The rapidly dwindling Senate Republican Caucus met Tuesday for the purpose of deciding the fate of the felon in their midst: Alaska Senator Ted Stevens.

At issue was the question of whether to take away the committee assignments of the party's senior senator -- who has been convicted on seven counts of failing to report bribes, er, "gifts" – and kick him out of the caucus. In the tradition-bound Senate, the move by the caucus is the first step in a broader process of censuring Stevens.

But the Republicans blinked.

"After talking with many of my colleagues, it's clear there are sufficient votes to pass the resolution regarding Senator Stevens," explained South Carolina Republican Jim DeMint, who has been the most outspoken advocate for having the caucus punish the Alaskan. "The question now is timing."

Translation: It looks like Stevens will lose his seat to Democrat Mark Begich in the final count of votes cast by Alaskans on November 4. (Begich now leads Stevens by more than 1,000 votes with thousands of ballots cast by voters who are presumed to lean in a Democratic direction yet to be counted.)

DeMint's fellow senators would prefer that Alaskans do the dirty work of addressing corruption in their caucus.

In other words, the Senate Republican Caucus is more than ready to talk about "reform" and repairing its tattered reputation. But, aside from DeMint and a handful of others, the Republican senators have no stomach for the hard work if holding one another to account.

Luckily for the gutless legislators, it appears that the voters of Alaska will within a few days clean up the mess that is Ted Stevens.

Comments (23)

1. Booting Stevens would have given the GOP a chance to START to re-build their image and NEW claim to "reformers"....

   now they won't even get the chance!

   Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 12:35pm

2. EXTRA EXTRA Spine Destroying Microbe on the Loose in DC!

   Posted by winyahn at 11/18/2008 @ 12:54pm

3. Put that jerk in a retirement home so he can't expose himself to more young Alaskans.

   Posted by johnfournier77 at 11/18/2008 @ 1:11pm

4. hey darin,

   i got some of the references, but drew a blank on some of the more intriguing ones (kkk, $90,000 in "cold" cash, etc.) can you provide the names of the criminals that go along with these crimes?

   i guess the point is that people can get away with murder when even felony convictions doesn't earn you prompt censure in the senate.

   Posted by Jason Rhodes at 11/18/2008 @ 1:50pm

5. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 11/18/2008 @ 1:39pm

   Yeah! Atleast Stevens never was a virulent anti-gay politician who was caught "toe-tapping" in a men's bathroom!

   (Oops....that one doesn't "work", does it, Darin?....heheh)

   Posted by Mask at 11/18/2008 @ 1:54pm

6. darin-What crimes were those people you were using to divert attention away from Stevens convicted of?

   Posted by i'm nobody at 11/18/2008 @ 2:01pm

7. At Stevens' trial, his use of Senate staff as household servants was confirmed. How many Republican or Democratic Senators want to talk about that under oath? I'm waiting for the hearings. I discovered that Bob Bird, an anti-war, pro-life conservative from the Alaska Independence Party actually earned Stevens votes sufficient to cost him the election with a $28,000 budget! Bird wrote me that he had been kept out of the statewide debates- just like Jim Sykes, Green candidate for Senate in 2004-and ignored by local media. All of this is included on Dissident Voice in an article by me. Steve Conn. P.S. Thanks for your fair treatment of Ralph Nader- as usual.

   Posted by steveconn at 11/18/2008 @ 2:20pm

8. Darin, The notion that liberals are all about symbolism and conservatives are all about results is ludicrous. I run a small business here in Virginia and I care about results everyday... I run my business ambitiously and aggressively and create many jobs. I am a progressive and voted for Obama. I am conservative financially and more liberal on social issues. To divisively cleave this country into those of results and those of symbolism is an unwise move that hurts us all long term. Such absolutism is not a mark of conservatism, but a mentally lazy habit that is all too common of today's Republican. I guess that's why they absolutely got their arses handed to them this November. It must have been bittersweet to get what they love (absolutism) and still lose their job. If the Republicans want to rebuild... maybe they should stop being elitist and holier-than-thou. They'd learn there are more and more diverse peoples joining the movement against them. I suppose the cleansing is necessary, the changes are way overdue. The right might learn a thing or two about evolution - if they even believe in it while it's happening to them.

   Posted by hirohyoto at 11/18/2008 @ 2:25pm

9. I want to comment on the magazine. I am a new subscriber and have never commented before. Please, be kind if I am writing this in the wrong place or it is in some way inappropriate.

   In the short time I have been reading the Nation online I have often found myself uncomfortable (embarrassed) with the editing. The Ted Stevens article, alone, has two glaring spelling/grammatical errors. Please, edit our voice carefully enough that we do not look like a group of careless, unintelligent writers. I strongly believe we are just the opposite of that. We are, and must reflect ourselves as, articulate, informed and educated.

