Larry Craig Won't Go

It's always funny to hear how Republicans talk tough on terrorism. Why then do they run away from reporters when asked about Larry Craig.

Not Tony Perkins of the Family Research Council or Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America or David Keene of The American Conservative Union or Grover Norquist of Americans for Tax Reform.

None was willing to tackle the subject of Craig's future; the lawmaker has pleaded guilty in connection with a men's room sex sting at the Minneapolis airport.

One man quickly left the podium rather than answer. The rest glanced at reporters, then gazed into space, then turned to each other and began shaking hands.

Sooner or later Republicans are going to have to face the music. Craig intends to fight his guilty plea. Attorneys Stanley M. Brand and Andrew D. Herman sent a letter to the Senate ethics committee. They argue that the committee lacks jurisdiction.

Assertion of jurisdiction over this matter by the Committee would be literally
unprecedented and would create deleterious consequences for the Senate as a whole.
To wit, we are unaware of a single case where either the full Senate or the Ethics
Committee has taken cognizance of a complaint, or facts publicly disclosed in the
media, to consider conduct - here a misdemeanor - which in no way implicated official
action by the subject Senator.

The argument doesn't carry much weight. But these guys are paid to get Craig off the hook. Craig's guilty plea didn't give them much to work with.

I never understood why Craig pleaded guilty. Tapping his foot and making contact with another man's shoe is a rather legal argument that he was soliciting. Considering he is a United States Senator, I'm sure he could have convinced a judge that he was just playing accident footsy.

Craig only pleaded guilty because he actually was soliciting sex and didn't want it to be made public. He should have consulted a lawyer before he pleaded out.