2007-08-29 14:02:18 · 9 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
When Senator Craig repudiated his guilty plea, he opened himself up for trial both in the court of Public Opinion and a Court of Law, should Minnesota choose to take offense.
On the basis of his own statements in the matter, I find him guilty of arrogance, willful stupidity and hypocrisy--which is to say, being a Republican.
Pleading guilty and then using that as "Proof of Innocence" regarding the charges you pled down from--that is just soooo Republican.
2007-08-29 18:43:27 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
Of course - anyone famous who has a brush with the law is tried in the media and found guilty before the facts are even known. His guilty plea was just what he said it was and something many have done - plead guilty to a minor crime in order to avoid the hassles of a drawn-out court case even if you know you are not guilty. For a politician, neither is good but getting it into the press then largely forgotten as more important things like some low talent singer having a DUI comes along is often less damaging then a drawn-out public battle.
As a conservative, I really don't care about his sexual orientation as long as he doesn't promote non-heterogeneous sex as normal. His orientation is between him and his family and none of my business. To me, the whole episode sounded like a pair of five-year olds ratcheting up a silent argument until one showed his cool badge and the other his cooler Senate ID. Craig should have known better but sometimes the "full of yourself" syndrome gets the better of anyone with power.
His voting record is exceptionally good for his western constituents so I doubt that this will make much of a dent in his career. If only Washington State could vote in a Senator that reflects the view of its interior voters instead of just that of coastal voters our lives would be so much better.
2007-08-29 22:04:08 · answer #2 · answered by Caninelegion 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Craig, I refuse to call a pervert Senator - he lost that title when he went looking for sex in the men's room. As for his guilty plea, he is guilty, it won't stop what people think of him, and there is no recovery, or at least there shouldn't be!
2007-08-29 21:08:44 · answer #3 · answered by ♥ ♥Be Happi♥ ♥ 6 · 1⤊ 2⤋
All politicians and public officials are constantly tried in the "court of public opinion" -- such is the nature of the modern media-frenzied world.
As for his guilty plea -- it was a misdemeanor that is entirely unrelated to his job performance. Leave the guy alone, already.
2007-08-29 21:09:55 · answer #4 · answered by coragryph 7 · 3⤊ 2⤋
If some old pervert tried playing footsies with me in the bathroom stall, I'd punch his lights out. I respect openly gay men, but these closet perverts that 'molest' straight men in restrooms and underage Senate pages deserve a good azzwhoopin'. His opposition to gay rights earns him the disdain of all Americans. This guy isn't gay, he's perverted. There's a difference, you know.
2007-08-29 21:15:26 · answer #5 · answered by CaesarLives 5 · 2⤊ 2⤋
He thought his guilty plea "would make it all go away". Stupid of him, wasn't it?
2007-08-29 21:10:19 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Doesn't a guilty plea mean he's guilty?
2007-08-29 21:08:56 · answer #7 · answered by arvis3 4 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Both. And rightfully so. Mainly due to his adulterous attempt AND his hypocrisy.
Simply because he got caught, THIS TIME, is evidence that he has gotten away with it and achieved successful encounters in the past.
2007-08-29 21:10:09 · answer #8 · answered by Chi Guy 5 · 1⤊ 2⤋
if he didn't do it, he wouldn't have plead guilty
2007-08-29 21:10:15 · answer #9 · answered by anonacoup 7 · 1⤊ 2⤋