[Vision2020] Craig's official statement

[Sunil Ramalingam]

Roger,

Is it ok for the people who condemned Clinton to condemn Craig?  That would 
be consistent, I guess.  BTW, didn't Craig vote to find him guilty?  Where 
would that leave him when it comes to consistency?

In the end, Idaho's liberals aren't Craig's problem now.  He never had our 
votes.  It's the Republicans and conservatives who are far harsher to him 
now than we could be.  Here's one example:

http://www.claytoncramer.com/weblog/2007_08_26_archive.html#8887822874514443162

Now, until I saw this I hadn't read anything by this blogger, and I doubt I 
will again.  But he's obviously not giving Craig the benefit of the doubt, 
and he's condemning him for what he presumes to be his sexuality.  OK, what 
I presume to be his sexuality too, but I'll not condemn him if he is gay.  I 
disagree with him on his politics, and I think he's a hypocrite, but I don't 
condemn him for what I think is part of who he is.

Interesting, isn't it?  I'm fine with his being gay, but won't vote for him 
because of his politics.  And his former buddies who agree with his politics 
won't vote for him because he's gay.  Romney couldn't throw him under the 
bus fast enough.

Sunil