Republican David Vitter's call girl found guilty this morning. Even though he was on the list of witnesses, Sen. Vitter was never called to testify. And if he had been, there is no doubt he would have pleaded the fifth. Amazingly he is still in office. It's a good thing that he's a meager U.S. Senator and not of any importance or leader of a state like my friend Kent says, or else his career would have been in real jeopardy for hiring prostitutes like Spitzer's.
However, if one, like me, tends to think that a man who ran his 1998 House campaign on the moral grounds of the Clinton impeachment and on the very moral grounds of being a "Christian Conservative," should be held to the very standards he sets for others, then such a person, like me, would be wrong. Such logic only belongs in the reality based community in not in the GOP Fantasy World. Republicans are allowed such behavior because God has forgiven them. It's a good thing that we have a Party like the GOP that is ordained by God and washed in the Blood of the Lamb or all of our sins would be judged by liberals.
4.15.2008
D.C. Madam Found Guilty
Posted by Chris at 3:44 PM
Labels: Culture of Corruption, Republicans
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
6 comments:
Wow. Nice post.
I still think, contrary to your tripe here, that it's apples and oranges trying to compare Vitter with Clinton.
As I've commented previously, comparing a Senator with a sitting President (and the powers held by both) it's... Different.
David Vitter carries little to no national influence. If he cheats on his wife -- and, obviously, he did -- nobody cares. Truly.
Bill Clinton, as President, was the country's top law enforcement official. When he lied under oath about Monica and Paula Jones, it was actually a big deal because the lie wasn't about sex, it was about lying under oath.
How does Vitter then compare with Eliot Spitzer? One guy, Vitter, who doesn't set policy and doesn't have much of a say beyond 'the debating society' of the US Senate, and has never declared himself to be a champion of moral causes, versus the Governor of New York, who claimed to be the legal and moral enforcer of the people?
Thanks Kent. Glad you liked it. However, I'm not comparing Vitter to Clinton. I'm comparing Vitter to Spitzer. I'd argue that Vitter indeed does have national influence. He's one of only 100 senators in the entire country. Though I do think you are confusing cheating on your wife with a criminal act such as hiring a prostitute.
All three men, Clinton, Spitzer and Vitter cheated on their wives. We agree on that much. But cheating on your wife isn't illegal. Immoral, yes, but not illegal. An entire independent counsel was established with unprecedented powers and an unlimited budget to investigate whether or not Clinton acted unlawfully on his Whitewater dealings. During the course of that unparalleled investigation, the Starr committee discovered Clinton had extra marital affairs. A surprise to no one. When they discovered they could prove no wrong doing in Whitewater they used the Starr committee to investigate his womanizing, which is not illegal. So the question then becomes how can a Congressional committee use tax payer money to investigate something that isn't even illegal? Republicans fail to remember the whole story of Ken Starr.
Even without Clinton in the mix, what Vitter did was more than the immoral act of cheating on his wife. He committed a crime. He's a criminal. He should do the right thing and resign, or go to jail like you mention Republicans always do.
I'm not sure where you've been the last couple months, but to suggest that Vitter has never declared himself a champion of moral causes is entirely inaccurate. He openly labels himself as a Christian Conservative who states marriage is the "most important social institution in human history."
He's also blamed, like many on right, Hurricane Katrina on the sexual sin of New Orleans. A moral suggestion in and of itself. Not to mention he was for the impeachment of Bill Clinton solely on the grounds of his immoral behavior for cheating on his wife. Vitter is, if anything,a typical self-indulged, righteous, Southern Republican so-called Christian. He's always lauded himself as a champion of morality and Christian issues. All the while committing serious immoral and illegal acts.
In the world I live in, he should resign and let the people move on. In the GOP Fantasy World, illegal acts and sexual immorality is a personal issue and be easily forgiven by God.
I compared Vitter to both Clinton AND Spitzer.
Without realizing it, you proved my point for me. If Vitter has power as 1 out of 100, then certainly Spitzer, as 1 of 50, was the more powerful governmental figure by comparison.
We agree that we have laws prohibiting prostitution. I've never argued against that point. Paying for sex in the United States is illegal.
But is David Vitter the only US Senator to pay for sex? Highly doubtful. Are you trying to tell me that an equal (or greater) number of Democrats haven't done the same thing?
The difference would be that Democrats would deny the wrong doing, even with compelling evidence. Vitter came out and admitted what he'd done. Surely there is honor in that.
That's not saying he's not wrong. That's not saying he's not engaged in immoral behavior. But where are you, Christopher, in condemning Democrats as aggressively as you condemn Republicans?
