SHOULD SEN. LARRY CRAIG RESIGN?

I liked Dan Savage's take on it:

Quote:

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

kuvasz, do you think for one minute that the Republicans would be drumming Craig out of the Senate if the Governor was a Democrat and they would lose that Senate seat?

as much as I also believe Elvis is alive.

0 Replies

I agree, blatham, but there's some details left out by Debra of what is in the police report and what may be in the officer's verbal testimony. I'm not sure of the assumption that the officer is lying if this is one of his stake-outs and he's come up with clean convictions (which could also be a problem as an ordinary person might usually take the disorderly conduct plea). There wasn't just a shoe contact that led to the arrest, which, incidentally, has to be done in a certain way such as an obvious rubbing or tapping of the shoe against the arresting officer's shoe. The hand motioning would have to be in the other's persons side of the wall (which is where I have doubts about that picking up a piece of toilet paper defense). I have stated that he had a chance of acquittal but going forward with a trial would have been a greater chance of being picked as a story in the paper. I think he may have gotten some advice from a friend or elsewhere and this was a calculated risk.

The news this morning is that the Senate is going ahead with their own investigation proceedure and Alan Spector, the lone voice of support for Craig, has become mute in his defense.

I don't think Craig has a chance in the world considering his colleague's attitude towards anything homosexual, be they hypocrites themselves due to DUI's or any kinds of misdemeanors.

sozobe's Dan Savage comments are in line with my own.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

I

sozobe's Dan Savage comments are in line with my own.

Ditto but I would add to that that I have nothing but compassion for closeted gay men like Craig even though he is the worst kind of hypocrite, that stems from his pathology.

What is frightening is that in our repressed culture, there are legions of repressed homosexual men like Craig. Just go to the gay marriage thread if you care to meet some of them.

0 Replies

Granted and you will still see or hear the "I am not gay," or "I am not homophobic" as a qualification and not as a rationalization even though it's extremely likely that by that declaration, one cannot be blamed for believing that they are lying. It still retains the "where there's smoke, there's fire" aroma.

0 Replies

MM, I guess your position is that Craig should not resign. I agree, and hope he stays in the senate for the rest of his term.

Debra, great posts. I hope you will represent me the next time I am arrested (which would be in a nonsexual matter).

0 Replies

I don't actually think he should resign either but it remains to be seen if he's got the stamina or, for that matter, the guts. But I don't believe that even if he were to somehow get out of his legal predicament that he has a chance of re-election.

0 Replies

The Ethics Committee snubbed him today so he may lose his seat no matter what.

0 Replies

all Craig all the time at the Idaho Statesman.

0 Replies

Lightwizard wrote:

I don't actually think he should resign either but it remains to be seen if he's got the stamina or, for that matter, the guts. But I don't believe that even if he were to somehow get out of his legal predicament that he has a chance of re-election.

There are certainly a lot of John Does who are just waiting for the right time to garner their 15 minutes of fame. When that shoe drops, it will not be pretty for Mr. Craig.

0 Replies

Brand X wrote:

The Ethics Committee snubbed him today so he may lose his seat no matter what.

I don't think there are grounds for removal although there is no modern precedent in this matter.

0 Replies

He was convicted of disorderly conduct. Wow! What is disorderly about tapping one's shoe, or even touching your neighbor's shoe, or waving one's hand below the partition?

I am looking forward to seeing the trial on CourtTV.

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

He was convicted of disorderly conduct. Wow! What is disorderly about tapping one's shoe, or even touching your neighbor's shoe, or waving one's hand below the partition?

I am looking forward to seeing the trial on CourtTV.

You forgot about peeking through the stall.

I guess this is normal conduct in men's stalls? If anyone peeped through the stall at me in the ladies room, I would be tempted to call the police, unless she was really cute.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

I liked Dan Savage's take on it:

Quote:

(snip)

However, CASH, as I'm sure you and others involved in the homosexual lifestyle are aware, the kind of man that plays footsie in an airport toilet fully intends

Maybe he intends to have sex in that stall or maybe he intends to have sex at a nearby hotel. It doesn't matter what his specific intent might have been. Specific intent is not an element of the crime of disorderly conduct.

We have to look at the conduct itself and then ask the following:

Was that conduct the person engaged in offensive, obscene, boisterous, or noisy, tending reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others?

What was the conduct Craig engaged in?

He was in an airport. He had in his possession carry-on luggage. When he entered the stall, he parked his luggage at the front of the stall. Where else would he park it? This conduct is not offensive. Parking your suitcase at the front of the stall so that a person has room to drop pants and sit down on the toilet does not tend to reasonably cause others to be aroused by alarm or anger.