   Posted by rsssas at 11/18/2008 @ 2:37pm

10. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 11/18/2008 @ 1:39pm

    I see the reference to this post but no post. And I have no one on ignore. What gives?

    Posted by chaoszen at 11/18/2008 @ 2:50pm

11. 'Luckily for the gutless legislators, it appears that the voters of Alaska will within a few days clean up the mess that is Ted Stevens.'

    Wait John...didn't you write how sensible it was to keep Lieberman in caucus? Lieberman the Traitor to His Party? Now lets get real. Stevens was busted, but you think Congress is otherwise beyond reproach? A little partisan "my friend." Today you suggested we could still laugh at Lieberman, but the real laughing stock are the Democrats - another bunch of gutless legislators whom you prefer to characterize as sensible and playing smart politics. Just doesn't wash.

    Posted by OneVote at 11/18/2008 @ 2:57pm

12. I like the retirement home idea. Could we somehow get Sarah Palin in there too?

    Posted by labradorguy at 11/18/2008 @ 3:02pm

13. Ted Stevens is an arrogant self serving fool, who does not have any respect for Alaskan's or the rest of the country by carrying on as if he has done nothing wrong!!!! All this stuff makes the law look like a joke...felon's running around left right and centre, without a care in the world. I thought we were a nation of laws, what happened to that we ask???

    Posted by Caj at 11/18/2008 @ 3:13pm

14. Posted by Darin_the_Troll at 11/18/2008 @ 1:39pm

    I see the reference to this post but no post. And I have no one on ignore. What gives?

    Posted by chaoszen at 11/18/2008 @ 2:50pm

    If I'm not mistaken offensive posts get removed?

    Either that or: The internet is not something that you just dump something on, it's not a big truck...It's a series of tubes!!!

    Posted by ADHD at 11/18/2008 @ 3:54pm

15. damn. what did darin say? musta been bad cause i've never seen nichols knock off anybody. or even respond...unless he's benchrest or some other poster in disguise...

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/18/2008 @ 4:57pm

16. Posted by rsssas at 11/18/2008 @ 2:37pm

    Well this IS a blog, and I would have to believe that it's not subjected to the same editing standards as full-fledged articles. I could be wrong I suppose.

    Maybe you just need to loosen up?

    Posted by TexasFlood at 11/18/2008 @ 5:06pm

17. I think Nichol's criticism is off the mark.

    It seems only right that the voters of Alaska that Stevens represents should be the ultimate arbiter of whether he stays or goes.

    That is unless someone here wants to suggest that the Senate should be valued above the voters?

    Posted by lvliberty1 at 11/18/2008 @ 6:56pm

18. Darin is missing from every post on the nation.

    (Note small letters for the magazine, that I used to praise for it's lack of censorship.)

    Oddly, it has been mostly in-offensive posters, like Ibb, Mask and even Darin (kinda).

    Yet, no one banned canyon or even bleeped me, when I told people to fuck off.

    Not sure why the change. Between the still glitchy software and the censorship, it has gone downhill in the past year.

    HTML!!!!!! <b>NOW</b>

    <i>please?</i>

    Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 7:01pm

19. Errr...

    I think the suggestion is that felons shouldn't be allowed to make laws...

    Is it any wonder that the same people who elected Ms. Sarah "spread the wealth around" Palin, would re-elect a convicted felon????

    Good job Alaska!

    Posted by TexasFlood at 11/18/2008 @ 7:03pm

20. Darin is missing from every post on the nation.

    Posted by Malcontent at 11/18/2008 @ 7:01pm

    I actually had to look through my ignore list just to be certain. I thought maybe I was missing something but yup, Darin got eaten by the blog gremlins!

    Posted by yutsano at 11/18/2008 @ 10:03pm

21. Yeah, they banned me.

    I'm running out of unique E-mail addresses.

    I don't think I even used any naughty words yesterday. I am at a total loss. Could the all powerful Oz that banned me at least tell me why?

    Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 11/19/2008 @ 08:07am

22. Posted by Darin_the_Big_Fat_Troll at 11/19/2008 @ 08:07am | ignore this person | warn this person

    keep coming back. its easy to get new e-mail addresses.

    Posted by ibbleblibble at 11/19/2008 @ 11:09am

23. HEY YOU!

    Yea you, you big fat troll.

    I guess it's not too bad that they banned you. It is their blog and all.

    But, retrogresively erasing you is kinda creepy... revisionist. (is unjournalistic a word?)

    Anyway, good to see you're back. You big fat troll. (You still suck).

    Eric

    Posted by Malcontent at 11/19/2008 @ 8:39pm