Posted on 08/30/2007 7:50:09 PM PDT by pacificus
I read the transcript of the Larry Graig interview with the Minnesota police.
I don't like what I'm hearing from other conservatives. The liberals see a cheap Senate seat and you want to give it to them because a guy moved two fingers under the stall wall in an airport bathroom.
If they had the guy on tape asking for sex, paying for sex, or photographed in the act, or any other physical proof, then I would say that looks very very bad and he should go.
But that is not the case.
This is very lame, and those of you who have never had a disagreement with a law enforecement officer should hope that a cop never accuses you of something. Because by your own action, your professional career, and or political career, should be forit, merely on the word of the officer with no physical proof or corroborating evidence.
Those of you who pass judgement, on Larry Craig, merely on the heresay and liberal spin that has been run in the press, should be ashamed.
No.
Notice how I answered the question? It's a new thing we're trying on Free Republic. Now if you had simply placed that rather reasoned question in your previous post, instead of "he already pleaded guilty to it," I'd be agreeing with you. Just because I wouldn't do that, does not mean there are no circumstances in which that would happen. Which is why there is a distinction between your statement and your question.
I think that's a fairly safe bet.
Can you imagine what his wife is going through?
It is important, because truth is important. Perception is not truth. Spin is not truth (for Craig or the MSM). And if we allow ourselves to be governed by such a fickle thing as perception and further allow that perception to govern our Republic then we become a nation of polls, tossed about by the passing fancy of the latest news cycle. We cannot survive in that manner. Truth of our ideas and truth of our convictions must guide us. Not perception and power.
Count 1 PEEP: Interference with Privacy: Minn. Stat. Sec 609.746 subc. 1(c), by surreptitiously gazing, staring, or peeping in the window or other aperture of a sleeping room as in a hotel, as defined in section 327 70, subd 3 a tanning booth, or other place where a reasonable person would have an expectation of privacy and has exposed or is likely to expose their intimate parts, as defined in section 609.341. subd. 5 or the clothing covering the immediate area of the intimate parts and doing so with the intent to intrude upon or interfere with the privacy of the occupant; a Gross Misdemeanor.
Count 2 DISOR: Disorderly Conduct Minn. Stat. Sec. 609.72 subd. 1(3), by engaging in offensive obscene abusive boisterous, or noisy conduct or in offensive, obscene or abusive language tending reasonable to arouse alarm anger or resentment in others, in a public or private place, knowing or having reasonable grounds to know that it will, or will tend to, alarm, anger or disturb others or provoke an assault or breach of the peace, a Misdemeanor.
By his own hand Craig himself says he deserves the disorderly conduct because:
I did the following: Engaged in conduct which I knew or should have known tended to arouse alarm or resentment of others which was physical (versus verbal) in nature.
Neither of those two charges above suggest resisting arrest. Nor does Senator Craig himself mention resisting arrest. I don't try to read things into charges that don't exist. Especially when neither of the parties involved do so.
It seems that scandal and corruption only applies to Republicans. The dems can do as they please and its called freedom of choice.
How? It is impossible to prove a negative, so his innocence can't be established. In the court of public opinion he will stand guilty until proven innocent. Therefore his case is hopeless.
Politics ain't beanball!
Did he plead guilty to the first count?
“Your statement alone is an injustice.”
But if you read upthread, it’s not about justice, only politics. And in the end only politics should prevail.
Even if every allegation is true, I wonder if anyone here has an ounce of compassion for a man who has fallen short. Probably not.
You have issues. Sheesh!
Nor is politics an excuse for abandoning principle for expediency. You are perfectly willing to abandon the question of his guilt or innocence for the expediency of the "Republic" (which I cynically opine may more closely resemble Republican power than some grand noble notion of the Republic).
In politics perception means everything. Truth and justice is simply not of political benefit, unless the people PERCEIVE it to be true and just. Truth and justice are vital in ethics, but ethics and political success have little to do with each other.
It is a fact that these closet cases harm the GOP more than one might think. I keep waiting for the pics to come out of Lindsay Graham chasing male pages around his desk screaming ARRIBA, ARRIBA!
“It’s hilarious some here are demanding his innocence, while he signed a plea of guilt.”
Party first, party last, party forever.
Sure do, visit my homepage.
That is a question I asked myself. We are all broken in varying degrees. Sometimes we respond with brazen disgust at others weaknesses while carrying our own under our skin. The removal from the situation and the tabloidization of our society makes us callous to our human suffering and the shared burden of our brokenness. I'd say more but it's kind of rambling.
I feel sorry for him. I feel even more sorry for his family. May truth prevail and brokenness be made whole.
No, he plead to the second count. I believe intent is mentioned in the first count. Harder to prove intent. There is no intent in the second count that he plead to, just an agreement that the behavior is wrong.
Actually that is JUST what politics is. Mr. Smith, don't go to Washington, you won't do as well as Jimmy Stewart.
And political success and the ultimate success of ideas or ideals have little to do with each other (see Vaclav Havel or Lech Walesa). Truth is an unstoppable force. The Senate is a barely moving body. I'll take the former (truth) over the latter (political success) any day. If we are in politics for politics sake, we are playing parlor games. If we are in politics for the sake of forming a more excellent nation, then truth means everything. Otherwise, it's just who has the best propaganda.
It does not appear at first glance that the 2nd count has anything to do with the alleged peeping.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.