Reader comments
A matter of dignity

Jim Balcer | 4:51 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

If Sen. Craig wants slow down or stop all these calls for his resignation from Congress. All he has to do is switch parties. If he were to become a democrat, there is a very good chance that all these calls for his resignation would cease.
I have noted over the years that when a republican does something wrong, the republican is usually called on to resign or not to run for office again.
If a democrat violates some law, the media and most Americans just shrug it off as business as usual.
Take the case of the Senator from Louisiana who was allegedly found with a large sum of money in his freezer. When the story broke I did not see any major calls for him to resign or not to run for office. Instead there was a lot of quiet.
the man ran for office and was reelected.
So Senator Craig switch parties, become a democrat and the calls for your head on a platter may lessen quite a bit.

Gail Knight | 6:02 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

Senator Craig is too enlighted to have pleated guilty of a crime he did not commit. If he were a naive youngster that might be a reasonable assumption. To have one of his statue and knowledge plead guilty--he is guilty--even if it is of stupidity. He should resign. I live in Idaho and am very sorry he brought this on himself and our great state

Pioneer Stock | 6:06 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

It's hard to feel sorry for Senator Craig. He brought this upon himself. The hypocrisy of crusading against fellow US citizens who happen to be gay, while secretly indulging in the very same activities himself, is just asking for downfall. Bad Karma always comes home to roost.

Comments continue below

Tom Lindsay | 7:08 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

I feel sorry for the Senator. He is not yet willing to be honest with himself or others. One reason for his difficulties was standing beside him with her sunglasses on. He needs to confront that problem too and resolve it. Until then, the cacopheny of the indignant will crescendo. I just hope he has a spiritual awakening, repents to his wife, his grandchildren and family and to the Lord. And, I hope he does it before he does something even more horrendous as he finds himself trapped by his own lies and obfuscation.

Anonymous | 7:35 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

I don't care what the man's orientation is, I think it's trashy for anyone -- gay or straight -- to solicit for sex in a public restroom.

Did the man never watch Law & Order?! Everyone knows you don't talk until your lawyer shows up and that you NEVER admit guilt until you've been advised.

VoU | 8:12 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

Jim, you need to broaden your reading material. There were numerous calls for Jefferson (the La Congressman) to resign, by people in both parties. It's funny how the only response some people have to the hypocrisy of someone like Craig is to attack Democrats. Do you have any thoughts on the Craig situation itself?

Bob | 8:17 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

If Craig would have went to a prostitute or grabed a women he would have been fine with the Rs.

Sad | 8:37 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

I feel sorry for Craig. It sounds like he's a very conflicted man who has painted himself into a corner with his own hate-filled rhetoric. I hope he finds a way to gain some peace with himself. This whole situation does lend some credence to the old idea that homophobia is often fueled by personal guilt and self-hate. With any luck, societal enlightenment will help prevent the creation of sad situations like that Mr. Craig is in.

cdub | 9:08 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

Whether Craig did it or not, he pleaded "guilty". That closes the case. Congressman Jefferson is maintaining innocence and has the right to draw out his case as long as it remains open and under investigation. This isn't a Republican-Democrat issue.

McCain is right on this one--by pleading guilty the case is done. Certainly a career law maker knows that. If Craig wants to try to back pedal to fight this, he has every right to pursue his legal options. But he shouldn't go down that road as a US Senator. He should resign first.

hbrand | 10:07 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

Senator Craig is a disgrace to his family, his party, and his state. One doesn't have to be gay to get excited at the possibility of anonymous sex. The hypocrisy of Craig is startling.....seems like Republicans love to damn everyone else for their morality but always refuse to take responsibility for their own.

Sara | 11:19 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

GO JIM!!! My sentiments exactly.

Disappointed | 11:30 a.m. Aug. 30, 2007

I just hope he is not LDS and we get dragged thru the mud AGAIN !!!

lifer | 12:29 p.m. Aug. 30, 2007

Jim and Sara,

I seem to recall something about a guy becoming the second president in history impeached and tried on charges stemming from conduct generally considered less tawdry than soliciting annonymous sex in an airport toilet. It pretty much ended his effectiveness as a president, called into question any action taken to kill or capture Bin Ladin, etc.

