I don't know Rep. Flaherty personally, but he was generally viewed by Republicans, even before today, as someone who was full of himself and who had let his election go to his head. He also had a reputation as a heavy partier, which is not uncommon in Augusta. He had not gained much respect across the aisle.

This view is not due to his age or party. People like Hannah Pingree and Emily Cain have been well liked and respected by people in both parties since they were first elected even though they came to Augusta at a young age.

And why is Alex Steed pretending to be an Independent?

Good evening, Mike and Dan,

Mike - Thanks for the nod.

Dan - I would be interested to hear more about how Rep. Flaherty's image had - by way of the Republicans you're referring to - become defined by his being "full of himself" and how he had displayed having "let his election go to his head." In what situations had his inflated ego most manifested itself, and how had - post election - Mr. Flaherty changed for the worst (and how - of course - did this relate to his election?)

Also, in what circles did his "reputation as a heavy partier" float around? I do hope that it wasn't the same vicious circles in which Paul LePage is being criticized because of his French Canadian views/background.

I apologize for being a stickler for detail, but it seems as though you have - in this case - thrown unsubstantiated generalizations into the air without pointing to anything bigger than your own impulses.

Should you be able to define what "pretending to be independent" means, I would be happy to answer the question. What must one do in order to satisfy your expectation of lack of party affiliation, and what - based on what you know about me - is not appropriately fulfilling your expectation? If I am not un-enrolled, what do you imagine me to be?

Many thanks in advance for your clarifications,
Alex Steed

Alex: I have read your site and there is nothing about where you stand that places you outside of the Democratic Party. You may be unenrolled but there should be no doubt about how you will vote if you are elected. You have grabbed the Independent label because a candidate with the Democrat label is hard to sell in the district in which you are running. Your defense of Flaherty illustrates where you are really coming from.

No, Dan. My defense of Flaherty illustrates:

1) my concern for someone that I know and appreciate - regardless of positions - and who I know will be chewed up and spit out for a short, painful while by vultures try to leverage a really bad decision in order to make heavily flawed and inaccurate political points.

2) my frustration with the fact that - of the two parties - Republicans are particularly good at pretending - in the words of my late, sailor father - that their "shit don't stink." Some conservatives are particularly drawn to doing exactly what I outlined above despite the fact that there has been no shortage - particularly in recent memory - of Republican representatives and operatives who have found themselves in a bit of trouble for:

- DUI (Ashburn, the story about whom is linked in the blog entry to which Mike refers)
- maintaining extramarital relationships (Sanford, Gingrich)
- maintaining inappropriate relationships with underage staff members (Foley)
- maintaining relationships with members of the same sex in the shadow of also maintaining legislative crusades against same sex relationships (Craig)
- maintaining relationships with male prostitutes of the same sex in the shadow of also maintaining legislative crusades against same sex relationships (Allen)
- maintaining relationships with male prostitutes of the same sex, with whom they do crystal meth, in the shadow of also maintaining social crusades against same sex relationships (Haggard)

And yet every time something like this happens, it is impossible not to stumble upon circles of insular party enthusiasts snickering and tee-heeing like none of the aforementioned examples - or hundreds of other similar events - hadn't happened just two days before yesterday (so to speak).

I am running un-enrolled for many reasons, Dan, not the least of which is my issue with one version or another of the shallow charade outlined above. Not long ago - without any up-front explanation - you added me as a contact via Facebook, which added to the long list of avenues you had available through which to reach out and ask me questions about my candidacy before making conjectures as random and unfounded as the "general" views held by Republicans you laid out with regard to Flaherty above. Should you have any other questions about my stances or campaign, please get in touch with me before you opt for coming to convenient solutions. I am happy to talk any time.

Alex

Either Flaherty's behavior is OK or it is not. What others in either party have done shouldn't matter. I can't recall Dan ever defending Republicans in similar situations, can you? Alex, your totally irrelevant partisan attack in defense of the indefensible proves Dan's point.

You are the only candidate running against a Republican. Tell me, if elected, with which party would you caucus? That seems a relevant question all unenrolled candidates should answer before the election.

I have read what you have written on Facebook and on your blog. I have reached my conclusions from reading your own words. I have yet to see you write anything that indicates you don't fit within the Democratic Party. Your rant above is a good example.

Haggard? How is the GOP responsible for him. Most of the others you mention were appropriately thrown overboard by Republicans. Though there are examples of people like Vitter who are still around, Gingrich, Foley, and Craig were pushed out by fellow Republicans.

In Maine, there was a Republican legislator who was picked up for OUI a few years ago in an election year. He was encouraged, behind the scenes, by Republicans to step aside and deal with his personal issues and did so. That was the right thing for him and would be the right thing for Flaherty to do.

As for my post about what I have heard about Flaherty, I expect we will hear a defense that his actions this weekend are out of character for him. While I certainly have no reason to think he has committed previous criminal acts, from what I have heard about him since his election, there are a number of people who have questioned his maturity before this week. There are other young legislators who have sterling reputations and who are seen by people of both parties as being beyond reproach so the questions about Flaherty have not been just because of his young age.

By the way, I was first elected to public office at 21 so I have no complaints with young people in office. I also made lots of mistakes in the early years of my public life because of my lack of experience and maturity (though no OUIs). I was much more sure of the correctness of my positions and a lot less concerned about process. As I have got older, I see a lot more grey areas, though I obviously still make mistakes.