On Larry Craig

I like to believe that I am a non-partisan when it comes to scandal.

Thus, we have Senator Larry Craig, Republican of Idaho. What an idiot!

I saw his televised explanation of his public restroom arrest the other day. I have to say, if this is what constitutes the decision-making process for this guy, Idaho voters need to get him out of the Senate at the next election.

Resign? Don't know yet. What he allegedly did was tasteless and disgusting, but Bill Clinton, Ted Kennedy and Barney Frank, to name just a few, have done much worse, and kept their jobs.

Should the voters of Idaho turn him out next election? Probably so. I suspect that I would. Including voting for a Democrat if Craig entered and won his primary.

My business partner and I were discussing this case earlier in the week, and he believes that Craig, contrary to his own public statement, had consulted his attorney before pleading guilty to the lesser charge. In my partner's view, this is a standard police/prosecutorial tactic- threatening a smear by reporting an arrest for soliciting sex (in this case, gay sex), but "allowing" an on-the-spot plea to a lesser charge, like 'lewd or indecent conduct.'

If Craig found himself between 'a rock and a hard place,' no puns intended, it's his responsibility and he has handled the entire matter ineptly. By seeking no 'counsel,' including that of an attorney, I believe he displays the sort of inept decision-making process that we cannot tolerate in the US Senate.

Nevermind that Craig apparently has a history of dabbling in matters gay. One search on YouTube turns up a video of then-Representative Larry Craig dealing with the matter some years ago. Craig defensively and pre-emptively publicly disavowed any involvement in the 1979-82 Congressional page sex scandal.

My point is that now, Craig is one of only 100 Senators, and his nearly-incoherent babbling about what he should have done, and what he did, and didn't do, what he is, and isn't, reflects poorly on our so-called 'deliberative' chamber. Surely there must be someone else in Idaho with conservative values who is more capable of effective decision-making than this buffoon.

Congressional Democrats Retreat On Earmarks

Not yet a year into their domination of Congress, House Speaker Frisco Nan and her Senate counterpart, Harry Reid, have already broken their promises to reform earmarks.

Reid has contrived the Senate processes to now require his, and only his, personal, unpublicized opinion as to whether a bill complies with the chamber's earmark rules. So much for sunshine as a disinfectant.

Meanwhile, over in the House, they passed a bill containing the word 'ethics,' but have left the earmarking process largely intact.

In fact, Fox News recently reported a story wherein Pennsylvania's pompous and arrogant member, John Murtha, Frisco Nan's failed candidate for House Majority Leader, inquired, in a debate concerning a spending bill, whether a Republican member had a preferred special interest who needed to be 'taken care of,' in relation to the bill at hand.

The subject was a military need for a special paint, which Murtha had arranged to have provided, sans competitive bids, by Sherwin Williams. Further, while the government paid for the experimental process, the vendor would hold title to any patents or assets resulting from the contract.

What was truly horrific was the Republican member's recounting of Murtha's presumption that the member must be opposing the bill because he had another special interest in whose pocket he was.

With shenanigans like this occurring, I continue to dispute those pundits who think that the House and Senate remain Democratic locks for 2008.