Posted on 03/21/2008 7:08:20 PM PDT by kingattax
Sen. Larry Craig (R-Idaho), encumbered by a scandal since last summer, did not file for reelection by his state’s deadline Friday, keeping a promise he made and officially marking the end of his congressional career.
Craig’s political future has been in doubt since his arrest and guilty plea on disorderly conduct charges filed after an incident in a men’s restroom at Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport last June.
The three-term senator, who previously served five terms in the House, denied the charges that he solicited sex from an undercover police officer conducting a sting operation to crack down on alleged gay sexual liaisons in the airport’s bathrooms. Craig said he pleaded guilty in hopes of quelling a scandal, a decision he said he regretted.
The passing of Friday’s 5:00 p.m. deadline brings to a close a career in elected office that began with Craig’s election to the Idaho state Senate in 1974 and all but clears the way for Idaho Lt. Gov. Jim Risch (R) to take his seat next year in the strongly Republican state where President Bush defeated Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) 68 percent to 30 percent in the last presidential contest.
(Excerpt) Read more at thehill.com ...
Your buddy followed through on his promise to retire. You were right in your assessment of his principled character (in this situation, at least).
You forgot the most fashionable excuse of the last week or so.
Reports of the guy having $90,000 in cash in his freezer were “taken out of context.”
As if there is ANY context in which that, or saying the things Obama’s racist pastor said from the pulpit, would be justified.
I’m curious why someone on FR would mimic leftist Democrats’ accusations of “kooky extremism” toward conservative Idaho Congressman Bill Sali.
In December 2005, Human Events — the conservative newsweekly that Reagan called his favorite publication — ranked Romney #8 nationwide in its Top Ten List of RINO’s (Republicans in Name Only).
More like the polls were not in his favor.
____
____
You nailed it on post #3.
The rest is commentary
No, he did not "keep his promise." His promise was not only not to run again, but to resign immediately and let a new Senator from Idaho take his place, if his challenge to his consent conviction was denied. It was denied; he did not resign then.
Craig thought that the Senate Ethics Committee would be too timid and toothless to throw him out. Unfortunately, he was right. The Committee issued only a slap on the wrist. From what I see of Craig now, the only reason he did not file for reelection is the correct assessment that Idaho voters, unlike Massachusetts voters, will not tolerate reprehensible behavior in their Senators.
Otherwise, Craig's ego would have led him to file to run again.
Congressman Billybob
Not only is that a far cry from being the “most liberal governor ever”, they weren’t even correct about him being a RINO, much less being one of the top 10. But you can appeal to authority if you like.
I’ve only studied two of those issue in detail. In those two, you are dead wrong. So I have no interest in caring about the others you mentioned that I haven’t looked into.
Romney did all he could to stop gay marriage in Ma. The court forced it on the state. Those who believe the fantastic story that Romney somehow broke the law and imposed it — but somehow did so without a single person taking him to court over his violation — is the kind of thing that small children believe before they are introduced to reality.
The only gun law he passed was the pro-gun law pushed by the Ma. Gun groups and the NRA, which relaxed restrictions on the ownership of guns.
Come on. You shilled for Romney all those months and now claim that you never bothered to look into all the postings that laid out his leftwing record as Governor of Massachusetts?
That just isn’t credible, since you were on numerous threads where the facts were vetted for FReepers repeatedly.
As to gay marriage, the facts of the case are irrefutable. Mitt Romney used his executive authority to institute gay marriage, threatening the justices of the peace with firing if they refused to perform the ceremonies, and changing the marriage licenses to a gender neutral state. Not only was he not compelled to do so by the court, he was forbidden to do so by the state’s constitution. To this day, no law or constitutional provision allows gay marriage in Massachusetts.
Romney’s gun ban was a permanent ban on scary “assault” weapons, and his statements at the time of signing speak for themselves as proof that Romney was the worst sort of enemy of the Second Amendment.
http://www.iberkshires.com/story.php?story_id=14812
Romney signs off on permanent assault weapons ban
- July 08, 2004
“Deadly assault weapons have no place in Massachusetts. These guns are not made for recreation or self-defense. They are instruments of destruction with the sole purpose of hunting down and killing people.”
