Breaking: Craig to resign? Update: Will announce plans tomorrow morning

posted at 9:33 am on August 31, 2007 by Allahpundit

Yup, says CNN, maybe as soon as today. Although given the GOP’s weird aversion of late to announcing bad news on Friday, look for the official word to come bright and early Tuesday morning, when the press is nice and fresh after a long holiday weekend.

Sounds like it was John Ensign, head of the Republican Senate re-election team, and the RNC hitting the gong in tandem that sent him off. Although he would have certainly announced next month anyway that he wasn’t going to run again, so I’m not sure why he didn’t just quit straightaway at the presser two days ago. Pride, I guess.

Whether he’s learned his lesson remains to be seen, but the GOP’s certainly learned:

The movement against Craig is part of a concerted effort by Senate Republican leaders, who are trying to learn the lessons of the Mark Foley page scandal and distance themselves swiftly from a colleague ensnared in sexual misconduct.

Several prominent Senate GOP officials told FOX News that Republican leaders don’t want to repeat the circular firing squad that engulfed the House GOP leadership last year after evidence surfaced about lewd e-mails from Foley, then a Florida congressman, to a congressional page.

In that case, House GOP leaders fought publicly over who knew what when and how Foley’s case should be handled — feuds that deepened the story’s corrosive effect on party morale and sparked public doubts about Republican vigilance on ethics and public morality.

Interesting comparison. Are they worried about who knew what and when about Craig?

Meanwhile, after three days of the left rolling in Craig’s misery like pigs in filth, the Times asks Republicans to try to be a little more fair.

Update: Another reason they’re pushing him out is to avoid this headache.

Update: Craig’s not playing ball. They’re going to have to do this the hard way with an ethics hearing, which will give the left a nice opportunity to reverse course and rally to his side as a poor persecuted minority battling the wingnut machine.

Update: Quitting? Or just declaring his intent not to run again?


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

It’s from CNN… well… I wouldn’t hold my breath, but the guy does need to take a flying leap.

If for no other reason than the appearance of impropriety. I just wish other politicians would do the same (Hilliary, Kennedy, etc).

E L Frederick (Sniper One) on August 31, 2007 at 9:41 AM

from the NYT

Being stupid as a member of Congress is hardly a reason to be ridden on a rail from Washington.

i really wish it was…

Morning AP.

zane on August 31, 2007 at 9:43 AM

This is such a no-brainer move for the GOP leadership to push for. Anyone who’s heard the tape knows he’s guilty of, at the very least, lying about his sexual orientation and adultery.

Straight men here ask yourself this question: Is there any way another man could “entrap” you into having sex with him in a public bathroom or anywhere, for that matter?

I’m glad to see the Republic leadership taking action here.

12thman on August 31, 2007 at 9:43 AM

I have mixed emotions about this.

Craig’s resigning is NOT going to stop the anti-republican hate screeds. If the Republican leadership thinks otherwise, they’re crazy. At the very best, the hypocrites on the left will continue to beat on every Republican as a proto-molester or worse, and indict the party in general. The stories will not stop just because Craig leaves. At worse, there will be a concerted effort to go after other Republicans as either gay or who can be accused of being gay, irrespective of the facts. And the Democrats will continue this attack until election day next year.

I suggest that the Republican leadership immediately declare war on the media and the Democratic leadership and start exposing the “sins” of the Democrats. I think the Republicans should invoke “The Chicago Way.”

Craig was a strong advocate for RKBA. Gun owners will miss him.

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 9:44 AM

I don’t think he should quit…we need to be more tolerant.

Who released that tape?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 9:45 AM

This is a good thing. The GOP needs to clean house, and get some true conservatives that actually represent those who elected them. Hopefully Republicans don’t lose the seat as a result, but the sooner he resigns the better the chances of holding onto it are.

BadgerHawk on August 31, 2007 at 9:45 AM

This doesn’t need to wait until Tuesday. There’s already been a week-long media orgy over this. Time to end it.

It needs to be shown the GOP will not tolerate people like this in the party and draw a clear distinction between them and the Democrats (see Cold Cash Jefferson).

