"Petty" allegations

Why do some people insist on describing the Sen. Al Franken's alledged sexual misconduct as "petty" or minor?

The latest example is Michelle Cottle's article, "What Does 'Sexual Misconduct' Mean?," in The Atlantic.

...as the public outrage over sexual misconduct gains force, it is swallowing up an increasingly diverse range of allegations, from the relatively petty (such as those lodged against Franken) to the truly monstrous (such as the claims regarding Harvey Weinstein and Roger Ailes).

To be clear, Cottle roundly criticizes Sen. Franken's behavior. She also correctly points out that his behavior wasn't as horrendous as some other recent cases.

But "petty?"

The picture he gleefully staged during a 2006 USO tour prior to running for the Senate is both horrible and demeaning. Worse, it was on a CD of photos that were distributed to multiple people, so the victim's shame was compounded.

Sen. Franken subsequently wrote,

There's no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn't funny. It's completely inappropriate. It's obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture.

Inappropriate, disgusting, a violation, but definitely not petty. And that's the offender's take.

In short order, four other women (two named, two anonymous) accused Sen. Franken of groping their backsides. Another woman accused him of groping her breast. His original accuser and another woman described unwanted open-mouth kisses, and yet another woman described an attempted open-mouth kiss.

Would other accusers have come forward if Sen. Franken hadn't announced his resignation? Who knows. But aren't eight accusations of sexual assault--a serial pattern of misbehavior--enough?

Sen. Franken's behavior is disappointing on many levels, not least of all because he was an effective advocate for women's issues. He has taken some important remedial steps by apologizing (sort of) and announcing his resignation.

However, his behavior by any objective standard was beyond the pale. It was not a petty offense; it wasn't flirty unwanted attention; it wasn't even close to the line.

It's regrettable that President Trump and others seem to have gotten away with worse behavior--for now. But none of that changes the objective awfulness of Sen. Franken's behavior.

Reprehensible comments by DNC delegate

Earlier this week, Julia Rodriquez, a DNC delegate from New York, told a reporter at the Democratic convention in Charlotte that if she saw Gov. Mitt Romney, "she would like to kill him."

Her reprehensible comments have (appropriately) drawn the attention of the Secret Service.

The comments were beyond the pale and have no place in the country's political discourse. It's not clear what steps the DNC can take to censure Ms. Rodriquez, but she has no place in the Democratic party.

More slime in the Congressional swamp

"Draining the swamp" is a challenge when the swamp keeps refilling so quickly.

The Dallas News reports

Longtime Dallas congresswoman Eddie Bernice Johnson has awarded thousands of dollars in college scholarships to four relatives and a top aide's two children since 2005, using foundation funds set aside for black lawmakers' causes.

The recipients were ineligible under anti-nepotism rules of the Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, which provided the money. And all of the awards violated a foundation requirement that scholarship winners live or study in a caucus member's district.

Applying the Rangel defense, Rep. Johnson concedes that she violated the rules but did so unintentionally.

Now that she's been called out, she has promised to "rectify the financial situation." Now if only she could rectify the trust-in-your-Congressperson situation.

Broder joins the dump Rangel bandwagon

David Broder, welcome aboard the dump Rangel bandwagon.

Broder writes in his column this morning

Rangel ... has been busy of late revising and amending the record, backing and filling, using buckets of Wite-Out as he discovers or remembers properties he has owned in New York, New Jersey, Florida, the Dominican Republic and God only knows where else -- and has forgotten or neglected to fully report on the required forms, not to mention the income from them. Oops!

Rangel recently even discovered bank accounts that no one in the world, apparently including him, knew he had. One was with the Congressional Federal Credit Union; another was with Merrill Lynch -- each valued between $250,000 and $500,000. He somehow neglected to mention these accounts on his congressional disclosure forms, which means, if you can believe it, that when he signed the forms, he did not notice that maybe $1 million was missing.

...There is something wrong with Charlie Rangel. Either he did not notice that he was worth about twice as much as he said he was -- which is downright worrisome in a congressional leader -- or he thinks that he's above the law, which is downright worrisome in a congressional leader.

Democrats keep Rep. Rangel as a committee chair--the tax writing committee, no less--at their own peril. Democrats regained the majority in the House of Representatives in 2006 in no small part due to public disgust at Republican corruption. Several Democrats, including Rep. Rangel, seemed determined to wallow in that same mud pit.

Ex-Rep. Jefferson convicted on 11 counts

Good riddance.

It's time for Rep. Murtha to go

It's time (past time actually) for Rep. Murtha to go.

Maybe the Murtha Twins' song can lure him out of Washington and into retirement.

Update: It turns out these are the Mothra Twins and not the Murtha Twins (note to self...next time look things up when the eyes are a little fresher). Regardless, Murtha should still go.