- Mitt Romney
I never looked into the entire “gay agenda” in schools hysteria. I’m sure there is some kernel of truth that was totally distorted in that as well, but it didn’t interest me. I was more interested in the claims about gay marriage, the gun law, and the medical insurance plan.
It’s a lot easier to post some half-assed sound-bite attack against someone than it is to do considerable research into the actual facts to find out how they have been distorted.
As this is not my real job, I limited myself to those things that seemed the most damaging, and where the claims were the most egregious but somehow being believed by otherwise smart people.
BTW, claims are not facts.
Romney did not use his “executive authority” to institute Gay Marriage. As I’m sure you know, Mass. law does not GIVE the governor the “authority” to institute Gay marriage. If he HAD tried to do so, his fate would have been the same as that of Newsom in San Fransisco — a quick lawsuit and a court overturning the ill-fated attempt.
Romney told the executive branch, correctly, that they were bound by the interpretation of the Mass. marriage law that the courts adopted and that the legislature did not correct. Some were threatening to NOT FOLLOW THE LAW, and as a good conservative Republican, Romney showed respect for the rule of law by implementing it, even as he took every legal step possible to correct the court’s ruling.
As I’ve explained previously, the idea that the state constitution forbid the court from acting is absurd, the idea that Romney acted in a forbidden manner is laughable, and the belief that “no law or constitutional provision allows gay marriage” is a belief that truly is less sound than the belief in the Easter Bunny.
That this is so is so evident that it amazes me that any person could believe those who falsely made these claims.
The ENTIRE NATION was up in arms over the idea of a court instituting Gay Marriage. On the day the court made it’s ruling, every conservative was writing about how they had “instituted gay marriage” . Since that time, the entire focus of the conservative movement has been to overturn this horrible ruling.
And yet this one group insists we were all wrong, that the court did absolutely nothing. And further, that a Governor acted on his own with no authority to institute Gay marriage — and not ONE of all those millions of conservatives, religious leaders, and others thought to actually have him arrested, or sued him to stop his illegal activity.
I can’t imagine you don’t see how ludicrous this is. The Mass. Resistance people had the audacity when pushing this story to claim that NO LAWYER in the entire world had actually READ the ruling, which was why nobody but THEM understood what they were talking about.
I’m sorry. The idea that a major court battle was joined through appeals to the supreme court at the cost of millions of dollars, the end result of which was a ruling that had absolutely no effect and that had no meaning and that was completely benign is so utterly incomprehensible that it is hard to imagine it has to be argued. But you are arguing that is the case.
And the argument that the Governor of a state can simply make up rules without consequence is equally incomprehensible, but you argue that this is the case.
IN fact, the Mass. legislature was more than happy to institute Gay Marriage. They were given time by the court to fix the law if they didn’t want gay marriage, and they did nothing. They were asked by the Governor to allow the people to vote for a constitutional amendment, and they refused — with 75% of them voting to accept gay marriage.
Of course, if YOU were correct the entire fight to pass a constitutional amendment was stupid, because there was no constitutional amendment needed, just somebody “smart” enough to sue the court to block the “illegal” gay marriages.
So, have you filed a suit? Has Mass Resistance filed the suit? Where are the people pushing to have this “illegal” gay marriage stopped? Nowhere. because that would happen in the real world, not the fantasy world where courts have no power and the governor is God.
In fact, I've driven by the cemetery where he currently "lives" a few times.
To be added to this ping list just make some stupid bathroom humor innuendo that has nothing to do with Larry Craig.
Craig really blew it. He threw his life down the toilet. The only way he can resurrect his career is to suck it up, swallow his pride, get on his knees and ask for forgiveness.
Craig is incapable of exciting the base.
It’s time for him to clean up the mess he made.
Nothing can make a real man give up his seat and his throne. Try to make us. Surgeon Generals Warning: We are armed and we have a license to carry.
Pretty much sums up your entire post.
Not very likely. Most probably he was beholden to the large agricultural interests in the southern part of the state and everyone else be damned. Also, he was never above kissing up to the president.
You might want to mention that revelation on your campaign website, then....I think it still praises his character, last I checked.
At least he didn't hit on you in the storm. :-)
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.