Tarnish or polish?

Senator Larry Craig was for leaving his senate seat before he was against it.

Shortly after a judge denied his request to withdraw the August plea admitting to disorderly conduct, Mr. Craig said he had reversed his previously announced decision to leave the Senate if he could not get the plea thrown out. He said he would instead serve out his third term, which expires in January 2009. He said he would not run for a fourth.

With the judge's decision to maintain the guilty plea, we will now be treated to the fitting sight of convicted criminal sitting in the "august" chambers of the world's most serious deliberative body (at least, that's what I think they like to call themselves). Craig will now rejoin all his fellow unconvicted criminal Senators for another blessed year until he quietly retires.

GOP leadership is still worried, however.

Republicans are unlikely to lose Idaho’s Senate seat but are worried Mr. Craig could tarnish the party’s overall reputation.

They must be worried about some heretofore unknown reputation, because compared to the vast roster of felony convicted Republicans, Craig's misdemeanor nuisance conviction ought to appear as a point of pride. This actually polishes the GOP image as far as I'm concerned. Craig is one of the few, if not the only, convicted Republicans whose conviction was not centered on graft, money, and corruption of American government. Craig should be viewed by the GOP as a poster boy of personal foible as opposed to public scoundrel.

I say to the GOP, run with it! The new clarion call of Republican rectitude:

I'm not a felon! I've only been convicted of a misdemeanor!