Politics and the Craig case
0 comment Wednesday, November 12, 2014 |

Democrats are the real homophobes
Senator Larry Craig has already been tried and convicted in the court of public opinion for trying to solicit an undercover cop in an airport bathroom. Welcome to the judicial system of America. The irony is, if anyone invaded anyone�s private potty time, it was the cop thrusting his badge under Craig�s stall. Is it a crime to have Restless Leg Syndrome or to touch the bottom of a stall divider? No, the crime today is being a Republican who champions family values.
The charge of hypocrisy is practically tripping off the tongues of those stalwart supporters of Bill Clinton. They criticized anyone who would look into the private lives of public officials yet now are condemning Senator Craig for keeping his alleged private life in the closet. At least he did not act out his alleged private life in a real public place, like the oval office. It will be interesting to see what Ted Kennedy�s response will be and if he calls for Craig to step down even though he never felt a similar compunction after leaving a young woman to drown in his car,dining on eggs benedict while the fish dined on her. It will be interesting to see if Hillary, who demands that President Bush come clean, stop hiding evidence and evading the truth when she herself has developed at least 500 new ways of saying "I don�t recall."''
So the only conclusion that we can draw from the obvious outrage by the liberal democrats demanding that Craig step down, is that they don�t think gays should serve in the Congress. At least they don�t they don�t think Republican gays should serve since they had no issue with Barney Franks running a prostitution ring out of his house, or Gerry Studs [sic] having sex with an under-aged page. And the argument that Democrat spokesmen give is that these guys got reelected. Great, then let Larry Craig stay in office and let the voters in his state decide if HE should be reelected or not. And if they reelect him, then the people of Idaho, like the people of Massachusetts have said that congress is a big tent, or that they forgive Larry for any alleged indiscretions.
But please, drop the hypocrisy line. It just doesn�t fit here. And if liberals insist that he resign, they better be knocking on Ted Kennedy�s door, suggesting that murder is a lot worse than tapping a foot in a bathroom stall.
And tell Hillary that lying under oath is a lot worse than running your hand under a stall divider. But if the claims of hypocrisy continue, it will only serve to show that the Democrats are the biggest hypocrites when it comes to equal rights for all people. By calling for Craig to resign, they are saying that no matter what your sexual preference, regardless of whether you are open about it or not, gays are not allowed and not welcome in congress and will be run out on a rail from this elite body . . . oh, unless they are Democrats. Hmmmm...did someone say hypocrisy?''
The Larry Craig story is the kind of thing I really like to refrain from commenting on. The nature of the charges, involving sleazy trysts in a public lavatory is just unseemly, and I would shy away from discussing this kind of thing even if it involved heterosexual behavior.
But when I read political commentary, such as that in the above-linked piece, I have to comment on the political aspects of this sordid episode.
First of all, I am really annoyed by the Republicans who will seize on an episode such as this one, involving homosexuality, as a pretext for pointing the finger of accusation at liberals/Democrats. I realize that, apparently, some people find the urge to gleefully turn the accusations of 'bigotry' back on the liberals too much to resist, but all the same, we should resist it.
And I don't think conservatives should be trying to shift the blame away from Craig's behavior, or excusing it because the Democrats are just as bad or worse. What kind of defense is that? None at all. It's much the same as a child, when caught doing wrong, protests that 'Johnny did it first.' Two wrongs don't make a right.
What the writer seems to be saying is that we should seize on the opportunity to catch the Democrats/liberals at their own game and call them homophobes, and thus possibly make hay of the scandal, and snag some votes from "the gay community" by proving our non-homophobic bona fides. Thanks but no thanks. Nothing doing.
I remember reading the same kind of thing during the hearings for some of Bush's minority nominees; whenever the Democrats criticized a minority nominee, some Republicans latched onto that as proof that "the Democrats are the REAL racists." This to me is a very unproductive strategy, and it involves a certain amount of cynicism. It is based on the idea that if we 'catch out' the Democrats in some act of 'bigotry' based on race or on sexual preference, then we can poach lots of votes from the 'minority community' or the 'gay community' or whoever. And we can be, at least temporarily, in a morally superior position to the Democrats/liberals, who usually lord it over us in matters involving political correctness and pandering rights.
Do we really want to get into a 'more-politically-correct-than-thou' contest with the Democrats? Once we start playing that game by their rules in earnest, it will be hard to turn back; we will be just a pale imitation of the liberals. Republicans and 'conservatives' are already farther down that path than we were say, ten years ago, and do we need more political correctness in this country? Do we need another pandering party full of sycophants like the Democrats, who are beholden to 'special interest groups' of every description? It seems to me that conservatives (which category I realize does not include all Republicans) should stand apart from that kind of thing. The last thing this world needs is more name-calling and politically correct censorship.
All the back-and-forth about who is more hypocritical is just silly. And joining in the childish game of 'gotcha' with the Democrats is demeaning.
What is wrong for members of one party is wrong for both. The kind of behavior of which Craig is accused is not appropriate for an elected official, and at the very least, it is an indication of bad judgment, as well as poor self-control. Not qualities we want in elected officials who wield power and who should be honest, trustworthy, responsible, self-controlled people.
If we make it OK for people to do this kind of thing just because they are of our preferred political party, we are just adding to the sum of irresponsibility and lack of morality in our society. We are helping to define deviancy downward. Now for people who are simply party loyalists first, last, and always, maybe there is nothing wrong, in their minds, with that. But for anyone who stands for traditional principles and mores, this kind of thing is not acceptable. Ever.
For the liberals, politics is everything, and they will excuse or overlook or defend the worst kinds of behavior in a political ally. But this is what we might expect of moral relativists and nihilists. If we excuse bad behavior or even criminal conduct by those on 'our' side of the aisle, we are truly being hypocrites, because conservatives are traditionally on the side of law and order and principle. We should not want to be the political cynics the liberals show themselves to be.

Labels: , ,