Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bipartisan Hypocrisy - Libertines on all sides.
National Review Online ^ | March 08, 2007 | Victor Davis Hanson

Posted on 03/08/2007 10:38:58 AM PST by neverdem

Edited on 03/09/2007 3:38:37 PM PST by Lead Moderator. [history]

Recently, several conservative politicians, moralists, and evangelicals have been embroiled in scandal. As congressmen, Tom Delay and Duke Cunningham had publicized brushes with ethics laws, while their former colleague Mark Foley and Ted Haggard, who was pastor of a large evangelical church, were implicated in embarrassing sexual affairs.


(Excerpt) Read more at article.nationalreview.com ...


TOPICS: Culture/Society; Editorial; Government; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: hypocrisy; vdh; victordavishanson
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last
For both liberals and conservatives, the days of the simple-living Harry Truman and clean-living Dwight Eisenhower are apparently long gone — and for two reasons.

--snip--

Debt, drink, drugs, gambling, lotteries, and sex all happen without much restraint or rebuke — and our most prominent are often the most susceptible to these new appetites.

How about limited government? From the progeny of the Pendergast political machine in Missouri who was an artillery officer in World War I, to the smoking, highly skilled poker player who never served in combat, VDH picks a somewhat odd couple to idealize.

"I never trust a fighting man who doesnt smoke or drink." Attributed to Admiral William Halsey, courtesy Lexmark Corp. Quotation Server.

1 posted on 03/08/2007 10:39:00 AM PST by neverdem
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Tolik

Ping


2 posted on 03/08/2007 10:41:49 AM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

Your highly skilled poker player had rules about not gambling with those who could not afford to lose. When he did break his rule, he conspired with the other players to insure the destitute loser "won" his money back. And on top of which had the then Colonel Patton issue orders prohibiting playing of poker.

I do not see how a highly restrained gambler refutes VDH's assertion of "happen without much restraint or rebuke?"

Nor do I see Halsey as someone who would trust a habitually drunk or lush.


3 posted on 03/08/2007 10:51:19 AM PST by ExpandNATO
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

He's right.


4 posted on 03/08/2007 10:51:29 AM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

The stinging truth.


5 posted on 03/08/2007 1:12:58 PM PST by vpintheak (Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ExpandNATO; The Ghost of FReepers Past; vpintheak
I do not see how a highly restrained gambler refutes VDH's assertion of "happen without much restraint or rebuke?"

Nor do I see Halsey as someone who would trust a habitually drunk or lush.

He's right.

The stinging truth.

Both of these Five Stars either tolerated or were addicted to the evil weed - tobacco. Heaven forfend! I can remember when the government gave me free tobacco.

Debt, drink, drugs, gambling, lotteries, and sex all happen without much restraint or rebuke — and our most prominent are often the most susceptible to these new appetites.

VDH moralized about personal bad habits. The dems can always slide on hypocrisy and corruption. Pubbie moralizing always comes back to bite them. That tendency didn't help the pubbies in the last midterm election, e.g. banning online gambling. The GOP lost a number of small 'l' and big Libertarians, mostly in the midwest and west, losing Congress in the process. Their plan to turn out the base was a disaster, even if complicated by the war in Iraq, spending and corruption.

Smackdown! By Independents & Moderates

Libertarians Emerge as a Force (Losertarians deep-six the GOP)

I'd rather keep government small, as opposed to enabling the nanny state. Why do you think the left keeps comparing social conservatives to the Taliban, Al Qaeda and Islamists? They do that even as they effectively make common cause with our Islamist enemies.

At the same time you have politics as a moral crusade yielding second hand smoke bans and campaigns against man made global warming based on junk science. If junk science doesn't work, then it's for the children, or if it only saves one life. This how our liberties have been progressively diminished.

"Let he who is without sin cast the first stone." Amen.

6 posted on 03/08/2007 3:10:10 PM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
VDH moralized about personal bad habits. The dems can always slide on hypocrisy and corruption. Pubbie moralizing always comes back to bite them.

Well the standards are definitely skewed. Republicans are called moralizers because they stand opposed to the slaughter of millions of unborn babies. This is more of a crime issue than a moral issue. Isn't it. And people seeking to maintain the centuries old definition of marriage (and sex for that matter) are hardly deserving of the slander they receive (Taliban).

I am not sure when it happened but at some point "morality" became a bad word.

Nevertheless, as to your charge agianst VDH: I don't see that he was moralizing about personal bad habits or anything else. He was merely pointing out the overwhelming hypocrisy of both sides. Do you deny that?

7 posted on 03/08/2007 3:42:02 PM PST by The Ghost of FReepers Past (Woe unto them that call evil good, and good evil; that put darkness for light..... Isaiah 5:20)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: The Ghost of FReepers Past
Well the standards are definitely skewed. Republicans are called moralizers because they stand opposed to the slaughter of millions of unborn babies. This is more of a crime issue than a moral issue. Isn't it. And people seeking to maintain the centuries old definition of marriage (and sex for that matter) are hardly deserving of the slander they receive (Taliban).

