Amid the blogospheric frenzy over that juiciest of subjects, a Washington sex scandal, the reality of politics moves forward.
The scandal that forced Idaho Sen. Larry Craig's retirement, combined with Virginia Sen. John Warner's announcement that he will not seek re-election, have boosted Democrats' hopes of expanding their Senate majority next year.
Democrats were already facing a very favorable environment for 2008, as John B. Judis of the New Republic explains:
Overall, the Democrats will have an advantage in 2008 in having to defend far fewer seats than the Republicans. Only twelve seats held by Democrats will be up compared to 22 for Republicans. And several of those Republicans were elected during the peculiar post-9/11 circumstances of the 2002 election, when President Bush used his immense popularity and the threat of a terrorist attack to boost the chances of several Republican underdogs.
Regardless of the consequences for the Republican Party, many conservatives are happy to see Craig go. Conservatives have criticized Craig for his record on immigration, especially his votes in favor of the 2006 Senate immigration bill (which passed, but was blocked by the House), and this year's similar bill (which was stopped by a filibuster).
Allahpundit at Hot Air -- definitely not a member of the Larry Craig Fan Club -- did some research on Craig's rumored replacement, Lt. Gov. Jim Risch, and describes the results as "promising," due to Risch's order in December for Idaho state agencies to screen employment applicants for immigration status.
As to the sexual politics involved in the Craig scandal, Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America says:
Critics assume that since Sen. Craig is accused of seeking homosexual anonymous public sex, he is somehow obligated to vote in favor of same-sex 'marriage.' Anonymous public sex is not marriage. ...
Americans have the right to expect sexually moral behavior from others, especially from those passing laws over us. One thing we can learn from the accusations against Sen. Craig is that Americans should be allowed to uphold sexual moral standards in the law, employment practices, public venues and society.
Meanwhile, a poster at FreeRepublic.com provoked a discussion of how conservative reaction to the Craig scandal reflects the politics of homosexuality in the wake of the Supreme Court's 2003 Lawrence v. Texas decision:
We are open to the charge that we are hypocrites when we invoke the criminal law to enforce our predilections about sex because we are the party which says it stands for individual liberty and limited government. The Democrats say we intrude government into the bedroom and in this case they are right. So, when they say the same thing about abortion, we cannot effectively deny the charge even though a much higher value -- a baby's life -- is at stake.
This prompts the obvious question: Are law-enforcement efforts to prevent solicitation in public restrooms merely an expression of personal "predilections about sex"?
-- Robert Stacy McCain, assistant national editor, The Washington Times
Comments (8)
I think it is possible that Senator Craig's actions really were misinterpreted. I'm sure my foot has strayed under the partition more than once while maneuvering to to adjust my diaper before or after a long flight.
Posted by Tom E | September 1, 2007 4:13 PM
I can in no way defend Larry Craig's activities, but Idaho has laws against sting operations. Idaho is a great state in that respect. The police certainly have better things to do than to invent crime, and that ought to be true for the police in Minnesota as well.
Do the Minnesota police have nothing better to do than to harass people in public restrooms? I wish Washington police could waste time like that.
I just don't get it. What is the real crime here? Senator Craig bumped another man's foot in the bathroom? I can see why he should be forced to resign. Not.
Posted by Paul Yost | September 1, 2007 4:22 PM
If Larry Craig was a Dem we would have seen Constitutional Experts like Dershowitz on 10 news programs. MSM would have dug up dirt on the arresting officer and would have called the Minny Cops Homophobic .
Now that Craig is gone we can get to the REAL STORY. An epidemic of Homosexuals using public rest rooms for sex. Complete with a secret code of signals etc.
Are there any REAL LIBERALS left? Any REAL liberal would be outraged at how little was needed to railroad a US Citizen. This will come back to bite the homosexual community .
Posted by Dennis D | September 1, 2007 5:15 PM
Dennis D
Studies show that the majority of men arrested for lewd conduct are in straight long term relationships, most often married with children. Of course this type of behavior is rampant in the gay community too.
The sad truth for Senator Craig's family is that he railroaded himself by pleading guilty. You have to take him at his word.
The Republican Party needs to return to its roots of smaller government and get out of being the enforcers of the christian social agenda. Until we do there will continue to be Craig's, Foley's, etc. that cannot function in the narrow confines the Party promotes.
Republican Party = Fiscal conservatives + live and let live!
Posted by Belinda | September 1, 2007 11:06 PM
The greater probability is that now former Senator Craig is not Gay, but is in fact yet another variety of Straight recently found involved in societal-determined weird behaviors, and as acts so deemed are to be found sited by common agreement somewhere along the unapproved spectrum of human sexual conduct. As well, this otherwise comedic event, taken together with acts reported of similar nature, also makes a mockery of the present simpleminded and unscientific nonsense, mostly foisted on a credulous polity by our incautious politicians and those variously engaged in supposed matters of faith, of assigning all points along the broad spectrum of sexual expression or proclivities to only two: Straight or Gay.
Posted by Edwardian | September 2, 2007 12:06 AM
As a career law enforcement officer I can tell you that this kind of disgusting behavior is all too frequent. It is a terrible situation where children are often exposed to this type of activity & the police are right to try to prevent it. You would have to be naive to not understand that Mr. Craig was clearly seeking some kind of sexual encounter with another male. Having said that I do believe that the evidence against him is weak & if he had contested the charge he would have prevailed, although in the court of public opinon the results may have been no better.
The really amazing thing to me is that Democrats caught in similar or worse circumstances have remained in office (Barney Frank, Jerry Studds, Bill clinton, Ted Kennedy etc.) While I do think it correct that Mr. Craig resigned, his resignation should be because of the criminal charges he plead guilty to. The idea that he is somehow a hypocrite is absurd. I do not know Mr. Craig's sexual preference, but it seems to me that one could be gay & not hold the same view as the radical homosexual left. There are gay individuals out there who wish to keep there private life just that, private. Certainly not all gay people are in lockstep on gay issues.
Posted by William K | September 2, 2007 1:26 PM
People keep talking about charges to which Senator Craig did NOT plead guilty. "Disorderly Conduct" did not include any lewd act.
Posted by Tom E | September 2, 2007 5:36 PM
Just one more thing to keep Congress from doing its business.
Posted by Larry Stone | September 3, 2007 2:37 AM