Hypocrisy Watch: David Vitter

It is not enough that U.S. Senator David Vitter fell off his moral mountain last summer, proving himself to be one of the biggest hypocrites in Washington, but Sen. Vitter is now trying to appease the right wing of his party by asking his conservative colleagues to sign on to his resolution that would put the Senate on record as disagreeing with the Supreme Court's ruling that rejected the death penalty for those convicted of raping a child, without murder.  

The fact is, however, that the Supreme Court has already asked attorneys educated on this issue to submit briefs on whether the high court should reconsider that ruling. So, in short, Vitter wants the Congress to get involved where it is not necessary nor warranted.  Surely, Congress has more important things to do.  The legal authorities involved will and can handle this issue very well as they have with similar situations in the past.  If Mr. Vitter really cared, he should introduce legislation to actually correct the situation as he sees fit, rather than introducing legislation that just says that he disagrees. One again, it's talk, not action, for Vitter and the Republican Party. 

The Spitzer Scandal: My Take

I'll start off by saying that I was never a huge fan of Eliot Spitzer; I didn't see what others apparently did---a future President.  At the same time, however, I never thought he would face a scandal like the one he currently is.  All in all, I have very mixed feelings about the whole thing.  Here's my take:

First of all, I always feel terrible for politicians and their families when their personal lives get aired for the whole world to see.  My feeling is that if what a politician is doing personally doesn't effect the public, then the public has no reason to know.  After all, we elect leaders to do a job, and that job is to take care of us.  If they do that job, then that should be enough for us to know.  The perfect example, of course, is the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal.  I'm certainly not saying what Bill was doing was okay, but it in no way was any business of the public's.  President Clinton was a fantastic President, and his personal life obviously didn't get in the way of that.   

In many ways, however, Spitzer's case is different.  Spitzer wasn't just having an extramarital affair, which is not illegal, he was involved with a prostitute, which, of course, is illegal.  And it's not so much the fact that he hired a prostitute that makes me mad, it's the fact that he spent the better part of his life going after and prosecuting people severely for the exact same act he has now been caught engaging in.  If there's one thing that gets me mad at elected leaders, it's hypocrisy.  And by engaging in the acts he allegedly did, Eliot Spitzer is just that, a hypocrite.  

It's for that reason that I believe Gov. Spitzer should resign.  Not because he absolutely has to, but because he portrayed himself to the public as someone he was not.  It's the exact same hypocrisy that made me so outraged over the Larry Craig and David Vitter scandals---they ran on high ethics and morality, yet were involved in controversial sexual acts. I called for Craig and Vitter to resign over their hypocrisy (they didn't), so to be fair, I must ask the same of Spitzer.  The difference, however, is that I think Spitzer has the decency to know that what he did was a clear violation of public trust and because of that, I know that he will do the right thing and step down as Governor of New York within the next few days.  

The Man the GOP Just Can't Get Rid Of

I'm sure from reading the title everyone knows who I'm talking about----Sen. Larry Craig. For those of you who haven't heard, the Idaho Senator was caught soliciting sex in a men's restroom in an airport in Minneapolis. At the time, he pleaded guilty to the charges. When the story broke, however, he quickly said that he wasn't guilty but that he would resign from the Senate. Then he said he would try to withdraw his guilty plea. A few days later, Craig announced that, even though he said he was going to resign, he decided not to. And ever since the GOP leadership has been trying to get him out of Congress. Here's my take:

I don't personally harbor resentment towards Craig for the act. Everyone makes mistakes. I do, however, have a problem when a man preaches about being "moral" and he consistently votes against gay rights and then goes and does what Craig did. Craig can say he didn't do it, but, from listening to the police tape, its obvious Craig was guilty. And for Craig to deny the obvious just further infuriates me. If there is any reason why Craig should resign, it is because of his hypocrisy and his clear failure to live up to what he promised his constituents----"good, moral, family values."

The problem I have with the GOP is that they don't want Craig to leave because of the crime or even because he is a hypocrite. They want him to leave because he is gay. Republicans can deny it all they want, but if it really is because of "moral reasons", then Sen. David Vitter should be pressured to resign as well. The GOP doesn't find it necessary to speak out against hiring prostitutes(as Vitter did), but they do for Craig? My problem is, not that I'm defending Craig, that he was treated completely unfairly solely because he's gay(or should I say we all know he's gay even thought he won't officially confirm it).

The Republicans feel Craig, a gay man, tarnishes their "family values" appearance. News to the GOP: you lost that warm, family appearance when you voted not to give children healthcare, and when you called for an 8 year old to be hung, or when you refused to raise the minimum wage for years. "Compassionate Conservative"-----give me a break.

Craig gone, but why not Vitter?

Sen. Larry Craig of Idaho announced today that he is resigning from the Senate after being involved in a gay bathroom sex scandal. His resignation came after much pressure from his own party to resign. But as this week went by and I saw more and more GOP politicians turn against Craig and push for his resignation, I began to wonder, why wasn't there any pressure from the GOP on Sen. David Vitter to resign after his sex scandal earlier this summer.

I hate to think it, but the first and most likely reason is because Craig was involved in a "gay" scandal, while Vitter's was with a female prostitute. I can't help but feel that if Craig was involved in a scandal with a woman, he wouldn't have had to resign. Both men were hypocrites, Craig for voting against civil unions, against gays serving their country in the military, and against gay rights, and Vitter, for running his campaign on family values and attacking Bill Clinton, while he himself was involved in cheating on his wife. Both men's actions were more than likely illegal: Craig for attempting to have sex in a men's restroom and Vitter for paying for sex, whether the DC Madam calls herself a prostitute or not. The only conceivable difference is that Craig was outed as a homosexual while Vitter was just with a woman. I'm upset the media has not called more attention to this even further anti-gay view of the GOP. If Craig had to resign, then the Republican Party should have encouraged Vitter to do the same.

A special Sunday post by John Lucia: The GOP, the party of hypocrisy

The Grand Old Party of hypocrisy came about around 1993 when the so called "Gingrich Revolution" started to brand Democrats as lacking in family and moral values. The neocon republicans who participated in the so called Revolution set them selves up as the pillar of moral and family values and self righteousness. But before long their self serving statements revealed their hypocrisy and the real truth about their own lack of moral and family values. The steady exposure of their hypocrisy since the early 90's was again made evident recently when it was revealed that one of their Senator's name appeared on the D.C. madam's phone records. The Senator in a self serving statement then said he was forgiven by God and his wife for his sins. Newt Gingrich and many of his neocon friends who's real character have been exposed represent the height of hypocrisy and the real threat to civility and morality. One of the main problems we face as a society are television journalists who are willing to promote the neocon's talking points while questioning other's morality. It was said many years ago when one politician questions another's character, you can be sure that it is the one who raises the question that has the character problem. For the past 13 years history has proven that to be a fact as the neocon's, one after another, came tumbling down. That says it all. Does the Grand Old Party have any moderates or progressive members who can stand up, be counted and bring some character to the Party? I don't recall any who have stood up recently, that door is still open.