He tapped his shoe. Again, not offensive nor something that tends reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

He allegedly rubbed his hand along the bottom of the stall divider; he says he was trying to pick up a piece of paper. Again, not offensive nor something that tends reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

Two people allegedly brushed their shoes together. The recipient of the shoe brush invited it. Again, not offensive nor something that tends reasonably to arouse alarm, anger, or resentment in others.

No offensive, obscene, boisterous, or noisy conduct occurred. No crime.

But, even if you get past that element, you have to prove that he had the requisite culpabilty. That means, when he engaged in the alleged offensive conduct, e.g., parking his suitcase at the front of the stall, he had to do so with knowledge that his conduct would likely provoke a breach of the peace. Inasmuch as the person in the next stall showed his receptiveness to the conduct by moving his foot up and down in encouragement, there is no way that Craig could "know" that his conduct would likely cause the man in the next stall to jump out of his stall and beat him up.

NO CRIME OCCURRED.

0 Replies

kuvasz wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
squinney wrote:
Non of the people you mentioned, MM, plead guilty to the accusations, as Craig did.

So, unless they plead guilty, they shouldnt have to resign?
Then why did you and others demand that Tom Delay resign?
He didnt plead guilty and he hasnt been convicted of anything.

But,Alcee Hastings WAS convicted,so he shouldnt be in Congress.

Patrick Kennedy did say...

http://www.cnn.com/2006/POLITICS/05/05/kennedy.accident/index.html

Quote:
I am deeply concerned about my reaction to the medication and my lack of knowledge of the accident that evening. But I do know enough to know that I need to seek expert help," he said Friday.

Quote:
Sometime around 2:45 a.m., I drove the few blocks to the Capitol complex believing I needed to vote," he said. "Apparently, I was disoriented from the medication."

In his comments Friday, Kennedy said, "The recurrence of an addiction problem can be triggered by things that happen in every day life, such as taking a common treatment for a stomach flu.

"That's not an excuse for what happened Wednesday evening, but it is a reality of fighting a chronic condition for which I'm taking full responsibility," he said.

Those two statements sure look like he is admitting that he is guilty to me.

Then there is this...
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,199290,00.html

You still want to say that Patrick Kennedy didnt plead guilty?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/onthisday/hi/dates/stories/july/25/newsid_2763000/2763525.stm

Quote:
1969: Kennedy pleads guilty over car crash
Senator Edward Kennedy has pleaded guilty to leaving the scene of a crime and has been sentenced to a two-month suspended jail sentence
.

So,apparently Ted Kennedy did plead guilty also.

Alcee Hastings was convicted after a trial,so it doesnt matter if he pled guilty or not.

Personally,I dont think that anyone that has ever been convicted of anything more then a traffic ticket should be allowed to serve in Congress,and anyone that has pled guilty to any type of cfime other then a traffic ticket should be forced to resign their office.

But for you to say that the repubs that have only been charged with a crime should resign (Tom Delay, Bob Foley) yet to then turn around and say that only the dems that pled guilty should resign,is a huge double standard.

I have said before,Craig should resign because he pled guilty.
You dont seem to care about the dems that have either pled guilty or have been found guilty in court.

Why is that?

blah blah blah.... buddy, complain about Hastings to his congressional district they actually voted him into Congress AFTER he was convicted.

I know they did, but since he is a convicted criminal I dont think he should be allowed to hold public office.
Now,sisnce he was elected,does that forgive the crimes he committed before?
Does that excuse his bribery conviction or void his conviction?

Not in my eyes it doesnt.

This latest public debachery by a Republican occured with Craig WHILE he was in office. You ought to note that Congress itself can reject a Representative or Senator from being seated and no Republican controlled House ever prevented Hastings from taking his seat, so actually it was a Republican Congress that allowed Hastings into the House for the last decade. They could have stopped him but they didn't and I don't hear a peep from you about it.

If they could have stopped him and didnt,then it is the fault of congress for allowing him to take his seat.
BUT, I have never heard of The Senate having that power,nor do I see it in the Constitution.

I do however, see this part...
In Article 1, section 3 the Constitution says this about impeachment...

[quote]Judgment in Cases of Impeachment shall not extend further than to removal from Office, and disqualification to hold and enjoy any Office of honor, Trust or Profit under the United States: but the Party convicted shall nevertheless be liable and subject to Indictment, Trial, Judgment and Punishment, according to Law.

As I read that, anybody impeached AND convicted cannot hold public office.[/color]

So much for your fidelity to your morality. It called hypocrisy, by the way.

