Booking Bennett

NRO ^ | 5/5/2003 | Jonah Goldberg

[mr.pink]

I wonder why a smart guy like Bennett doesn't play real poker. I'd have a lot more respect for him if he did.

I agree. Real poker against real men with real (unvirtuous, thus inferior) minds, even if he was using researched knowledge to bet the ponies or bet sports, at least he'd betting on his superb mind. But video poker?

Could he have been trying to discreetly (as discreetly as possible) wash money? He did say he made money (or broke even) over the years.....I don't think those games were designed to permit that outcome over the long term.

[Liberals are Evil Socialists!]

Let's see now, Bennett has disclosed that he has had gambling wins/losses of $8 million over the LAST DECADE. That translates to Approx. $800,000 per year. Now here's the rub. He spends a bit of time in a few casinos for several hours in front of video poker machines. If you don't know anything about how this is reported to the IRS, let yourself be educated. An electronic monitoring card is used to register ALL wins agaisnt ALL losses. So, the longer a person plays, the more the wins and losses add up. Therefore, over that amount of time, playing sometimes until 6 am in the morning, Bennett would ring up a lot of pulls. It is that aggregate that is reported. It also keeps track of winnings. Anyone who has ever played video poker will know that it mostly evens out. In truth, the net result from his hobby is that he has not won or lost a net of $8 million, or $800,000 per year. It indicates the amount of time he has spent playing his hobby/game. Sure beats sexually harassing government interns and employees on the job, lying about it and then obstructing justice over it. That is hypocrisy, not Bennett's legal form of enterntainment. Anyway, Bennett isn't President. That unfortunate bit of history is played by the original scumbag himself: Cliton.

[Cacophonous]

I'll concede that he may not be meeting the strict definition of "hypocisy", as you seem to be willing to ignore a behavior that was not mentioned specifically as a vice by Bennett himself. I guess it depends, to paraphrase one of our lesser lights, what the definition of "moral" is.

So instead I'll stick with my usual beef with Bennett, his unbridled arrogance (I know, I know, arrogance is not a sin either).

Now please answer my questions. I'm curious as to what you think I have said in the past.

[sandydipper]

I like Bill Bennett.

[robertpaulsen]

With Bill Bennett it's gambling -- everyone else it's "gaming".

[borkrules]

Here's a shocker for you: all of those people are sinners. Morally failed at something at some point in their lives. Are they also disqualified from speaking/writing/opining on moral issues?

[goldstategop]

Pre-marital sex? Today the term sounds positively old-fashioned. Bennett doesn't doesn't condone his children doing it and then justify an exception for them, so he isn't a hypocrite. And if he did wink and nod at it, he'd be a liberal for whom any lifestyle under the sun is acceptable as long as you're not not a conservative caught doing it.

[borkrules]

And I will concede that you may not fall into either of the two camps I described. I have neither time nor inclination to parse through your past posts (although I'm sure they are all interesting).

Fair enough?

[Cacophonous]

Fair enough.

[JohnGalt]

That is a tortured response since you are asking a question that self-evidently is yes, but your everybody does it defense is sophistry to the issue at hand.

[Fpimentel]

I gamble. I consider myself and Bill Bennett a moral person.

[Cacophonous]

For the record, I think going after Bennett because of a gambling thing is silly, and I don't really have a problem with "casual" gambling. I would probably be more inclined to gamble myself if I did not have the worst luck of any individual in the world (it's documented). As it is, it doesn't interest me in the least, and the best time I had in Vegas was when I went to see the Hoover Dam.

My problem with Bennett is, as I said, his arrogance, and how his arrogance manifests itself in attempting to be a moral touchstone, when he, being a human being, is so spectacularly unqualified. And his ultra-liberal past bothers me; he changed stripes in a hurry when Reagan became President, which struck me as suspicius. I suspect he is closer to his brother Bob (Defender of Bill) than any would like to admit.

[JohnGalt]

LV takes about 24 cents on the dollar for its slots/video poker machines. If we assume for the sake of argument that BB kept his bet the same over the years, we can conclude that Bill put approximately $32 million dollars through these machines.

[LaGrone]

Excellent! Wish I had thought of it.

[dfwgator]

Who do you propose to replace Bill Bennett, or shall all of us sinners simply sit down and STFU about virtue, since we all are guilty of something?

Nothing wrong with standing up for virtue, but if you are going to make millions of dollars from doing so, you'd better be impeccable.

[LaGrone]

His gambling habit didn't make it to the "Book of Virtues". I always thought Bennett made good logical sense. Frankly, I'm disappointed.

[swheats]

Very good point, heads in Vegas should roll for the breach of privacy. That is the real story.

[AbsoluteJustice]

Michael Savage used to be a stouch liberal and look at him now what does that have to do with what he is today??

[gdani]

Nothing wrong with standing up for virtue, but if you are going to make millions of dollars from doing so, you'd better be impeccable

Bennett already looked like a fool even before the gambling story because he constantly lectures about other peoples' vices -- yet he probably tips the scales at about 300 lbs.

If he spent a little less time preaching & a little more time pushing himself away from his feedbag he might not look like such a blowhard.

[radioman]

So you didn't do some things in your younger years that don't fit the person you've become now?

lol!!!
I'm sure if we compare our past I could easily trump Bill when it comes to moral turpitude!

But, I am not lecturing morals to others, and I am not trying to criminalize anothers vice while I enjoy my own.

I am a Conservative, and as a Conservative I believe Bill has the right to practice any vice he desires.

Bill chose to speak out as a pillar of moral virtue, and that is his right. It is also my right to call him on his bluff.