I know that one is not supposed to delight in the misery of others, but some days it just gets to be too hard. Yesterday we saw the much vaunted (Hot) “Air America” radio network fall flat on its face after just two weeks in operation, leaving angry Democrats muttering about Rovian conspiracies and shouting about the need for the “Fairness Doctrine” and today we’ve seen the fall from grace of the most loathsome man in Canada who is not incarcerated (yet, at least) or fourteen.

In all honesty, it couldn’t have happened to a better man (or, more accurately, “man”). Svend Robinson, MP for Burnaby-Douglas is one of the most despicable figures in Canadian life. A member of the socialist New Democratic Party, Robinson is Canada’s first gay Member of Parliament, a fact which has essentially been the focus of his entire life and public existence for the last decade or so (he officially “came out” in 1988, but has been an MP since 1979). He’s also Canada’s foremost friend of terrorists (he’s an open and extreme advocate of the “Palestinian” cause, for one) and one of the leading anti-American voices in the country (in breach of all Parliamentary decorum, he once heckled President Ronald Reagan as he made a special address before the House). Today, Svend announced that he was “suspending” his political career. Why? Well, you see, he stole a ring valued at $50,000 during an auction last weekend.

You might think it amusing that Canada’s leading homosexual would revolve around expensive jewellery. You might very well think that. I could not possibly comment.

Many, of course, are already prepared to forgive Robinson his sins and are already dragging out the various offences of innumerable conservatives in his defense. Of course, I would argue, that there’s a rather substantive difference between Rush Limbaugh’s abuse of prescription painkillers and grand larceny. As to those who are claiming that, well, the fact that Svend came forward to the RCMP and returned the ring on his own should be a credit upon him, I’ll merely point out that his theft was reportedly caught on tape and that, from what I know of the handling of any item of such substantial value, certainly the theft would have been noticed before the end of the day (or at the end of the day) last Friday. In all probability, the rightful owner of the ring used his tapes to ascertain Robinson’s guilt and then, in some fashion, had him confronted with the evidence. Caught, Robinson was allowed to pull the stunt he pulled today as a face-saving measure. I do not know this to be true, but it seems impossible to me that the rightful owner of a ring with such substantial values could let something go missing without noticing or that, upon noticing it was missing, would not check their security tapes and call the police.

This is all especially interesting in light of the fact that, during an NDP leadership campaign two years ago, people close to Robinson are reported to have tried to smear a leadership candidate, Lorne Nystrom, by reviving the story of how, a decade and half ago, he was tried (but not convicted) for inadvertently shoplifting a box of pain medication from a Drug Store.

Look, I’m all for forgiveness for minor sins and even not-so-minor ones. Congressman Barney Frank let his male “companion” use his home as a brothel, and I’m willing to let that slide (of course, whether Frank knew the exact details of what was going on is debatable). Members of Congress of both parties wrote dozens of bad cheques in the House Bank scandal. Dozens of major celebrities have suffered from various drug problems. Everyone (or, most everyone) is human and everyone makes mistakes.

Of course, there’s a matter of the scale of a mistake and the scale of atonement. Someone with a private drug problem should seek treatment and, upon recovery, return to their previous life as best as they can. Someone who commits adultery should work things out with their family and, if they’re in a position of public trust, apologize to the public (and mean it). And so forth. Of course, we have to admit that there’s a rather quantifiable difference between forgetting you have a bottle of Tylenol in your pocket and pocketing a ring whose value roughly equals that of 10,000 bottles of the stuff. Punishment must be proportional to the scale of the crime and so must contrition.

Svend is trying to blame this on “stress” and claim that it’s the result of a “health problem.” I’m sorry, but that’s nonsense. It is shameful that someone, under such circumstances, should remain in the House of Commons and continue to draw a public paycheque even while not fulfilling his duties (Robinson claims that he’s going on “medical leave”). An honourable man who was sincerely sorry would not only have declined to run in the next election, but also immediately resigned his seat. If, after a suitable period of time, he’d managed to get his life in order and pay his debt to society (either by spending time in jail or through reaching some sort of private accommodation with the jeweller) and he wants to run for Parliament again, then more power to him (not that I’d ever like to see him anywhere near the levers of power again).

But, please, don’t try to hoodwink us with the “emotional stress” nonsense. That might work for booze or pills or women (or even men), but it’s not going to fly for grand larceny. You can’t steal something worth more than the average Canadian makes in a year (you know, those average Canadians that you claim to care for so deeply) stammer out an, “I’m-sorry-I-was-stressed,” and then skip along your merry way.

Of course, perhaps I’m being too hard on poor Svend. After all, he was merely putting what his party preaches into practice. It wasn’t larceny: it was socialism in action! But no, I don’t think that will do either.

So, here’s to you, Mrs. Robinson. Jesus loves you more than you will know. This is advice that, I hope, the individual in question shall take to heart in the days ahead. Perhaps this all might turn out to the great good of Mrs. Robinson (it has already turned out to the great good of the people of Canada), who may now examine how his impulse-control problems when it comes to dealing with pretty things may be universal and not just confined to fancy jewellery.