Friday, February 28, 2014

Protecting One Of Their Own

It was Republicans who forced Trent Lott to give up his Senate Majority Leader position after making comments at a birthday party for Strom Thurmond; it was Republicans who cut Todd Akin from the campaign financing vine after he made stupid comments about abortion; it was Republicans who convinced Larry "Wide Stance" Craig to resign.

Democrats, however, do things differently:
Power corrupts, and absolute power corrupts absolutely. That adage has more application than usual in California, where Democrats hold all of the statewide offices and supermajorities in the legislature. They can enact any policies they want, with only the judicial branch offering belated checks on their power. And when I say belated, that’s literally the case with state Senator Rod Wright, whom a jury found guilty in January of committing eight felonies regarding his residency and eligibility for the office he held.

Normally, politicians who get that kind of a verdict have the decency to resign. If not, the body in which they serve would almost assuredly eject them — but not California Democrats...

In the past, a jury verdict of corruption has been enough to press for resignations from the California legislature. Democrats insisted yesterday that a resignation wasn’t necessary because Wright has been stripped of his committee assignments, and — I’m not making this up — he’s on paid leave, and apparently only since Tuesday. Democrats want taxpayers to pay his salary after a jury convicted him of corruption in the office he now refuses to leave.
I remember their protecting Bill Clinton, too, saying that he shouldn't face any hearings until after he left office. They protected Anthony Weiner, too, until doing so was too much of a political liability.


allen (in Michigan) said...

Special rules for special people baby.

Mike Thiac said...

Yea, Weinder went off half-cocked too many times.

Bad thing, in all seriousness. Of all the candidates for mayor last year, he sucked the least, no joke.

pseudotsuga said...

We mustn't leave John Edwards out of that list of recent protected politicos!

maxutils said...

Clinton, yes. Absolutely. But -- he lied under oath. Weiner did something akin to watching porn ... didn't have an affair, hurt no one except his wife, and ... I don't remember a lot of support for him. As evidence? He was Jon Stewart's college roommate and close friend ... and Stewart ripped him on a nightly basis. Weiner has yet to return as a guest on "The Daily Show;" also his attempted mayoral comeback was doomed. John Edwards ... reprehensible behavior, but he didn't gain from it either. The examples for the Republicans you cited? With Akin, shouldn't the issue be "Why do Republicans vote for people who are this stupid?" It SHOULD take care of itself -- but he didn't do anything wrong, either. Presumably he was just as stupid when people voted for him. As for "wide stance' guy ... he didn't commit a crime he was charged with solicitation. And, I would make the argument: if he had done the exact same thing in a bar, instead of a restroom...would it even have been a crime? But ... homosexuality, or bisexuality still has a stigma, especially if you're a Republican from a conservative state. Can you blame him for attempting to be discreet? I would really prefer that the parties focus on things which actually matter ...and of things you cited ... Clinton's mattered, because he committed an actual crime. Akin's mattered, because he could have affected poor policy ...but that one fixed itself, as it should. No amount of money was going to save that campaign.