Craig: My Final Take
Let me state that I emphatically reject the puritanical squeamishness driving the calls for Craig’s resignation. I disagree with his legislative issue positions. His hypocrisy sucks. His denials don’t sound convincing. And public bathrooms lack the type of ambience I’d prefer for my own liaisons.
All that could lower his chances for re-election. Which could convince him not to run again. That’s okay; I consider that democracy, working as it should.
But I don’t think what he did should be a prosecutable sex crime. He invaded privacy and posed a nuisance to someone in a bathroom stall. He was charged with misdemeanors that said as much. He was a nuisance. Not a demonic danger to society. I’d consider drunk driving to be a more serious offense than Larry’s lust.
I don’t believe minor misdemeanor violations should cause automatic disqualifications to public service in the Senate. If public censure convinces him not to run again, that’s his decision, ultimately. But the moral posturing by his Republican peers is itself more objectionable than anything Larry did. After all, we have a president that fucked our Constitution, lied about the intelligence, promoted torture and its twin, extraordinary rendition. And hundreds of thousands have died, needlessly.
That the same Senators disgusted by Larry’s leer find no moral objection to actions I consider crimes against humanity is an indicator of badly skewed morality. Sexual desire for other adults is a natural impulse, even though it can produce tasteless choices. But the actions of the Bush administration amount to the advance of serial murder, torture and rape. If there be outrage and calls for dismissals of public servants, let them direct them at the greatest dangers to society. (Including government sponsored travesties like the one I blogged about yesterday).
They should find great moral objection to actions akin to those of Hannibal Lector, not to those akin to Benny Hill.
Satire is an appropriate punishment for the latter.