Did you condemn Barney Frank for running a gay prostitution ring? Why hasn't he resigned? Why haven't you called for his resignation?
Ted Kennedy. He's well known for various proclivities, including prostitution. I've never seen you condemn his actions, or call for his resignation.
We also strongly disagree about Vitter being more 'in the wrong' (my words) than Clinton. There's no logical way to conclude that.
On the one hand there's David Vitter, a Senator, who illegally paid for sex. On the other, the President of the United States, the chief law enforcement officer of the NATION, lying under oath. The subject of the lie is irrelevant. He could have been lying about widgets, doesn't matter. If POTUS lies under oath, that's precedent for the system falling apart.
No comparison. Clinton's 'sin' was worse. The Leader of the Free World, versus the junior Senator from a backwards southern state.
You can't spin that.
I don't prove your point. I never said Spitzer didn't have national influence. Had I said Spitzer didn't and Vitter did, then I would have proved your point. Instead I disagreed with you that Vitter isn't of any importance. Quite literally he is of extreme importance to our national government. He's one of only 100 senators in the entire country. Saying that a U.S. Senator isn't of any importance and shouldn't resign after committing a crime is spinning at it's best, or worst.
I have no idea if David Vitter is the only Senator to pay for sex. And neither do you. What we do know is that Vitter paid a prostitute for sex, which is a crime and has refused to resign. Then we have Spitzer doing the same thing but resigning. You said that when Republicans do the same thing they go to jail. Obviously they don't and Vitter is a perfect example. Not only does Vitter not resign, but you claim that he shouldn't have to because he's not of any real importance and tried to say that he's never presented himself as being a moral crusader. That, of course, just isn't true.
"The difference would be that Democrats would deny the wrong doing, even with compelling evidence. Vitter came out and admitted what he'd done. Surely there is honor in that." You have absolutely no proof of that. None whatsoever.
Just the opposite of that is happneing. What there is proof of, is Vitter, a Republican, never actually admitted to paying for the prostitute despite facing compelling evidence. He's only admitted to sinning. Even though his name is all over the escort services records, it's actually the Republican trying to deny the wrongdoing while denying the act. Vitter has not directly admitted to what he's done, only to say that he's asked for forgiveness from God. In this case, and not saying Democrats are any better, but in this case it's the Republican doing the very same thing you claim Democrats always do. You're really talking yourself in circles on this one.
I'll also not comment about whose sin is worse. That's for God to sort out. Not me.
The point of the matter is Vitter should be held to the very standard he sets for everyone else. He's absolutely not doing that. And you're trying very hard to apply different standards to Democrats than Republicans.
No, I'm not. Everyone should be held to the same standard and those standards should be applied consistently.
My point about degrees of wrong doing is important here and I want you to see this clearly. When it comes to lying about sex it didn't matter when Clinton did it. But when a Republican does it, it's a huge deal.
Larry Craig comes to mind on this, also. He's recanted his resignation. But he's been formally charged. He's a pig.
The $64K question: Has Vitter actually been charged with anything?
Spitzer hasn't been charged with anything either. Does that mean Spitzer shouldn't have to resign?
What's clear is you are talking in circles. You first said when Republicans do the same thing they go to jail. Then you said Vitter shouldn't have to resign because he isn't anyone of importance. Then you said that Vitter only cheated on his wife like Clinton did and never presented himself as a moral crusader like Spizter did, and therefore the same doesn't apply to Vitter. But cheating on your wife like all three men did isn't illegal and in addition to cheating on his wife Vitter committed a crime by hiring a prostitute. And he most assuredly presented himself as a moral crusader, ran his campaigns as a Christian conservative and called marriage the most important social institution in our nation's history. It's so important and so ordained by God, and immoral to deny marriage as such, that he hired prostitutes.
Then you tried to weigh whose sin was worse, concluding that Clinton's was worse. Now you're saying that Vitter was never charged with anything. But neither has Spitzer been charged with anything and yet he still resigned. And we've already discussed that both Spizter and Vitter were in very important public official roles, one a governor and one a senator. That both were self-described moral crusaders and ran their campaigns as such. One admits to the crime and resigns while the other does just the opposite.
And finally you mention Larry Craig, which again proves my point and not yours. Here we have another Republican not resigning from office. In this case he pleaded guilty privately and then once it went public he denied he did anything wrong and simply accepted the plea to get on with life. So again we have a Republican not admitting to the sin/crime and not resigning from office. Again, another example that Republicans don't always do the right thing and resign or go to jail.
Why does this feel like a Friday?
Post a Comment