Hoo Boy

August 28th, 2007 | by Craig |

Something tells me that I’m really going to hate the Google fallout from this deal.

I will add my $.02, though, because there are some interesting points raised by the whole mess.

1.) Isn’t what a politician does with his private parts his own private business; between him and his spouse?
     a.) Unless, of course, it’s in a public restroom, then that’s a whole ‘nother kettle o’ fish. But put that aside for now.

2.) This is something that has made me scratch my head for a long time. Say, for the sake of argument, that Larry Craig is gay. Regardless of his own procilivities, he is elected to advance the wishes and/or interests of his constituents, right? So he could be “personally not opposed.” Right? Or is it the other way around? People like his stances, so they vote him into office. I’m just wondering aloud here, because it seems like a chicken and egg problem to me.

  1. 6 Responses to “Hoo Boy”

  2. By Wulfgar on Aug 29, 2007 | Reply

    With all the time spent accusing liberals of being ’self hating’, I’m surprised that no one has considered that in this case. As regards #2, why can’t it be both? I believe completely that Larry Craig is as anti-gay as a person can get … it just kinda sucks that he’s gay. So when he votes anti-gay, he is indeed voting his own will, which coincides with those who elected him.

    On some level, I really think this brings up the nature v.s. chosen behavior argument again. Like it or not, Larry Craig seems compelled to seek satisfaction with men, even though he clearly does not think of himself as gay, and abhors “the gay lifestyle” (being gay). I really wonder if Larry Craig would be in any way similar to the person he is now, if there wasn’t such an anti-gay stigma and sentiment in this country.

  3. By Gman on Aug 29, 2007 | Reply

    Chicken and egg: is one elected to advance their own opinions in the legislative process to represent their constituency? I’ve pondered it a few times and it seems like the answer is…both. However, there will always be a loose affiliation between a Member of Congress and his constituents. If a Member of Congress castes votes inimical to the wishes of his constituents, then the only control citizens have is the ballot box. So many questions arise. What can the average constituent do when a Member of Congress castes a series of votes for 2 or 6 years that hurt his or her constituents? They’ll just have to wait until election to make him or her pay. Also, is a Member of Congress beholden to only those that voted for him or her or to hi or her entire constituency?

    What I’m trying to point out, folks, is that democracy is inherantly flawed. So, here’s the most important point — THAT’S WHY WE HAVE A CONSTITUTION AND THAT’S WHY MEMBERS OF CONGRESS TAKE AN OATH TO UPHOLD IT! Well, I digress….

  4. By noodly appendage on Aug 29, 2007 | Reply

    The directed delegate versus the trustee debate is a long one. I tend to believe that representative government is best with trustees who vote based on public input, the facts, the laws, and their consciences, rather than being the “directed delegate” puppet on the public opinion string.

  5. By Shane C. Mason on Sep 2, 2007 | Reply

    Craig, I struggle with this question all the time. I think that if we elect people purely to represent our values, then why not move to direct democracy? We have the tech to do it now. In our system, I think that I have come to accept that we elect a person whose values we believe represent us and allow them to choose. Maybe.

    I reserve the right to reverse this position at any time.

  6. By Walter Greenspan on Sep 2, 2007 | Reply

    Why Republicans suffer more that Democrats from scandals:

    According to a column in today’s (Sunday, September 2) Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Jack Kelly writes, ” … (M)edia bias is not the main reason why Republicans suffer more from scandals. Democratic voters expect Democrats to steal on their behalf. Lawmakers are judged on the basis of how many goodies from the federal treasury they can shower on their constituents. The typical Democratic voter doesn’t mind terribly if their senator or congressman takes something for himself along the way.”

    The column continues, “The typical Republican voter wants his senator or congressman to keep his taxes low, his government honest. He is furious when GOP lawmakers stick their fingers in the cookie jar, or give lip service to values they do not practice.”

    For the complete column, “GOP scandals get more press: Democrats and the media let the liberals slide”, please go to:

    http://tinyurl.com/yww6qd

    H/T: http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2007/09/018350.php

  7. By Craig on Sep 3, 2007 | Reply

    Direct democracy is a Bad Idea(tm) for many reasons, not the least of which that it is, essentially, mob rule.

    I’m a firm believer in the capacity of most people to make the best decisions for themselves, based on the fact that they can make informed decisions.

    This is why even Congresscritters have staff. There is no way on God’s green earth that one person can educate himself in all the facets of running a nation, then make informed decisions.

    You could spend a lifetime trying to learn the Federal budget and never get through it.

Post a Comment