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.

[jordan8]

This country is a velvet dictatorship of the left, and the loci of that dictatorship is in the undemocratic halls of the bureaucracy, the academy, and, most especially, the medias. Conservatives (and let's be honest, most of these people aren't very conservative: they're as bendy as Gumby) turn on each other with such ferocity because they have no real power and to maintain their standing (and their perks) they must kowtow to those who do. In other words, this tendency is a reactionary manifestation of the power relationships in American politics and society.

I was perusing a furren board a while back on which someone asked "What is Kwanzaa?" to which someone else quipped "It is a black separatist holiday mostly celebrated by white liberal newspaper editors". But I can think of at least one other well known figure who celebrates it: George W. Bush. GWB issues a happy Kwanzaa message every year. Why does Bush promote a black separatist holiday whose roots are vicious anti-white and anti-American hatred? Because it reflects the orthodoxy of those who control the culture (and thus have the real power) whom Bush must placate if he wants to prosper in their system. Turning on your own, showing yourself to be more Stalinist than Stalin, is another way of mollifying these forces.

[aristeides]

Those of us who are Catholics do not regard gambling as an intrinsically immoral act. We would only regard it as a vice where it causes evil results. Why is it hypocritical for Bennett to gamble?

[Valin]

Who's bashing Bill Bennett?

There are some here who are shocked that Bill Bennett gambles.
It must be hard for them being perfect and having to live in a world with us who aren't.

[Stone Mountain]

Why is it hypocritical for Bennett to gamble?

Bennett has repeatedly told people not to 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 (and I don't think anyone believes that casino gambling is good for society), why can't the rest of us? That's why some of us see Bennett's high-stakes gambling as hypocritical.

[TLBSHOW]

Morning Bump

[aristeides]

That's why some of us see Bennett's high-stakes gambling as hypocritical.

Even though Bennett's religion does not regard it as wrong? I'm afraid that to me, as a Catholic, this looks like trying to impose Protestant morality on Catholics.

[Search4Truth]

I think it has something to do with hypocrisy.

[ArGee]

Until this thread I had not heard that Bill Bennet was a gambler. My comments below are not directed at Bill Bennet but at the question.

Much of conservatism is based on ideology, as compared to liberalism which is based on power and libertarianism which is based on individuality.

When a conservative abandons the conservative ideology he is not considered to be a conservative any longer. Even worse, if he has been preaching conservative ideals and then violates them he is a hypocrite. And since conservatism is the party of ideology we don't like hypocrisy.

This hurts us because neither liberals nor libertarians have the same problem with hypocrisy that we have. So we have this problem that we stone our hypocrites while the other two philosophies support theirs.

We have two choices. 1) put power over ideology. That is what many Republicans propose. I believe it would destroy conservatism. 2) recognize that even the greatest among us is capable of falling. Learn to distinguish between someone who has fallen and repented and someone who has fallen and wants to normalize lying in the mud. I vote for the latter.

Shalom.

[iconoclast]

He never said, "Don't gamble".

Yeah, gosh, I wonder why not? (/sarcasm).

[iconoclast]

Yes, he threw money away. So do I, when I buy that cheap purple nail polish at the drugstore.

When you are not being intentionally silly, please put (/silly) on your posts.

[iconoclast]

Those of us who are Catholics do not regard gambling as an intrinsically immoral act. We would only regard it as a vice where it causes evil results. Why is it hypocritical for Bennett to gamble?

I'm Catholic. I gamble.

But, this is hardly a case of a $2 Nassau or parish bingo. This guy is one sick puppy and your attempt to whitewash it by using our faith is embarrassing.

[Alissa]

I guess I'm totally missing something. Since when is going to Vegas and gambling considered a sin? I consider it entertainment. Although I don't gamble, I know lots of people, who in my mind are upstanding, moral people and they love to hop on a plane to Vegas for a weekend of amusement and entertainment. And these are usually, the older female types or married couples, who are not interested in the seamier side of Vegas.

[Stone Mountain]

Even though Bennett's religion does not regard it as wrong?

For me, at least, it has nothing to do with religion. It's that Bennett talks about doing things in the interest of a societal good. He tells people not to do things that don't necessarily hurt themselves (drug use, premarital sex) on the grounds that society suffers when people do these things, since some people can't handle them. Yet, he doesn't use this same criterion to eschew gambling, even though casinos make billions of dollars off of many people in our society that have gambling problems.

[The Green Goblin]

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.

Ergo, I can morally sleep with any prostitute in the State of Nevada, since it is entirely legal. Woohoo!

[dfwgator]

Absolutely! And he's surely got alot more than $8 Mil to play around with. He's exercising a legal right.

Isn't investing the stock market, technically "gambling" as well?

[aristeides]

I'm a product of 12 years of Catholic education. I'm judging Bennett by what I was taught in religion class for those 12 years.

[katana]

If you equate the morality of renting a woman's body for an hour with that of wagering on which particular horse in a race is the fastest that day, then I suppose you have a point. Personally, I don't think they're the same thing, but hey, it's your money and deciding where and how you wish to (legally) spend it ought to be your choice. Just remember which of the two is the place where you have to wear certain latex safety accessories and you'll probably be alright.

[Cathryn Crawford]

Good morning...I'll answer all these posts later tonight...