Once we get past the ironic hilarity of the bathroom stall incident:

Former Parks Commissioner and former CM, Henry Stern, has what I think is a very well-reasoned stance on the Larry Craig incident. He has, from the start, supported letting the Idahoans decide... although, it's clear for most people why the quick and dirty political crucifixion is more appealing to his erstwhile bedfellows.

Here's an excerpt that I received in my inbox recently. You can probably find the whole thing at www.nycivic.org.

"We ask whether a Senator elected by the people of any state should be forced from office for tapping his foot and swiping his hand in a toilet stall?  Is intent sufficient for a conviction for lewd behavior, resulting in the loss of a job one has held for 17 years?  What if, when they met face to face, one man had found the other to be a troll, or an undesirable sex partner for any other reason?  What if the older man had been solicited but refused to pay? (Senatorial privilege, they are used to freebies). We usually punish crimes, not intentions, except for cases of terrorism or where injury to others is foreseen.  Who would be injured in this case, whether they had sex or not?  What about the defense of entrapment?  If the officer had not responded to the tapping by moving his own shoe, that could have ended the matter."