when really he was going to hand the guy a roll of toilet paper, wrongly thinking that it had gone out in the stall next to him. Take a look at part of the police report after thinking about my suggestions above:

“At 1216 hours, Craig tapped his right foot. I recognized this as a signal used by persons wishing to engage in lewd conduct. Craig tapped his toes several times and moves his foot closer to my foot. ... The presence of others did not seem to deter Craig as he moved his right foot so that it touched the side of my left foot which was within my stall area. Craig then proceeded to swipe his left hand under the stall divider several times, with the palm of his hand facing upward”

This also raises the issue of selective enforcement. Article 1, Section 6 of the U. S. Constitution states that members of the U.S. Senate and the U.S. House of Representatives "shall in all Cases, except Treason, Felony and Breach of the Peace, be privileged from Arrest during their Attendance at the Session of their respective Houses, and in going to and returning from the same; and for any Speech or Debate in either House, they shall not be questioned in any other Place”. I know that Senator Craig’s atterney is looking in to that if they do indeed go to trial at all.

As for resigning. He needs to do whatever he needs to do. However these quick resigns are not something to look up to at all. They are the easy way out. On the contrary, staying in office would prove a number of things: 1.) that he believes he is innocent 2.) that he is willing to endure humiliation day in and day out so that he can continue to serve the populous that elected him 3.) that is he willing to fight for what he believes in 4.) he has decided not to be a victim of the media barge.

If you look into Senator Craig’s background you will find that he is the second-longest serving member of the Congress in Idaho’s history. You will find that he is on the Board of Directors for the NRA. You will also find that he was a member of the Army National Guard. I believe that since the big controversy surrounding this came from the Capitol Hill newsletter, Roll Call, that we should really take a look at the intent of this investigation. I worry that Senator Craig was a longtime member of the Democratic Party’s Hit List and that they almost got their way. By staying in office it will show that Republican representatives have the power to fight back and that Democrats are not the only ones with Teflon coats.

Again, let me make it clear that I do not condone the alleged behavior. I do not condone trial-by-media either. I do not condone the crumbling of American moral values. I do not condone representatives who do not conduct themselves in proper manner while in office. However, part of being a true libertarian means not pushing my values onto other. I will always defend the rights of others for their own choices.

Brian said...

The whole I am not guilty, refusing to cooperate with the police, I am going to resign, I am not going to resign thing, all I can say is typical politician.

If he is gay then don't hide it and live with the results. In life if you make a choice then you get to deal with the results of your choice. And yes I think being gay is a choice.

I personally don't approve of homosexuality and I don't think it is "OK" or "normal" or "acceptable." If that offends someone to bad.

I am sick of tap dancing around things, and worrying about who might be offended. Last time I checked there was nowhere in the bill of rights that said you have the right to not be offended.

Sean said...

I have to agree with chgm on several points.

I agree that the circumstances of his arrest are suspicious, and I too have noticed, and resent the efforts of the liberal media to dig up dirt on conservative politicians.

One thing I would like to add, is that apparently, to those "in the know" they can find these places to have promiscuous homosexual sex. While I was serving in the navy, we had two officers removed from our command for soliciting male prostitution in the men's restroom in a Montgomery Wards. The description in their arrest was identical to how Senator Craig was apprehended. Its possible that they too were entrapped, but I tend to see a trend here.

Now, his alleged homosexuality, is not for me an issue. I have strong libertarian tendencies, so hey, as long as he wasn't hurting anyone... Again, what I find issue with, is that if he was, indeed, seeking to solicit, he was lying to his wife. And if the man lies to the person closest to his heart, how can he be trusted with the reigns of governance? That is the key point I wanted taken away from my post.

I had forgotten about the Congressional immunity during a session. That raises some interesting questions. I do remember reading that he had properly identified himself as a senator, and showed his ID card. Why was he arrested at all?

I find your defense of his decision not to resign quite interesting. Must think on it :)