Justin's Thursday Political News 08.30.07

Posted by Justin Baragona on 08.30.2007

No Alberto Gonzales news, but plenty about Sen. Larry Craig and his men's room exploits as well as a new study on Iraq and when we can pullout.

Welcome to another edition of Justin's Thursday Political News. Since this column falls on Thursday, by now the Alberto Gonzalez resignation is old news and Jason Easley covered it very well already in his latest news report. So, I'll go ahead and skip on that story. Also, want to remind you all that I will not be posting a column next week as I'll be on vacation. I'm sure 411 will get someone more than capable to fill my shoes during my absence. With that said, it is now time for some news.



Bryan Fischer of the Idaho Values Alliance had this to say about Sen. Larry Craig (R-ID) after it was revealed that he pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct relating to an encounter in a men's restroom with a police officer:


"I believe he should resign because I believe character is an extremely important qualification for public service. And I believe the senator, by his own admission, has acknowledged that he has fallen short of the standard that we should expect from public servants."


Well, it looks like we have a new member of the Self-hating Repressed Homosexual Party, usually just referred to as the Republican Party. Here is how this has all come about. On June 11th, Craig was arrested by a plainclothes policeman in a Minneapolis airport bathroom after he peered into a bathroom stall and tried to gesture to the policeman that he wanted to engage in sexual activity. The Senator entered the stall next to the policeman, blocked the bottom of the door with his suitcase and then attempted to make contact with the policeman by tapping his foot up against his and running his hand beneath the stall a few times. After the policeman showed his badge, the Senator screamed out 'No!' According to the police report, once Craig was taken in for questioning, he showed the police officer his Senate card and asked him "What do you think of that?" By the end of that day, he was read his rights, questioned, had his mugshot and fingerprints taken and was released.

While Craig has stated that his actions were mistaken and that he was not looking to engage in sexual conduct in the restroom, he nonetheless pleaded guilty to disorderly conduct on August 8th and paid a $500 fine. In the guilty plea, it is stated that he knew that he "engaged in (physical) conduct which I knew or should have known tended to arouse alarm or resentment." The plea also had a stipulation that he would not claim he was innocent after he pled guilty. It looks to me that Craig figured that this would not get noticed as it was a misdemeanor where he would not serve time and it occurred in Minnesota, therefore not in his home state nor in D.C. In fact, the Senator pretty much said that in a statement he released on Tuesday where he said he "chose to plead guilty to a lesser charge in the hope of making it go away. I did not seek any counsel, either from an attorney, staff, friends, or family. That was a mistake, and I deeply regret it." Of course, he is making it seem that he did nothing wrong and that is why now he has retained an attorney. However, he has already pled guilty, so what is the point of retaining an attorney when you've already paid the fine?

None of the legal implications even matter here. That is not what this story is about. The fact is, the Republicans are distancing themselves as far away from Craig as they can right now because they are pretty sure he is a closeted homosexual. They can bring up other things that they are concerned with as a cover, for sure. Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has said that he is calling for an ethics investigation into this matter. However, McConnell and other senior Republican leaders apparently are most 'concerned' with Craig trying to use his Senate business card to get out of the situation. "Due to the reported and disputed circumstances, and the legal resolution of this serious case, we will recommend that Senator Craig's incident be reported to the Senate Ethics Committee for its review," the Republican Senate leaders said in a statement.
Sen. Craig has been dealing with allegations about his sexuality for years. Back in 1982, there were rumors that he was under investigation for having sexual relations with congressional pages (Craig was in the House of Representatives at that time.) This past fall, Craig again denied speculation from the internet and the Idaho press that he is gay. Craig has pointed to these past allegations as another reason why he pleaded guilty in Minnesota, and in his words, 'overreacted.' "Let me be clear: I am not gay and never have been," said Craig in his statement.

This situation has already had some consequences on Craig, as he has stepped down as a Senate liaison for Mitt Romney's Presidential campaign. It would also seem likely that even if he doesn't resign, it seems like a long shot that he will be re-elected in 2008, and it now seems like a good probability that he won't even run again. Throughout his career, he has been known as very socially conservative, especially when it comes to gay rights. He supported the recent bill to create an amendment to the Constitution that banned same-sex marriage. He has also opposed having hate crime laws expanded to include crimes against gays and voted against a bill that would outlaw discrimination in the workplace based on sexual orientation. The Senator is married with 3 children and 9 grandchildren. In my opinion, I really don't care whether Craig is gay or not. However, what I find humorous is that we have another conservative, who has spent his life fighting against gay rights, turning out to be gay and looking for love in all the wrong places. Just in the past year we have seen Mark Foley and Ted Haggard and now we have another one in Larry Craig. It appears that you have men who want to do so much to turn away their true nature that they will devote their entire lives being something that is a complete opposite of what they really are. They are completely masking themselves so nobody knows what they really are, as they can't stand it themselves. They repress and repress, hoping their secret will not come out, because they feel that they can never be their true selves.

So, now it looks like Republicans will make sure to get rid of Craig from their party, and I think the underlying reason is because they want to show their constituents that they will not tolerate any queers in their party. Presidential candidate Sen. John McCain (R-AZ) stated on Wednesday that Craig should resign from the Senate because he pled guilty to a crime, and you should not serve if you are guilty of a crime. Of course, that is a pretty simplified statement. The crime that Craig pled guilty to is a misdemeanor and all he had to do was pay a fine and did not have to serve time. If Craig was found guilty of littering or excessive speeding or even a DUI, all of which could be seen as crimes of similar consequences (in fact, DUI would probably be more severe), then I don't think McCain and others would be calling for him to quit. No, Craig's crime was that he was trying to get some quick nookie in a restroom stall from another dude. The Republicans have to show that they don't tolerate that faggot bullshit in their party, dammit! They may even use this situation as a building block to get renewed interest in the same-sex marriage ban amendment. Craig will be sacrificed so the GOP can show all the god-fearing Christians out there that they hate homos a bunch.



Former Pentagon official Lawrence Korb had this to say in an interview regarding Iraq and a report he helped author:


"It is essential that the military begin planning for a phased withdrawal from Iraq now so it can be safely completed within 10 to 12 months."


A report released on Wednesday by the Center for American Progress stated that Most U.S. troops can be withdrawn safely from Iraq within one year. It also said that the White House should start withdrawing troops now and plan their exit strategy. The study did say that one exception would be two brigades in the Kurdish area, which would need to stay longer to make sure conflict with Turkey would not arise. It also stated that one brigade would be stationed in Iraq for an indefinite period of time, as well as air support. The study suggested that the withdrawal from Iraq would allow more troops to be used in Afghanistan. One of the factors in how fast the troops can leave is how much equipment they bring back with them or leave. The report stated that if troops left behind all equipment, they could be out of Iraq in three months, but this was not a recommended course of action. The time period of 12 months is based on consultation with experts in both military planning and logistics. The study's proposed plan for withdrawal would be two combat brigades a month while reducing soldiers and staff in non-combat roles at the same time. The Center for American Progress is a progressive think tank and is headed by former Clinton Chief of Staff John Podesta. You can read more about them here.


That is going to do it for me this week as well as next week. I'll be back on September 13th. In the meantime, why don't you check out Jason's column and read what he had to say about Gonzales. Have a wonderful and safe Labor Day weekend!