In other words, that witch hunt hurt him, his family -- and us!

Hmmmm ... I don't think he was a Republican either.

Human | 1:53 p.m. Aug. 30, 2007

Our political leaders are human...one man or woman's hypocrasy has nothing to do with the entire party. Both parties alike are made up of humans, who make bad choices.....

RangerGordon | 2:40 p.m. Aug. 30, 2007

I find it interesting that in his press conference Craig tried to make the issue about his identity ("I am not gay. I have never been gay.") rather than about his conduct (soliciting sex in an airport restroom).

Coming, as Craig does, from the party that pretends to categorically reject the very existence of gay identity ("Love the sinner, hate the sin") this was a telling strategy.

I actually couldn't care less what people do in airport bathrooms. What bothers most people, I think, is the man's hypocrisy. And yes, Jim, as the party that has positioned itself as the most stridently antigay imaginable, the GOP pretty much has a monopoly on this particular brand of hypocrisy. These embarrassing events will continue until Republicans adopt a more realistic view of human sexuality.

Devil's Advocate | 3:20 p.m. Aug. 30, 2007

I'm not defending Sen Craig's behavior but...

As I read all these comments I keep scratching my head and thinking... It's odd that though President Clinton was accused by numerous people of rape, sexual harrasment and sodomy, all we heard was, "His personal behavior is not our business, it doesn't affect how he does his job". Yet this guy, on his first instance of tapping his shoe inapropriatly... Note: he is only accused of a misdemenor (a speeding ticket is a misdemenor) and we can't wait to condemn him and throw him out?

After testifying before Congress that he didn't have sexual relations with his intern then later after his semen was found on her dress admitting that he lied, all you heard was... "This doesn't affect his ability to do his job, we should just leave him in". Yet with no evidence of false testimony, many in Congress crying for more investigations and are all over Alberto Gonzales to resign NOW!

I'm not saying what Craig or Gonzales did is OK or that it should be OK because Clinton did it, so put that thought away. I'm just curious why Ganzales and Craig get one type of treatment but so many people came to President Clinton's defense.

Somebody explain it for me, please!

The Explainer | 4:00 p.m. Aug. 30, 2007

I'll take a stab at it Devil's Advocate.

As distasteful as Clinton's conduct was, it wasn't criminal and it wasn't directly related to the performance of his duties. (If memory serves, Clinton did lie under oath in a deposition, but that lie would not amount to criminal perjury.) I'm not condoning the multiple times that Clinton lied about the issue while not under oath, but it has to be conceded that Clinton was lying about a personal matter.

Gonzales has repeatedly misconstured (or some would say lied) to Congress about the functioning of the Department of Justice. He has also shown a startiling amount of ignorance concerning the functioning of the department that he was in charge of. The calls for Gonzales' resignation were based as much (if not more) on questions about his competence as they were on his testimony to Congress.

Craig is different because he pleaded guilty to criminal conduct (something Clinton never did). I also think that Craig is different because of his hypocrisy. He has been exposed as a man who doesn't practice what he preaches and I think that severly limits his ability to be effective as an advocate on moral issues (which happens to be a cornerstone of the Republican party's political game plan). You don't hear Democrats calling for Craig to resign because if he stays Democrats will have the best opportunity to capture his seat. I think it is politics more than moral outrage that leads Republicans to call for his resignation.

MB | 10:56 p.m. Aug. 30, 2007

Mr./Ms. Explainer, that was very well done. And just to clarify a little, there was no group of rape/sodomy victims around to accuse Clinton. Plenty of rumors and money spent to find them, but no willing accusers and just one reluctant consenting adult (though barely of age) when it came to crunch time before the Senate.

RangerGordon | 11:23 a.m. Aug. 31, 2007

I don't remember anybody giving Clinton a break. Repubs had Ken Starr looking up Clinton's nose with a microscope. They ended up impeaching him over the cigar fiasco. To this day, they blame him for everything that goes wrong.

Boy, Clinton sure got a free pass!

Add your comment

Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.

Words Remaining

E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.