Posted on 07/09/2007 8:55:07 PM PDT by freespirited
Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) acknowledged Monday night that his number appears on telephone records of the alleged D.C. Madam, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, and issued an apology.
“This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible,” Vitter said in a statement issued by his office.
“Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling,'' he added. "Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there -- with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way.”
Vitter did not disclose exactly when the incidents took place, but said it was before he ran for the Senate in 2004.
Vitter, 46, then became Louisiana’s first Republican senator since the end of Reconstruction and has built a reputation as a solid conservative, opposing abortion rights, same-sex marriage and gun control. Last month, he took a leading role in efforts to kill the comprehensive immigration overhaul bill.
A Harvard graduate and former Rhodes Scholar, Vitter was elected to the House in 1999, filling the seat vacated by Rep. Bob Livingston, who was headed toward the House speakership in 1998 when he was forced to reveal his marital infidelities.
In 2000, Vitter was included in a Newhouse News Service story about the strain of congressional careers on families.
His wife, Wendy, was asked by the Newhouse News reporter: If her husband were as unfaithful as Livingston or former President Bill Clinton, would she be as forgiving as Hillary Rodham Clinton?
“I’m a lot more like Lorena Bobbitt than Hillary,” Wendy Vitter told Newhouse News. “If he does something like that, I’m walking away with one thing, and it’s not alimony, trust me.”
“I think fear is a very good motivating factor in a marriage,” she added. “Don’t put fear down.”
Vitter’s revelation Monday comes a month after Hustler magazine Publisher Larry Flynt offered $1 million for information about illicit sexual relations with members of Congress. Flynt made a same pitch in October 1998, playing a role in Livingstons outing.
Palfrey posted the complete phone records of her client list on the Internet Monday night. The list for Pamela Martin and Associates dates back to 1994.
She is accused of running a prostitution ring catering to Washington’s elite. She faces federal racketeering and conspiracy charges based on allegations that she earned $2 million operating a prostitution service from 1993 to 2006.
Palfrey, however, has said that her company was legal operation that offered sexual fantasy services.
Her lawyer, Montgomery Sibley Blair, began distributing copies of the phone records to the media last week after a judge lifted an injunction that had previously prevented Palfrey from doing so.
It’s just sex. I don’t really care if he had it with a prostitute. Prostitution is legal in some places and illegal in others. As long as he wasn’t using my money to do it, and he worked it out with his wife and his church, I don’t care. This is a non-story. I’m not sure why anyone would care, except the MSM who wiil use it for sport to try to bring down Republicans.
As for: The term we are looking for here, I think, is ‘damage control’.
Perhaps, but the nature of the confession is head and shoulders above that of the typical Dem.
Clinton: "Listent to me real carefully. I did not have sex with that woman."
Kennedy: "The sleeping pills made me do it."
Typical Dem: "I made a mistake"
This Guy: "I sinned. I accept full responsibility."
It really is different and refreshing, don't you think?
you are awful judgemental there, mr. armchair quarterback
finally, a post that makes sense
whoops missed #2 lol
You knew it would be only the Republicans who would be leaked. Fortunately for Vitter, he’s not up again until 2010 and, by then, it will be old news.
As corrupt as most Louisiana pols seem to be, this won’t even show up on the Richter Scale.
FWIW, I think Vitter is smart to acknowledge it now and not let it simmer for weeks or months in a game of political “gotcha”. For that, at least, Vitter has more valor than a former Democrat president.
Are we reading about the same guy? He owned up and takes full responsibility. I guess you and others here would like to see him kneeling in a soccer stadium with an AK47 agains his head, even after you admit yourself that you've had your own moral lapses. The reformed drinkers / smokers / etc. are the most sanctimonious I guess, even when speaking of others who claim to be reformed themselves. Everbody should get off their high horse and reconsider the quote from the Senator I pasted above. When have you ever heard a Dem talk like that? That alone paints a picture of sincerity.
The fact that he apologized and took full responsibility doesn't mean that we (the voters) should just forget about it and let it go. I don't think it is asking too much to expect members of Congress to hold themselves to a moral standard higher than the average person. As leaders of our country they should be held to a higher standard.
Approximately 0.00000178% of the United States population are members of Congress. When such a tiny number represents all of the American people, I think it is perfectly reasonable to demand that members of Congress be held to far more exacting standards than the rest of us. Why shouldn't we demand the best from our representatives? Is it too much to ask that congressmen be moral and virtuous to not cheat on their wives?
I don’t really disagree with anything you said in the post to which I’m currently replying. I advanced the same arguments about Clinton and never bought the idea that you can separate the job of President from your personal life.
I was bothered by the silly speculation about the wife’s motivation for staying with the Senator, and moreso, that speculation be stated confidently as fact. That wasn’t about the Senator, or even the wife. There was something personal driving those silly comments.
Also, I was impressed with the nature of the Senator’s apology / confession itself (see my post just prior to yours) and was surprised nobody else had recognized the dramatic difference between that and a typical Dem confession. There was something in it that showed relative character. Character relative to a typical Dem getting busted at least.
Not so different—and given the context—not so refreshing, either. Remember: the evidence against Vitter was immediate and undeniable, while Clinton squirmed on that particular hook for awhile—and would’ve gotten away with it, too, had he not inadvertently left behind DNA evidence on a dress.
Again: it isn’t enough for someone like Vitter, an elected official, to simply apologize when he commits a corrupt act, no harm no foul. ‘Taking full responsibility’ only has meaning if taking that responsibility implies accepting the public and legal consequences of that act. When he publicly admitted to buying the services of a prostitute, he confessed to a crime, thus ‘taking full responsibility’ means he gets arrested, gets processed, gets a court date set, and appears before a judge or pleads out. That’s what happens if you or I commit a relatively minor misdemeanor and admit to it in public. Sins are private, crimes are public.
But that's exactly what he did!
This release of information isn't what prompted his change of heart, he did that long ago- as evidenced by his wife's joint response.
Sorry, if you do somehting wrong and try to cover it up, you should be toast. If you do something wrong (and we all do, as you've stated) and deal with it, and admit to it afterwards, that reveals a true depth of good character. Vitter passes. Bush did too, when he talked about his former alcoholism. Did you vote for him?
Um, oh, wait...that doesn't sound right.
Nevermind.
If some of the other Republican senators got caught with hookers and had their nads cut off in retribution, that would explain a great deal....
Bottom line...she's using him just as much as he is using her. Textbook marriage of convenience.
I feel sorry for the children.
And yes, knowing of President Bush’s prior struggle with alcoholism, of course I voted for him. Given my own hard-won sobriety, I could definitely empathize. From my own experience, I know transformation of character and change in thinking is possible over time. But that’s the key, isn’t it—time? I am not the man I once was and neither—given all evidence—is the President, whom I support and respect and admire.
Issues of personal transformation aside, it simply isn’t too much to ask of GOP elected officials that they follow a higher standard than their Democratic Party counterparts. I mean, just how difficult can it be to hold the high moral ground on people like Barney Frank, who essentially had a male prostitute doing business out of his home?
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.