JammieWearingFool on August 31, 2007 at 9:52 AM

Craig is creepy and this whole bathroom thing is just way past what is acceptable for a Senator. Resigning and getting a Republican replacement ASAP sounds smart to me. Democrats will always look for any angle to bash conservatives. Might as well do what’s right. Announce it on a Friday or a Monday or a Wednesday. No matter what, it’s going to get plenty of attention. Friday works for me. The weekend is when I have the most time to comment here! Although now that it’s football season… we’ll see :-)

Ordinary1 on August 31, 2007 at 9:53 AM

The GOP needs to clean house, and get some true conservatives that actually represent those who elected them.

Starting with someone who will enforce (or vote to enforce) our immigration laws and secure our borders, since Craig is one of those “shamnesty” Repubs.

Bigfoot on August 31, 2007 at 9:53 AM

Craig was a strong advocate for RKBA. Gun owners will miss him.

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 9:44 AM

Agreed, he was that. But he was just as strong a supporter of that shamnesty bill. Maybe his constituents will replace him with someone strong on the RKBA and secure borders.

Texas Nick 77 on August 31, 2007 at 9:53 AM

Very sad Larry Craig has his life ruined over something this stupid.

He should retain a little dignity and serve out the rest of his term.

jaime on August 31, 2007 at 9:55 AM

12thman: “Straight men here ask yourself this question: Is there any way another man could “entrap” you into having sex with him in a public bathroom or anywhere, for that matter?”

Macranger is calling this arrest a police frame-up.

Sometimes, that happens. Witness this article from the Chicago Sun-Times.

Man pays the price for being a good samaritan

August 30, 2007
BY STEVE PATTERSON Staff Reporter/spatterson@suntimes.com
It was Rocio Palacios who first noticed the woman who appeared to need help.

It was 8 a.m. when she and her husband, Erasmo, dropped their 6-year-old daughter off at school and had picked up their 22-year-old daughter to go out for breakfast when they saw the woman waving her arms at 53rd and Kedzie last November.

The couple laughed, realizing this wasn’t a woman in distress after all.

But within seconds, Chicago Police swarmed the family car, hauling Erasmo Palacios out in handcuffs. He was charged with solicitation of a prostitute

His daughter, who had just run in to exchange her coffee for a hot chocolate, screamed, while his wife cried in fear.

Eight hours later, Palacios, who has no criminal record, was released from custody. And weeks later, charges against him were dropped.

Now, Erasmo Palacios is suing the city and the officers involved in his arrest, saying they violated his civil rights during an incident he described as both frightening and ridiculous….

.

Now, I’m not saying that Craig’s arrest was bogus or a frame-up. But the police of every major US city are NOT concerned with “justice” or arresting only the guilty. They want “ARRESTS,” because that is what they are measured on.

I recommend that everybody get this book:

Arrest-Proof Yourself: An Ex-Cop Reveals How Easy It Is for Anyone to Get Arrested, How Even a Single Arrest Could Ruin Your Life, and What to Do If the Police Get in Your Face by Dale C. Carson and Wes Denham.

You have no idea, until you read this book, on exactly how an arrest will destroy your life, your career, your reputation, even if you ARE innocent.

My wife is an attorney and she gives every new client a gratus copy of this book.

The bottom line, 12thman, is that the cops can LIE.

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 10:01 AM

I don’t think he should quit…we need to be more tolerant.

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 9:45 AM

Tolerant of what? Senator’s who hypocritcally jam “family values” down everyone’s throat while being “entrapped” into soliciting extramarital homosexual intercourse in public bathrooms?

Or more tolerant of Senators so unaware of the workings of the legal system for which they supposedly author laws that they don’t realize pleading guilty is an admission of… uhm guilt?

He’s not the worst man in the world, probably not even in the top 4 billion, but there’s no way he should be a U.S. Senator.

12thman on August 31, 2007 at 10:03 AM

Good article by Parker about GOP shooting itself in the foot over these kinds of issues.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/KathleenParker/2007/08/31/republicans_unzipped

Those bemoaning the loss of a staunch gun rights advocate but slamming his stance on the immigration reform bill (s 1348 for jaibones)are illustrating the difficulty, if not overly simplistic dream of finding the “perfect conservative”.