If social conservatives confined their zeal to just those issues, I don't think the pubbies might not have done so badly last November. But the GOP was also being unjustly hammered on embryonic stem cell research in polls by an uninformed electorate, and the GOP decides to ban online gambling. I'm no gambler, but I know gamblers took revenge on Election Day. South Dakota passed a law banning abortions even in the case of rape or incest. Guess what happened. South Dakotans Stand Up for Freedom and Privacy, Repeal Divisive Abortion Ban

Politics is the art of the possible. The pubbies worked real hard to lose last November.

8 posted on 03/08/2007 5:27:25 PM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

That is why I said the stinging truth. Whatt he heack does the first part of your post mean?


9 posted on 03/09/2007 7:09:33 AM PST by vpintheak (Like a muddied spring or a polluted well is a righteous man who gives way to the wicked)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: neverdem; Lando Lincoln; quidnunc; .cnI redruM; SJackson; dennisw; monkeyshine; Alouette; ...


    Victor Davis Hanson Ping ! 

       Let me know if you want in or out.

Links:    FR Index of his articles:  http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/keyword?k=victordavishanson 
            His website: http://victorhanson.com/    
                NRO archive: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson-archive.asp

New Link!   
http://victordavishanson.pajamasmedia.com/

10 posted on 03/09/2007 8:40:12 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

One of those times when his article left me cold. Was not sure that I even want to ping to it. Can't be perfect every time, I guess...


11 posted on 03/09/2007 8:42:13 AM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem

"How about limited government?"

Another post where I get to make the "putting toothpaste back in the tube" analogy.


12 posted on 03/09/2007 8:58:31 AM PST by L98Fiero (A fool who'll waste his life, God rest his guts.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: vpintheak
Whatt he heack does the first part of your post mean?

Please, be more specific, i.e. comment# 1 or 6. My general argument is that the GOP overplayed its hand by just trying to satisfy those on the religious right. They banned online gambling. The "libertines," libertarians and gamblers took their revenge on the last Election Day. I provided links for those who don't understand my comments about Harry Truman, Dwight Eisenhower and "Bull" Halsey, both of the latter achieving "Five Star" military rank as officers.

13 posted on 03/09/2007 10:24:20 AM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
How about limited government

Yes, how about that quaint old notion?

I don't want politicians of any stripe being my nanny, I just want them to stop trying to rewrite the Constitution.

14 posted on 03/09/2007 10:28:01 AM PST by Madame Dufarge
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: neverdem
The libs are always nattering on about "framing" but this is one issue they've framed very nicely in their favor, and they've done it this way - what is deplored isn't sexual or financial or drug- or alcohol-related misbehavior, what is deplored is hypocrisy. What that does is to absolve anyone who claims to have transcended the "old" morality from actually adhering to it. Pretty neat trick rhetorically - it's why a Barney Frank is tolerated but a Mark Foley is not.

Of course it's a double standard. It's a very successful, institutionalized, well-established double standard and it stinks.

15 posted on 03/09/2007 10:42:08 AM PST by Billthedrill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Billthedrill; The Ghost of FReepers Past; vpintheak
The libs are always nattering on about "framing" but this is one issue they've framed very nicely in their favor, and they've done it this way - what is deplored isn't sexual or financial or drug- or alcohol-related misbehavior, what is deplored is hypocrisy. What that does is to absolve anyone who claims to have transcended the "old" morality from actually adhering to it. Pretty neat trick rhetorically - it's why a Barney Frank is tolerated but a Mark Foley is not.

Nailed it much better than my attempts.

16 posted on 03/09/2007 1:08:10 PM PST by neverdem (May you be in heaven a half hour before the devil knows that you're dead.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
It is evident to me that Victor Davis Hanson is not as highly esteemed here on Free Republic as was formerly the case not so long ago.

Are you under the same impression, and if so to what do you attribute it?

Furthermore, I think the same applies to Mark Steyn.

17 posted on 03/09/2007 1:14:53 PM PST by quidnunc (Omnis Gaul delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: quidnunc

I am not sure that there is reduction of respect. Both of them have their biases, that are constant, and, at least with VDH, his FR critics are all the same, did not see many new names lately.

My own critique is that its impossible to write on the same high level of rhetoric all the time. When they get more money for more frequent publications lately (and I can't blame anybody for desire to earn more), the quality suffers sometimes.


18 posted on 03/09/2007 1:31:26 PM PST by Tolik
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Tolik
Tolik wrote: I am not sure that there is reduction of respect. Both of them have their biases, that are constant, and, at least with VDH, his FR critics are all the same, did not see many new names lately. My own critique is that its impossible to write on the same high level of rhetoric all the time. When they get more money for more frequent publications lately (and I can't blame anybody for desire to earn more), the quality suffers sometimes.

My impression is that there are fewer replies to VDH (and Steyn) threads than was the case previously.

In this case there are only 14 commenting on the content of the article.

I think FR is becoming a less hospitible forum for neo-conservatives and their allies in the conservative movement.

19 posted on 03/09/2007 3:36:36 PM PST by quidnunc (Omnis Gaul delenda est)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: Madame Dufarge

"I just want them to stop trying to rewrite the Constitution."

Well said.

All I ask of my government is to protect the borders and enforce what the founding fathers left us, we can take care of the rest.


20 posted on 03/10/2007 8:56:15 AM PST by RedStateRocker (Nuke Mecca, Deport all illegals, abolish the IRS, ATF and DEA)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson