Breaking! Craig Decides to Hang in There

He actually said blow by blow?

You said 'blow.'

Who, me?

The Republican Senate leadership thinks his decision really sucks but they will have a hard time trying to thrust him out under Senate rules.

Actually I'm thinking the Republican senators are delighted to have him stay. They can continue to be pedophiles saying publicly how much worse Craig is being queer.

Since he wont do the honorable thing and resign like he promised, he should be forced out by the rest of congress.

Article I, Section 5, second paragraph reads:

Each House may determine the Rules of its Proceedings, punish its Members for disorderly Behavior, and, with the Concurrence of two-thirds, expel a Member.

I suspect that it wouldn't be hard to get two thirds of the Senate to expel him, if anyone were willing to push the issue. I also suspect that the Republicans don't want this to grab any more headlines. I suspect, finally, that everyone in the Senate will go a long way, and look at a lot of options, before deciding to take a public vote to expel a member.

Why would you force a member out for a misdemenor? What next, speeding tickets? We're not talking violent crime here.

When President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad spoke at Columbia University and said that there were no homosexuals in Iran he might as well been speaking for Republican neocons. Republican homosexual leaders are safe so long as they stay in the closet, otherwise they had better defect to the Democratic party where the T word is not anathema. The T word is tolerance.

Male prostitute who slept and did drugs with Ted Haggard alleges that Larry Craig visited him as well:

http://www.kesq.com/global/story.asp?s=7171888

Cycloptichorn

I go along with Engineer on this--what horrible crime has been committed which justifies expelling this joker from the Senate? Anyone who claims to be "liberal" can hardly condemn the man for being homosexual, even if he had the good sense to hide it when running for office (yes, the good sense, even in this day, being homosexual and admitting it publicly is hardly a benefit to a political career).

The only other plausible criticism would be that he and the Republican Party are hypocrites because of this. What . . . does anyone suggest that it is news that politicians are hypcrites? Politician and hypocrite are cognates.

Hahah, Set, I hope he stays in the Senate! I don't think he's committed any crime worth expulsion.

But, you see, I'm not a homophobic Republican.

The longer he stays, the happier I am, truly.

Cycloptichorn

I knew that was coming.

I don't like the fellow, but, so far, I think expulsion would be an exercise in silly, though we've visited silly before...
Retirement could be a satisfaction to his constituency, I've no idea.

I'm more interested in the psychological aspects of what to me is a presumptive denial state, and this rather large.. unveiling - conceivably very traumatic, so much so that I can sympathize. Plus whatever the latest scoop could turn up would be additive.
Again, it makes me want to go back and read Advise and Consent again.



Or, I don't know, could the unveiling be a kind of thrill?

Gee, there's even audiocasette -

well, this is the edition I read, back in the day. I trust there are reviews on other Advise and Consent links.

Link to 1959 edition of Advise and Consent




This means a lot to me in retrospect. It was my father who suggested the book, not too much after I had just decided not to enter the convert at seventeen, I probably read it in 1960 or 1961.
I had, back then, few clues about sexuality at all (just wild crushes), much less variations on sexuality. I doubt I had read Kinsey yet, for example. We were a quiet family, very quiet. Thus, I now see the book as a way of him teaching me about the world - with both sex and politics in it - without having to have one of "those" conversations.

Eh, tangent. But, the book involved similar dramatics.