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:04 AM

Now, Erasmo Palacios is suing the city and the officers involved in his arrest, saying they violated his civil rights during an incident he described as both frightening and ridiculous….

Craig responded by pleading out. Erasmo Palacios is innocent and is fighting the charges and suing over false arrest. I would think a Senator (if he was innocent) would never admit guilt and fight a false arrest. Like I said, Craig is creepy. Time to take a break from the public eye.

Ordinary1 on August 31, 2007 at 10:09 AM

Tolerant of what? Senator’s who hypocritcally jam “family values” down everyone’s throat while being “entrapped” into soliciting extramarital homosexual intercourse in public bathrooms?

Or more tolerant of Senators so unaware of the workings of the legal system for which they supposedly author laws that they don’t realize pleading guilty is an admission of… uhm guilt?

He’s not the worst man in the world, probably not even in the top 4 billion, but there’s no way he should be a U.S. Senator.

He was in a weird situation…It isn’t something I would do, but man this thing is way out of hand.

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:12 AM

Technically, Craig did NOT break the law. He’d not had sex in public – tho he was probably on his way to. But the fact that a senator would conduct himself in such a manner warrants being booted from office. This is NOT the kind of man we should aspired to in our politicians.

And before anyone says “All politicians are slime, so seeking something better is stupid.” This world has completely forgotten what setting STANDARDS is all about. Sure, we may not meet them, but we at least strive for them.

tickleddragon on August 31, 2007 at 10:15 AM

Benjamin Franklin?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:17 AM

The bottom line, 12thman, is that the cops can LIE.

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 10:01 AM

GeorgeJ, I have no doubt that cops can “LIE”. But I’m also a pretty firm believer in Ockham’s Razor.

Let’s recap for a second. Accusations of homosexual impropriety have hounded this man for years. On the day of this incident the Senator walks into the bathroom while this cop was on duty. Craig peaks into the cop’s stall for “a minute or two”.

The Senator then picks the stall next to the officer. He procedes to “drop a piece of paper” so important to him that he feels the need to pluck it up off the floor of a public restroom. (I’m sorry but if it wasn’t my plane ticket, which would be securely tucked away, that paper would have to stay there.) Then the Senator just so happens to take a wide stance, rubbing the officer’s foot.

Oh yeah, and then the Senator pleads guilty to a lesser offense to try to quickly make it all dissapear.

So what’s more likely, that a) years of a plot to fool the public into believing the Senator is gay and seeks sex in odd places came to fruition when this cop set him up? or b) the Senator’s dirty laundry has been exposed to the light?

12thman on August 31, 2007 at 10:21 AM

I don’t think he should quit…we need to be more tolerant.

Who released that tape?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 9:45 AM

No we don’t. We pay these people a lot of money an intrust them with significant power. We have every right, even a duty to expect respectable behavior. His claim of not guilty NOW is far to little far too late. He needs to be GONE !

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 10:22 AM

Is this case going to court or has it been decided?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:23 AM

Will McCain now ask Ted Kennedy to resign?

DfDeportation on August 31, 2007 at 10:25 AM

He was in a weird situation…It isn’t something I would do, but man this thing is way out of hand.

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:12 AM

Yeah, he’s in a weird situation all right. A situation created by his own actions. Where is the lust for personal responsability which was once a cornerstone of conservatism?

I’m not saying Senator’s need be perfect but Craig’s behavior definitely makes him unfit to serve.

12thman on August 31, 2007 at 10:28 AM

Is this case going to court or has it been decided?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:23 AM

Did you not read anything about this story before commenting? He was arrested, and two months later pleaded guilty in a cour hearing to disorderly conduct. There’s nothing further to go to court over.

Hollowpoint on August 31, 2007 at 10:28 AM

Is this case going to court or has it been decided?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:23 AM

Going to court? You need to read some background. He already plead guilty.

12thman on August 31, 2007 at 10:29 AM

Sounds good to me. But I fear that this is a setback for Hot Air not unlike the exit of Rosie O’Donnell from The View.

