The Crucifixion of Larry Craig

I do not share many, if any, of Senator Larry Craig’s political views. And to be blunt, I do not consider him to be much of a role model for anyone. I believe him to be dishonest, and feel that he is opting to break the law willingly, repeatedly, when he could actually be in a unique position to do a lot of good and help change people’s attitudes and prejudices about certain things, such as homosexuality. I do, unofficially, in my gut, think he is a homosexual, not that it makes a difference to me personally. These opinions of mine are based solely on highly subjective observations… and I think they are wrong.

I did not say they were incorrect, but according to my ethics, they are wrong. And unfortunately, for Senator Craig, I was not the only one to reach the same one-sided conclusions when the news broke of his arrest in a Minneapolis airport restroom. The arresting officer claimed that Senator Craig had attempted to solicit him for sex. Craig maintained that his foot bumped into the officer’s foot due to his “wide stance.” That, and all the other details the arrest report contained were, however, largely inconsequential for the media hoopla that ensued. One word was peppered throughout almost every article, every news bit and blog entry. That word, of course, was “gay.”

I watched on with amazement as politicians, celebrities, and even supposed friends of the good Senator climbed out of nowhere to quickly demand for his resignation. These people claimed to be appalled and shocked by Senator Craig’s initial admission of guilt. These public figures proudly goose-stepped on the high road of moral superiority, claiming that the Senator’s big mistake was that he confessed, if he was, as he claimed in public, innocent. He should have maintained his innocence, even if that meant the case going to court instead of him just having to quietly and discreetly pay a fine.

In my view, the greatest ethical wrong-doing in this whole mess was not Senator Craig’s alleged lewd conduct, or his alleged entrapment by the arresting officer. Instead, I feel, the real “wrong” behind it all was the very public and extremely political execution of Craig’s reputation and career. And it was not the “confession” or the “lewd conduct” that did him in. It was, instead, that one little three-lettered word, of which the media could not get enough, and the Senator’s political peers would not touch at all amidst all their criticism. It was that very critical non-issue that buried his political career, along with any prior accomplishments.

Young and attractive male politicians can get arrested for visiting a female prostitute, and there is yet a chance for them to recover their career. For a female politician, there would be no recourse. JFK, while never arrested for lewd conduct – to my knowledge – was known for appreciating the company of beautiful women. But the public could tolerate a young, vibrant, charismatic president courting the fairer sex. A middle-aged, balding, married senator arrested in a public restroom for soliciting gay sex, on the other hand, is a bitter pill to swallow.

That is not to say Larry Craig necessarily belongs in the Senate. For me, his sexual preference is not a matter of any importance. What is significant, however, is the fact that he confessed to a crime in a court of law, and then later on steadfastly denied any wrongdoing. We should not demand perfection even from our senators, but as a high-ranking member of the legislative branch of the government, he should have been more consistent in his statements to the police, and to the public.

I feel that this happens a lot in the arena of American politics, and it is always disappointing to observe. A man’s career is demolished due to circumstances which may be, at least partially, beyond his control. To me, it is akin to a pack of hungry wolves gathering around an injured one, ready to strike. When Craig’s fellow politicians were criticizing him, it seemed apparent to me that his alleged homosexual tendencies were the greatest issue behind the calls for resignation. But naturally none of his peers were going to openly acknowledge it. They were too busy making sure that their names were being printed correctly, as they valiantly protected the decent name of the strictly heterosexual collective conscience of American politics.