Patrick Kennedy ought to have resigned, that is IF convicted while driving impaired precludes elective office in your philosophy, but go ahead show us all your inate wisdom and give us a detailed reason why you voted for a ticket that collectively was convicted of multiple driving while drunk or impaired charges.

Patrick Kennedy pled guilty to DUI,so that makes him ineligible to hold office in my opinion.
Pleading guilty is the same as a conviction.

I dont know why Bush was elected, I didnt vote for him or anyone else.
I was having surgery that day,and didnt get the chance to vote.
However,knowing about his DUI would have stopped me from voting for him.
I will say it again,Anyone convicted of or pleading guilty to anything more then a traffic offense should be disqualified from ever holding elective office.

what's sauce for the Democratic goose is also sauce for Republican gander, or is that too strenuous an application of logic for poor, delicate you?

I 100% agree,the rules should be the same for both parties. Shame the dems dont see it that way.

btw What about your Diaper Boy, whore-master Senator Vetter? That guy is a frigging pervert for sure and by your silence of his actions you obviously condone and agree that his behavior of evaculating his bowels into a diaper while screwing a hooker is um .....shall we say "senatorial?"

Nope,Vitter should have been run out of town on a rail.
What he did is not only illegal,it is disgusting.
I dont support him,and I wouldnt vote for him if I could.

Now,what about Ted Kennedy?
He pled guilty to leaving the scene of an "accident", one a woman died at.
He didnt report it for 8 hours,and IMHO used his family name to avoid prosecution.

Do you think he deserves to still be in the Senate?
Yeap its always "politics," with you folks, until yet another Republican is caught with dead women or live boys.[/quote]

0 Replies

Quote:

NO CRIME OCCURRED.

Deb, you're simply incorrect. A crime did occur. I can say this with complete certainty, b/c he plead guilty to this crime, with ample time to reflect upon it, and was duly convicted.

That's the way the system works, yo... in the absence of first-hand information, we have little choice but to look to the law in order to determine the truth of the situation.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Now he's resigning again....

0 Replies

Advocate wrote:

MM, I guess your position is that Craig should not resign. I agree, and hope he stays in the senate for the rest of his term.

Debra, great posts. I hope you will represent me the next time I am arrested (which would be in a nonsexual matter).

No,I think he should resign.
Not for his actions, because I dont care if he is gay or not.
He should resign because he pled guilty to a crime.
That disqualifies him from serving, IMHO.

0 Replies

Roxxxanne wrote:

mysteryman wrote:
Alcee Hastings was convicted after a trial,so it doesnt matter if he pled guilty or not.

Alcee Hastings? Are you effing kiddding me? How does the Hastings matter have anything to do with this? He was impeached after the conviction then he ran for Congress and won. It is called Democracy. Were not you the one who posted a thread whining that the "Democrats" were hypocrites because the Democrats didn't believe that every vote should count?

Alcee Hastings was impeached and convicted of taking a bribe.
That is a felony.
He should not be allowed to serve in the Congress.

I refer you to Article 1, Section 3 of the Constitution.

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?t=102456

Quote:
Personally,I dont think that anyone that has ever been convicted of anything more then a traffic ticket should be allowed to serve in Congress,

Oh but that doesn't apply to the office of President of the United States in your mind?

It applies to EVERYONE that runs for an elective office,anywhere in the US.
At least it would if I had my way.

You are even a bigger hypocrite than Craig.

And besides being a hypocrite, MM doesn't tell the truth:

mysteryman wrote:
Ted Kennedy, killed a woman and still serves in the Senate.

Bill Clinton, accused of rape,accused of groping a woman,lied to the grand jury...

Tell me, exactly what part of that statement is a lie?
Bill Clinton was accused of all those things,and he even paid to settle one of the charges.
Ted Kennedy did kill a woman.
He was driving the car that went off the bridge, he didnt report it for 8 hours, and there is a good possibility that he was drunk.
So,what part of my statement is a lie?

kuvasz, do you think for one minute that the Republicans would be drumming Craig out of the Senate if the Governor was a Democrat and they would lose that Senate seat?

It shouldnt matter what party someone is.
My whole point is that the dems want every repub that even MIGHT have done something wrong expelled,while they defend and support the dems that have either been convicted or indicted.

So,here is a simple question for all of you.

Should EVERYONE that has been indicted,convicted,pled guilty, or even has the "appearance of impropriety" be forced to resign?
If not, why not?

0 Replies

Nobody should ever resign except for a better position with more cash and perks. It's weak.

One might be sacked or even fired but one does at least retain one's dignity.

0 Replies

SHOULD SEN. LARRY CRAIG RESIGN?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know