Asher on August 31, 2007 at 10:29 AM

Those bemoaning the loss of a staunch gun rights advocate but slamming his stance on the immigration reform bill (s 1348 for jaibones)are illustrating the difficulty, if not overly simplistic dream of finding the “perfect conservative”.

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:04 AM

I realize there is no “perfect conservative,” I wouldn’t qualify for that myself. I just hope someone who stands firm on both those issues, along with removing unnecessary spending from the budget and reducing the federal debt, replaces this man.

Texas Nick 77 on August 31, 2007 at 10:31 AM

My view on this guy’s fate is this – has he done anything to constitutionally bar him from holding a position (regardless of the width os stance) in congress? If not, then the ‘ethics committee’ (ROFL), and assorted politicians, could suggest he quit – but is he under any legal obligation to? Couldn’t he just tell ‘em to get bent and remain in congress?

Ultimately, the people of _Idaho_ need to decide whether this is the kind of man they want representing them.

Ochlan on August 31, 2007 at 10:40 AM

Well that Times article instantly put me in a bad mood this morning. Seriously, we just can’t win.

CorinthianJest on August 31, 2007 at 10:41 AM

Is this case going to court or has it been decided?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:23 AM

Your a little behind the power curve, this has been to court and Craig plead guilty.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 10:41 AM

My wife, an attorney, listened to the tape and as attorney feels that the Craig may not have been guilty of the accusation that he was soliciting for sex. In other words, she thinks he had a chance at defense.

She points out several things.

1. Certain charges YOU MUST FIGHT TO THE BITTER END, no matter what “deal” the prosecution offers you. “Reduced charges” in exchange for a plea deal in a case of an accusation of sexual impropriety is as bad as the actual charge. Pleading guilty to “disorderly conduct” didn’t make the noise go away, and Craig is about to be out of office anyway. Had he fought the solicitation charge, he might have still been convicted, but he could have been acquitted. And an ACQUITED MAN stands higher in society than a man who pleads guilty.

My wife would have advised a client in a similar case to plead not guilty to soliciting and make the state prove the case. To quote her: “He was a fool to not take it to trial.” In any criminal case, the STATE MUST PROVE guilt.

This also applies to charges of “domestic abuse” that are commonly and automatically levied. Around here, prosecutors routinely promise you that it will all go away if you plead guilty, pay a $200 fine and be a good boy for a year or so, if you are arrested for domestic violence. However, if you do, YOU ARE A CONVICTED DOMESTIC VIOLENCE OFFENDER. And you can kiss your right to EVER own a gun good by. You can kiss unsupervised visitation (if there are children involved) good by. You can kiss good by to ever getting an even break in family court, forever.

2. If you plead guilty today to something, you have no way of knowing in the future what new “popular” crime that Congress apply sanctions to in an ex-post facto law. Who knew that a minor bust for pot as a teenager (over 17) means you can never, ever be a teacher in my state, or drive a school bus. Get arrested for “mooning” and you become a SEX OFFENDER, and suddenly, decades later you have to register your address every year for the next 10 years or so.

Who knew that a finding of guilty for MISDEMEANOR domestic violence would, decades later, strip your right to own a firearm. Or serve in the military or on a police force.

3. By pleading out, YOU MAKE IT EASY for the prosecution to either put you away or make you pay big bucks to the state. And in return, what do you get? A CONVICTION that is attached to your police record.

Why is this important?

My wife has a client who, before he hired her, was arrested for shoplifting and who plead guilty. Irrespective of whether or not he did it or not, every time he drives through the town, he is followed by a police car (they know his tags), and if he goes one mile over the limit, or touches the yellow line or the fog line, or doesn’t stop at the line at a light or stop sign, he gets a ticket. Every time.

Plead guilty, and you have plead guilty FOREVER.

I don’t know what is in Craig’s heart. I don’t know what kind of man he is. But he damned himself FOREVER by pleading guilty to disorderly conduct. I bet he now wishes he had fought the solicitation charge. After all, could the outcome have been worse?

