Friday, August 3, 2012

Chutzpah redefined

Chutzpah:  that wonderful Yiddish word meaning audacity, brazenness, cheek, is usually exemplified by this anecdote:   
a man murdered his parents and then begged the court for mercy 
on grounds that he was an orphan.

Former Senator Larry Craig (R-ID) has now provided us with an alternate exemplar of chutzpah.   A few years ago, he was caught in a sting operation in the Minneapolis airport men's room and charged with soliciting sex with an undercover police officer.  You may remember the phrase "wide stance."

Now comes the chutzpah part.

The election commission wants him to pay back the $217,000 in legal fees that he paid out of his campaign funds.   He was on a trip from Washington to his home state of Idaho and therefore claims he was on an official business trip, which he can legitimately pay for with campaign funds.

Yes, senator -- for airplane tickets, car rental, in route meals, etc.   But legal fees to defend yourself against charges of a criminal act committed during the trip?  The documents filed by his lawyer yesterday offered this:
"Not only was the trip itself constitutionally required, but Senate rules sanction reimbursement for any cost relating to a senator's use of a bathroom while on official travel."
Come on.   This is a joke, right?

You know, I can remember when many public restrooms had coin-operated doors on the bathrooom stalls, and I suppose that would be a legitimate travel expense.   It was maybe a dime or a quarter.  Definitely not $217,000.

Honestly, Sen. Craig.  I just don't think legal defense fees for soliciting sex in a public restroom qualify as a business expense. . . 

. . .  unless you were planning to pay the other guy for sexBut then you're talking about another whole line of business.  Definitely not part of your duties as a United States Senator

That is Chutzpah.

Ralph


1 comment:

  1. Wouldn't you think Craig would rather pay his own legal fees than bring this embarrassing episode back into headlines?

    My piling on about his chutzpah should not be interpreted as siding with out-dated laws against gay sex, or with thinking it's shameful to be gay. Nor would I out a public figure who chooses to remain closeted -- unless he is at the same time supporting oppression of gay people.

    Craig was, of course, one of those closeted people who take public stands against gay issues -- unlike Barney Frank who was always supportive, even while he was still in the closet.

    ReplyDelete