Posted on 04/09/2008 3:28:12 PM PDT by mngran2
Embattled Louisiana Sen. David Vitter (R) is getting support from fellow Republicans who say he should not resign over a public sex scandal — including from someone who can speak from experience.
Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho was among several GOP senators who say Vitter’s testimony in the “D.C. Madam” prostitution case should not compel his resignation.
“First and foremost, in these kinds of issues, it’s the state and the relationship you have with your state that really determines where you ought to go,” Craig said. “That was certainly my case. The Senate itself wasn’t going to judge me. I would allow the citizens of my state to do so. And there is still strong support there.”
Craig went through his own trial-by-media last year, after his arrest for and guilty plea to soliciting sex from an undercover male officer in a Minneapolis airport.
Craig, who later tried to withdraw his guilty plea, said support from Idahoans convinced him to reverse his pledge to resign last year. He added that his decision last month not to file for reelection pre-dated the controversy.
Lawyers for Deborah Jeane Palfrey, the so-called D.C. Madam, have called on Vitter to testify in the upcoming case, according to media reports. The Louisiana senator last year acknowledged a “serious sin” but has spoken little about it since, and his office did not respond to calls for comment Tuesday.
Craig said he has told Vitter he regretted the fact that his own case seemed to cause the media to dredge up and rehash Vitter’s situation. He also said he sympathizes with Vitter’s treatment by the media.
“My story became a situation where my wife and I watched it almost as if it were caricatures out there being talked about,” Craig said. “It certainly wasn’t me, but that was quite typical in a 24/7 news cycle like we have today.”
While Sen. Mary Landrieu (D-La.) has avoided the topic of whether Vitter should go, the Louisiana Democratic Party has issued several statements urging his resignation.
“No way has this already been dealt with, we’re dealing with it day-by-day,” state Democratic Party Chairman Chris Whittington said Tuesday. “It’s a continuous distraction from his work on behalf of our state, and it’s a continuous blight on the state of Louisiana to have a sitting senator connected to a prostitution ring.”
Under Louisiana law, Republican Gov. Bobby Jindal would have the right to replace Vitter, meaning a Vitter resignation may do little to tip the 51-49 partisan split in the Senate.
Isn’t Craig the answer to: Who da’ ho’?
I wonder if disgraced, adulterous, prostitute loving Elliot Spitzer (Democrat) will offer his support. Did I mention Spitzer was a Democrat? What is it with Democrats and their culture of corruption?
(Isn’t it “funny” how Democrats/the media are trying to resurface old stories on Republicans, but have left Spitzer alone after no more than a week of coverage?)
Oh, Bravo Sierra. I am an Idahoan and there was no such level of support. Most people are disgusted about Craig and the whole sordid experience, with him then backing out on his own public pledge to resign. He clearly was too enamored with and hooked on the power and prestige.
He would not be relected here if he ran...and he knows it.
I hope the man retires from public life and spends the time necessary to somehow make things right with his family. We do not want his "wide stance" around anymore.
Oh, Bravo Sierra. I am an Idahoan and there was no such level of support. Most people are disgusted about Craig and the whole sordid experience, with him then backing out on his own public pledge to resign. He clearly was too enamored with and hooked on the power and prestige.
He would not be relected here if he ran...and he knows it.
I hope the man retires from public life and spends the time necessary to somehow make things right with his family. We do not want his "wide stance" around anymore.
Isn’t the difference that both Craig and Vitter remain in office while Spitzer is gone?
“(Isn’t it “funny” how Democrats/the media are trying to resurface old stories on Republicans, but have left Spitzer alone after no more than a week of coverage?)”
The story on Vitter is in the news again.
SEN. VITTER MAY TESTIFY IN SEX CASE
4/8/2008, 3:38 a.m. CDTBy MATT APUZZO The Associated Press
WASHINGTON (AP) — Louisiana Sen. David Vitter may be called to testify on behalf of a woman accused of running an upscale Washington prostitution service, attorneys said at the opening of trial.
The Republican senator was among several possible witnesses identified Monday in the racketeering and money laundering case against Deborah Palfrey. Among others on the list is Harlan Ullman, a military strategist who created the concept of “shock and awe” that the United States used to open hostilities against Iraq more than five years ago.
http://www.nola.com/newsflash/index.ssf?/base/politics-5/1207621744254310.xml&storylist=washington
It's "hilarious". It's also apropos, since Vitter didn't resign, and decided that he was worth more than the people and the party he represents. He knew this was coming - it's been in the news for months. Pretty much every story I have seen with Vitter's name in it since the story broke mentioned that he'd probably be testifying.
Vitter brought this on himself and his party. Not the media. Not the Democrats. Though I'm sure they are thrilled to make a big deal out of it.
And he did it during what he knew would be an election year.
Remember this: Without Vitter visiting a prostitute and refusing to leave office, there would have been no story for anyone (media or Democrats) to wave around.
Place the blame where it should be: with Vitter and with Vitter alone.
What you said.
But as long as they aren't any better, we really cannot blame Democrats. The Dems can only make a show of something when "something" exists to begin with.
The difference is that Spitzer is a Democrat, and Democrats are given a pass by the media.
Note how little attention his replacement has been given by the media, even though confessing to several affairs?
While Vitter did wrong, the difference in media coverage is astouding. I put blame on Vitter, AND the media, AND the Democrats. The media controls the story, and they certainly have paid disproportionate attention to Republican scandals each and every time.
If Vitter had resigned, you wouldn't be hearing about it now. But he didn't. And you are hearing about it. And you will continue to hear about it during this, an election year.
Remember this: if Vitter hadn't run on a "family values" platform, all the while visiting prostitutes, there would be no story to report.
Vitter has asked for every word of coverage. He made a point of calling for Bill Clinton's resignation when Clinton was caught with Monica Lewinski. And he did it by comparing Bob Livingston stepping down (Vitter took his seat) after a similar scandal, saying that Livingston did the right thing and that Clinton should, too.
So, Livingston was right to resign, and Clinton should have resigned, but Vitter is holier than thou and doesn't have to
It doesn't work that way.
That's called hypocrisy and it resonates with the media, the opposition, and the public. It's an easy story to write and Vitter has handed it to the media on a silver tray.
I repeat: every single word of media coverage directed at Vitter is because of Vitter, and no one but Vitter.
It's really hard to write a hit piece about a man who is at home with his wife and family.
Now that the Senate Ethics Committee has acted, the next logical step is for Dubya to award a Presidential Medal of Freedom to Senator Vitter.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.