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 10:41 AM

Well that Times article instantly put me in a bad mood this morning. Seriously, we just can’t win.

CorinthianJest on August 31, 2007 at 10:41 AM

No offence intended, but that’s what you get for reading the Times.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 10:43 AM

These things (court) can take time…I didn’t realize it was official?

tomas on August 31, 2007 at 10:45 AM

My wife, an attorney, listened to the tape and as attorney feels that the Craig may not have been guilty of the accusation that he was soliciting for sex. In other words, she thinks he had a chance at defense.

My wife has a client who, before he hired her, was arrested for shoplifting and who plead guilty. Irrespective of whether or not he did it or not

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 10:41 AM

No offense to your wiffe, an attorney, but wouldn’t it be nice if the practice of law on both sides was about the search for truth and justice rather than just determining if one could “get off”.

/idealism

12thman on August 31, 2007 at 10:51 AM

After all, could the outcome have been worse?

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 10:41 AM

Your wife is a smart lady. Craig could have fought and won, but he was afraid of the publicity. I think most everyone agrees. If he was innocent, he would have fought the charges. He plead out, now he needs to get out.

Ordinary1 on August 31, 2007 at 10:54 AM

Very sad Larry Craig has his life ruined over something this stupid.

He should retain a little dignity and serve out the rest of his term.

jaime on August 31, 2007 at 9:55 AM

The man is a “dignity” vacuum. He’s disgraced himself, the Senate and most of all the Republican party. He deserves nothing but to be shown the door. Let the Democrats stand up and cheer for this kind of thing. The Republicans boot your rear out the door and that’s what they should do. That’s what makes us different, we recognize inappropriate behavior.

Otherwise we are just like the Democrats that stood up cheered Gerry Studds for his “courage” in staying in the House after he was exposed for having sex with 17-year-old male congressional page.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 10:58 AM

Macranger made this interesting observation:

3. There is no way that Craig’s arrest was not reported to local media. Many times in my career media knew more than we did even before we reached the scene because they had their ears glued to a scanner or by other methods. They’re good and seeing that they already had Craig under their microscope I can see no way that they didn’t know. A US Senator is accused of lewd behavior in the bathroom and it flies under the radar for three months? Right.

Now on the same day that this story broke two other stories broke which contained absolute bombshells to both Hillary Clinton and the Democrat Party in general. The first was the fact that George Soros’s defunked America Coming Together received the third largest fine in FEC history for voter fraud during the 2004 election. The other news of course – which hasn’t been told completely – is the growing campaign scandal involving several democratic candidate for president – including Hillary Clinton.

Now, here’s what Mac is saying:

If you were on the editorial board of any major news organization, and given that you are (90% chance) a rabid liberal Bush-hating, “Repug-hating,” Democrat, and you had this story for *THREE MONTHS* and didn’t break it, would you not use it at a time when it would most help your party? I.e., like when your party’s major source of ILLEGAL MONEY is convicted of raping the campaign financing laws AND when your leading candidate is caught RED HANDED TAKING ILLEGAL MONEY, is that not the time to release a story you’d been sitting on for months to take the criminal behavior of your party below the radar?

Would you run with headlines that read: CRAIG IS A CONVICTED SEX PERVERT, or would you lead with DEMOCRATS ARE BY NATURE CROOKS AND THIEVES?

If I were a Bush-hating Democrat, I know which headline I would run.

So, Larry, THANKS A LOT (not!!)

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 11:04 AM

Craig was done in by his arrogance and creepiness, which he always possessed, and not by his sexual predilections.

Entelechy on August 31, 2007 at 11:23 AM

“If he was innocent, he would have fought the charges.”

It is not as simple as this. Here’s an example.

You get stopped for speeding, and you weren’t. Yes. Officer Friendly has a quota to fulfil and every car, speeding or not, is an “easy mark.” Besides, WHO FIGHTS SPEEDING TICKETS?

Where we live, a few miles over the limit could cost you $150.00 in fines AND you still have to take the “traffic safety class.” That’s if you plead guilty by sending a check in with your ticket. If you do this, you are on “supervision” for 30 days, and at the end of that month, the ticket is discharged (a finding of not guilty) and you go on your merry way.

But you really, really were not speeding. So, you plead not guilty as is your right. You will spend $300 or more on a lawyer to represent you in court. If you don’t have a lawyer in court with you when you fight a ticket, YOU WILL ALWAYS LOSE in my county, because the judges ALWAYS believe the cops. Always! Just like Wal-Mart.

So most people do the math, and “plead out” even though they are innocent. They consider it a “road tax” and let it go.

Guilt or innocence sometimes has nothing to do with it.

Of course, when *moi* gets a speeding ticket (which is almost never as I am an excellent law abiding driver. Really.), I bring my wife to defend me. That’s one of the bene’s of paying $120,000 to get your wife a law degree. Free traffic court appearances. So she makes up the difference from the (ahem) “paying” customers. ;^)

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 11:24 AM

If you were on the editorial board of any major news organization, and given that you are (90% chance) a rabid liberal Bush-hating, “Repug-hating,” Democrat, and you had this story for *THREE MONTHS* and didn’t break it, would you not use it at a time when it would most help your party?
georgej on August 31, 2007 at 11:04 AM

Stop with the “I question the timing” BS consiracy theories. There’s no reason to believe the media sat on this- it’s not in their best interest to do so and be scooped by a competing organization.

Furthermore, if they really wanted to sit on the story until it could be used for the greatest political benefit they’d have waited until shortly before the election when it was too late to get another candidate elected.

There’s always some kind of scandal, event or story you could use to “question the timing”. Simple answer- the cops didn’t go to the media (just like arresting officer said he wouldn’t), the media doesn’t cover every misdemeanor court hearing and simply didn’t catch it right away. Eventually someone tipped them off.

The irony is that had Craig not told the cop he was a Senator, it’s quite possible that no one would have known. “Larry Craig” isn’t exactly a household name outside of Idaho and certainly not in Minnesota.

Hollowpoint on August 31, 2007 at 11:33 AM

12thman: “No offense to your wiffe, an attorney, but wouldn’t it be nice if the practice of law on both sides was about the search for truth and justice rather than just determining if one could “get off”.”

I did take offense and almost decided to ignore your remark.

But I’ll answer you this way. The only source of absolute justice is that which God gives you when you face Him on Judgment Day. In the mean time, the “search for truth and justice” is handled by mortal and fallible human beings, who lack both the wisdom and the necessary omnipotence to see into men’s hearts.

And as long as our law says that a person is presumed innocent until proven guilty, and as long as our legal system is adversarial in nature in what is only an approximation of determining real guilt or innocence, the prosecutor will always try to win and convict, and the defense lawyer will always try to win and acquit. It is only in the adversarial process that the truth may win out.

Or, it may not.

/REALISM

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 11:34 AM

The New Mile High Club

Airlines Race to Upgrade Lie-Flat Seats and TVs and Even Add Private Rooms

Ok in planes apparently, but not restrooms.

JiangxiDad on August 31, 2007 at 11:34 AM

Ok in planes and plane restrooms apparently, but not airport restrooms.

So lets see, empty vials, no nailcutters, take shoes off, take belt off, don’t tap, no sex in airport, wait for takeoff.

JiangxiDad on August 31, 2007 at 11:37 AM

Hollowpoint: “There’s no reason to believe the media sat on this.”

Of course there is.

It is for the same reason that the MSM spent the last 3.5 years portraying the war in Iraq as a war we have lost. Where the impression is deliberately being given that our troops helpless and are “being picked off, one by one” by an enemy that we cannot beat.

It’s called AGENDA JOURNALISM. And that is what “journalists” are taught at J-school these days.

Know the agenda, and you know what they’ll print/broadcast and when.

Have your forgotten that WashPo and NY Times spent over 2 years trying to nail Rove with “Plamegate.” They held “Fitzmas” parties, they printed every innuendo, they hung on every word of Lyin’ Joe Wilson, and did innumerable interviews on Hardball on how they were going to finally get Evil Karl Rove, the Democrat’s Great Satan.

This isn’t a “I question the timing” thing from me.

Because if *THEY* can make such accusations of us (and they do it all the time), when it is clearly not true, then it stands to reason that the mindset to do it IS THERE, in their minds, and it becomes a strategy that they would use if they ever had the opportunity.

Well, for “the good of the party,” Craig is going to (if he hasn’t already) resign.

Because he was stupid (on several fronts), he allowed himself to be arrested AND he stupidly plead out to a lesser charge.

And if I were liberal Democrat with a chance to help destroy the Republicans (and protect and advance my party in the process), you had better believe I’d accentuate Craig on page 1, and put Soros and Hillary on page 43.

georgej on August 31, 2007 at 11:51 AM

Dear GOP:

Even if Democrats are jerks and “hypocrisy” is being wildly misused as a word, here’s a fact: You simply cannot campaign for good values and have a bunch of old men tripping over there personal sexual hangups. Period. There are, believe it or not, many middle-aged men who can control their libidos. This should be a non-negotiable requirement for everyone on your team, even if it means breaking up the Old Boys Club. Deal with it like men (and ladies), and move on.

Very truly yours,
Fed Up and Looking for a Viable Third Party

DrMagnolias on August 31, 2007 at 12:07 PM

another reluctant lemming goes over the cliff of public humiliation and disgrace

Yes he should resign

Yes he did all the right things – owned up to it and took his punishment

Lets leave him alone to fix his life

EricPWJohnson on August 31, 2007 at 12:12 PM

Ok in planes apparently, but not restrooms.

JiangxiDad on August 31, 2007 at 11:34 AM

There is some difference between doing what you will in a private room with a consensual partner and being solicited for unnatural sex in a public restroom by a total stranger.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 12:36 PM

The Times editorial, in chalking up to homophobia the GOP’s abandonment of Craig by comparing it to other scandals, fails to grasp one simple idea: In the other scandals, no one’s even been charged yet. In Craig’s case, he pled guilty to a crime. We can all feel sorry for Craig, but there is a real difference between a guilty plea and mere suspicion leading to an ongoing investigation.

calbear on August 31, 2007 at 12:56 PM

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 12:36 PM

Just playing devil’s advocate. An airplane bathroom is a stall with walls down to the floor. What is you see someone cute on the plane that you don’t know, and you ask them to join you there and she says ok? Sounds fairly similar to me.

What if there were “private” stalls in restrooms. Then it would be pretty much the same as on a plane.

Just trying to press the issue. It means, obviously, that we’ve allowed way too much sexual activity in public.

Remember when those 3 celebrity girls (Britney Spears I think) got in/out of a limousine without underwear? That’s a solicitation.

JiangxiDad on August 31, 2007 at 1:07 PM

Republicans are homophobic? But last week we were all gay! I get so confused anytime I make the mistake of reading the MSM.

drunyan8315 on August 31, 2007 at 1:14 PM

The next time when you feel the need to tap your shoe and place your bags in front of a airport bathroom stall then have a cop stuff a badge at you under the stall wall. Fight it to the death. Nothing goes away.

Egfrow on August 31, 2007 at 1:26 PM

What if there were “private” stalls in restrooms. Then it would be pretty much the same as on a plane.

JiangxiDad on August 31, 2007 at 1:07 PM

A private compartment on a train or a plane with a lockable door, and paid for by an individual is the polar opposite of a public facility. They are not the same thing no matter what the configuration of the restroom stalls. Public restroom are not meant to be a substitute for a hotel room or your private abode, and anybody using a public restroom to troll for sex is making a nuisance of themselves and causing a problem. That’s why its not tolerated, somebody can easily get hurt, and that’s why the perpetrators get arrested, as they should.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 1:28 PM

JiangxiDad on August 31, 2007 at 1:07 PM

Maybe I’m missing something here…but wasn’t Craig in a _public_ restroom? Aren’t planes _private_ property?

AFAIC they can have trans-atlantic orgy flights…you pays yer money, you takes yer choice…

Ochlan on August 31, 2007 at 1:35 PM

That’s why its not tolerated, somebody can easily get hurt

To be honest, I don’t give a flying frig if some homo ‘hurts’ himself in the ‘act’…what I care about is HIV-ridden fluids.

