Why Do Conservatives So Quickly Abandon Their Own?

Cathryn Crawford

[Cathryn Crawford]

Isn't it true that a lot of the bashing of Bill Bennett is simply due to the fact that conservatives naturally rejoice in the misfortunes of their own? The ability of the conservative movement to abandon their own people when they are even slightly attacked by the liberal/media establishment is absolutely astounding.

Why are conservatives so quick to judge their own? Are we afraid? Are we so afraid of being tainted by a scandal that we will so easily turn away at the first sight of blood?

This is a serious and long-term issue among conservatives that deserves to be adressed.

[Cathryn Crawford]

We could go on like this for days, you know...so do you..

[nopardons]

Yes, and you do again. LOL

[Kip Lange]

Aye, couldn't have said it better myself. Eloquently put, X (are you Q's cousin? heh). :-)

Wanted to draw attention to:

This argument is itself a form of hypocrisy that allows liberals to take down even a liberal Republican like Packwood

Packwood is a particularly fun case of hypocrisy, because his behavior was *known*, and yet feminist groups STILL SUPPORTED HIM -- because he advanced some of their agenda -- when they *knew* what was going on. Of course, they turned up their noses once everything went "public", but...it may not have been in all the papers, however, I repeat, Packwood's "habits" were WELL KNOWN for a long time before that story broke.

[Truthsayer20]

"Unless Bennett hit little old ladies over the head to get at the slot machines, or in some other way broke the law, the story is not worth one moment's notice, and in fact any "controversy" generated over Bennett's private, legal conduct plays into the hands of the left."

Well, some folks on the right have an axe to grind when it comes to critizing Bennett over this incident. It goes back to the supposed neo-conservative conspiracy against the confederate sympathizer ME Bradford who was to be nominated as the director of the NEH back in 1981. The claim is that Irving Kristol somehow single-handedly persuaded Reagan to nominate Kristol's "liberal" friend Bennett instead.

[Dick Bachert]

Conservatives have a well-deserved reputation for shooting their wounded for the simple reason that we TRY to set a higher standard than the "dark side." Because we are human -- and sinners -- we frequently fail.

The dark side tolerates virtually ANY behavior from their members: Drowning young women in cars then fleeing the scene, pay-offs for the state to look the other way as slaughterhouse waste befouls the countryside disguised as cattle futures trading profits, assaulting women, getting hummers in the Oval Office, perjury, etc., etc...

[Cathryn Crawford]

I know...but we judge too, too quickly.

[TLBSHOW]

ping

[nonliberal]

I think you may be a bit angered because Mr. Bennett HAS a million dollars to gamble. I would LOVE to have that kind of money.

Gambling is legal and socially acceptable. If Bennett wants to pull the one-armed bandits because he has the cash to do it, more power to him.

[nonliberal]

Non sequiter. A drunk is putting an intoxicant into his body. He can then be a threat to others if he operates heavy machinery or works with sharp objects. If a gambler throws money in a slot machine and gets behind the wheel, he is not a threat.

[PISANO]

Conservatives tend to eat their own.......

A truer statement can not be made and NO WHERE else is it MORE apparant then on this board. Freepers bash virtually every conservative in a leadership post from GW (assualt weapons ban), Senator Lott (constant bashing) to his replacement Senator Frist (24/7 filabusters). Freedom is great and expressing one's opinion (as I am doing) is wonderful but we all must remember that we will reap what we have sown.

[katana]

Maybe I'm missing something, but are there allegations that Bennett has gambled illegally? I don't gamble because I don't enjoy it, but unless someone is so wrapped up in gambling that they are damaging their family I've got no problem with them having fun in whatever legal manner they may choose.

The use of certain drugs is, on the other hand, proscribed by law. Personally, I think those laws should be changed, but until they are Bennett's condemnation of drug use and his own enjoyment of a legal vice are IMHO not inconsistent.

[Mamzelle]

Who's eating Bennett? Bennett needs to knock off the High-Rolling behavior, or find himself not taken seriously as a voice for the traditional virtues. But if his book sales are hit because of this, that's not eating, that's plain market doing its job.

Conservatives don't have to support those conservatives whose behavior embarrasses.

Newt got caught behaving badly, and had to rehabilitate. No one is indispensible.

[Dick Bachert]

While Bennett HAS done a number of laudatory things for the culture, he has been a DC "hanger-on" for some time, accepting what amount to high 6 figure sinecures at conservative think tanks to permit him to write and speak on virtue and morality. Tough life!

By holding himself ABOVE the rest of us, he volunteered to wear a target on his chest. Now that he's taken a hit, his complaints about it ring hollow.

I play poker with friends when I can and once gambled in Vegas (not at Bennett's level as I certainly don't have his resources). Because I never authored a "Book of Virtues," nobody really cares.

ANOTHER chink in the guy's armor is his support for the continuation of a tyrannical income tax system and -- as Drug Czar -- growth of an increasingly intrusive juggernaut state.

How "virtuous" is that??

[RightOnGOP]

I haven't read the entire thread, but maybe many here feel like myself: a hypocritical Republican is worse than a normal (lying) Democrat. Cannot stand a GOPer with a Dem-like problem of any kind, just makes us easier targets for the Dems to paint with the same broad brush as some of their own...."well, you can't criticize me (the Dem) because you (the GOPer) did it too.....etc etc etc"

With some other scandals, I have little/no respect for the GOPs with the pants problems. Example, Bob Livingston did not deserve to become Majority Leader after criticizing Bill Clinton for a pants problem of his own. Newt Gingrich can put together some of the most scholarly debates for conservative causes, but I will never think the same of him after his (two) infidelity problems.

Now, with respect to Bill Bennett, my own opinion of him will change NONE. Gambling is not illegal, he did not bankrupt his family, and it was HIS money. One of the reasons that the left loves this story is because it gives them a chance to say what Bill Bennett SHOULD have done with HIS money........

[jonalvy44]

good point! I heard the same thing...So he's human?

If this is all the left can come up with then they are hurting...

As far as conservatives, I think this is an issue where PC has run amuck and conservatives are afraid to offend and thus, lose votes. I think the tide is chabging as we've seen with Santorum...

[6ppc]

Conservatives do tend to eat their own once controversy hits.

We tend to hold true to our values, unlike Democrats who will drink their Kool-aid no matter how bad the taste.

[Stone Mountain]

I've been debating this all day and no one has shown me that he's a hypocrite yet. He never said, "Don't gamble".

Yes. However, he has said many times, "Don't indulge in behavior that is harmful to society." He tells people not to use drugs or have pre-marital sex, not because doing so will necessarily hurt the individuals taking part in those activities, but because those activities are bad for society as a whole. Gambling has ruined millions of people's lives in this country, and the casinos that Bennett is supporting are encouraging more. If Bennett can indulge in activities that don't hurt him personally but are bad for society in general, why can't the rest of us? That's why some of us see Bennett's high-stakes gambling as hypocritical.

[mrfixit514]

Because we are not hypocrites. If a conservative does something wrong or immoral they deserve the same treatment as a liberal who did the same thing. That is the difference in conservatives and liberals. We don't give our own a free pass on moral issues.