This kinda thing has been going on forever though…I just never use public restrooms and leave others choose to wallow in such filth. Ugh.

Ochlan on August 31, 2007 at 1:38 PM

What about womens’ public restrooms? Do they suffer the same problem with dyke-trawling?

Or whatever the kids are calling it these days…

Ochlan on August 31, 2007 at 1:40 PM

We here in Idaho are going to get rid of Craig because he’s an a shamnesty shill. So I don’t care what he does. Although it would be nice if he resigned and the governor appointed a decent republican that can win in 08.

csdeven on August 31, 2007 at 1:41 PM

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 10:04 AM

I don’t call for his resignation just because he’s not a “perfect conservative”, although I welcome it because he’s gross and totally wrong on a very important issue (immigration).

I would like to see him resign because he pled guilty to a crime that should disqualify him from the Senate, imo, but that’s just serendipity.

Jaibones on August 31, 2007 at 1:41 PM

Proposed bumper sticker:

LARRY CRAIG: HIS CAREER IS IN THE TOILET.

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on August 31, 2007 at 1:45 PM

All Sen. Craig has to do is switch to the Democratic Party and all this will disappear overnight.

Proposed bumper sticker:

LARRY CRAIG: HIS CAREER IS IN THE TOILET.

ROFL – Good one Doc Waugh!

Wuptdo on August 31, 2007 at 2:02 PM

Staff source says he won’t resign — from headline

This is what I expected. He’s now missing his last chance to do the right thing and resign. I predict he will still be pressured into resignation, only later. Now the whole ugly thing is going to be drug-out. Your a real dirtball Larry.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 2:11 PM

I think the time was this was kept quiet by the Republicans during the amnesty debate. They let it out now because they can’t wait till after the primaries for this to come out.

Didn’t this story break just before the the Hillraisers? If anything, that story was broken after several weeks of waiting through the August doldrums and just before a long weekend, when by next week will no one will remember it.

pedestrian on August 31, 2007 at 2:15 PM

OMG! Hahaha!

Egfrow on August 31, 2007 at 2:17 PM

Jaibones on August 31, 2007 at 1:41 PM

As I would like to see Vitter get unseated in 2010 for a gaping hole between his values rhetoric and his behavior. His tacit approval of the fearmongering about s 1348 and his amendment helped derail it, so I guess that is “serendipity” (had to look that one up darn you)

You and I will have to agree to disagree on the immigration bill. Why the republicans couldn’t pass a better one when in the majority is still a puzzle. But they are showing that they can obstruct with the best of the democrats, although I would think you want more than that out of the senate and house.

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 3:02 PM

While we’re at it…………let’s start the Murtha, Hellary, Pelosi, Boxer, Feinstein, et.al. ethics investigations concurrently. That would make for some good TeeVee!

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on August 31, 2007 at 3:10 PM

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on August 31, 2007 at 3:10 PM

I’d be happy if they would just have full disclosure on the earmarks so the voters could make smart choices. Investigations take so long and are always seen as political by the opposition.

Bradky on August 31, 2007 at 3:13 PM

Senator Craig obviously did not see the oh so important and vital video, Men’s Bathroom Etiquette. He is destroying the very fabric of Society right now by not biding by these rules.

Egfrow on August 31, 2007 at 3:15 PM

No problem with gay men trolling to sex in public restrooms you say ? Then maybe you should read this article.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 3:27 PM

Sen Craig: Quit stalling and quit already!

Ordinary1 on August 31, 2007 at 4:42 PM

No problem with gay men trolling to sex in public restrooms you say ? Then maybe you should read this article.

Maxx on August 31, 2007 at 3:27 PM

Gee, in all the hundreds of comments I’ve read on this subject, I never saw anybody say they had no problem with it, Maxx.

JannyMae on August 31, 2007 at 6:16 PM

Dear Allah,

Shouldn’t your tagline “Out to pasture” be “Outed to pasture”?

Dr. Charles G. Waugh on September 2, 2007 at 2:51 AM