Posted on 07/11/2007 4:12:46 PM PDT by goldstategop
RUSH: Now, this David Vitter thing. Have you noticed...? You know, we have Larry Flynt out there now, and Flynt is taking credit here now for outing David Vitter, and Flynt says, "Well, we're going to find some Democrats in this list, but probably we'll throw 'em back in the river, because Democrats are not hypocrites on this. Democrats are not out there talking about moral values." Well, that may be true, and I'm not naïve and I understand this, but I gotta tell you something. Have you noticed when Democrats have sex outside of marriage, even with interns, it's no big deal? In fact, it's a résumé enhancement! You have the thing going on with the mayor of San Francisco, Gavin Newsom. You have the mayor of Los Angeles, and Bill Clinton. The list is long. This stuff happens on both sides of the aisle. However, when Republicans engage in sex outside of marriage, why, it's a huge story! Look, Clinton is the Democrats' big man on campus. The mayor of LA is still said to be unbeatable, a rising star. But David Vitter is today a slob. Well, frankly, folks, people that do this, to me they're all slobs. This talk about double standard? I know the Democrats don't out there and talk about family values.
Well, actually it's not even true to say that. After the 2004 election loss, they were wringing their hands (for a couple days) over what they were going to have to do to get the values voters because the exit polls show that the values voters did 'em in. So they're out there making moves. They have this new guy Drew Westen, who's trying to teach 'em how to speak again. By the way, George Lakoff (rhymes with)... Speaking of which, I had the most unbelievable e-mail. "Rush, what does Lakoff rhyme with? I don't get the joke." Uh, needless to say, folks, I did not reply. It's one of those that if you don't get it, go ask your mom. No, don't do that! Never mind. (laughs) Don't. If you don't get it, just ask somebody. Ask your dad. Ask your dad. Call Clinton's office. (sigh) That's the way to get the answer. So anyway, they're out there. They make this now-and-again push for "values" now and then, and the mayor of Los Angeles, Villaraigosa says, "I want my privacy. I ask that you will leave us alone. My family and I will to deal with this in private," and the media, all say, "Of course! Why, we understand the need for privacy in the circumstances like this." But here's the thing: these people take marriage vows, too.
Are their marriage vows worthless? If they don't mean it when they take the vow, I assume their oaths are worth nothing as well. And, look, the libs are out there calling for gay marriage, are they not? And, why? "Well, because of the strength of commitment, love is love, and we cannot deny love, anybody who finds it anywhere," aand we're gonna redefine what the family is. All of these sorts of things. They talk about the importance of commitment, and they say, "I know a lot of gay marriages that have a stronger bit of commitment than some heterosexual marriages." They're talking about the commitment and they're talking about the vows and all these sorts of things. But when it comes to the Clintons, "What commitment?" If marriage is important -- and for some people, it is -- then if they don't honor it, they can't simply say, "We don't hold ourselves to a higher standard." What higher standard? You took a vow. You claim marriage is important and then you violate those things, you shouldn't get a pass, but they always get a pass. They should all be treated like Vitter is. I'm not arguing for Vitter to be ignored and so forth, but, anyway, these little things just irritate me now and then. BREAK TRANSCRIPT
This is Jed in Biloxi, Mississippi. You're next, sir. It's great to have you on the program.
CALLER: Hey, mega dittos, Rush. You're the greatest. You're the greatest.
RUSH: Thank you.
CALLER: Listen, I'm from Louisiana, and a big support of David Vitter, a great Republican, you know, he was an up and rising star I guess the Republican Party. And, you know, I'm not one of these people that gives 50 or a hundred bucks to campaigns. I'm giving thousands of dollars to Republican candidates in the state, and I'm so disgusted right now. My question to you is -- and I want to do this but I'm going to hold off because you always hold off when you're aggravated -- should I ask for my money back or stick with a friend in time of need? What do you think?
RUSH: (chuckles)
CALLER: (chuckles)
RUSH: You know, I am not your conscience.
CALLER: (chuckles)
RUSH: I am not (interruption). Now, what are you...? Snerdley, you think I'm backing out here? I am not copping out! Snerdley thinks I'm copping out. You're not going to get your money back anyway. They won't give it back to you.
CALLER: (laughing) I've been told that already. But I could raise a fuss, you know, if I wanted.
RUSH: Well, you gotta weigh some things here. You have to weigh some things in making your decision. Let me walk you through your decision. You've got Vitter. Do you like his work? Do you like what he's done as a senator? Do you like the position he had on illegal immigration for example?
CALLER: Yes, he voted against the bill. Yeah, he's a good conservative. He's a great conservative. I know him. He's a great guy.
RUSH: Is he human?
CALLER: Yes. Yes, he is.
RUSH: Yeah. So that means everybody as a human being commits sin. We've all done it.
CALLER: Yes, that's right.
RUSH: Okay. So boils down to whether or not you want to get mad at him for being a hypocrite.
CALLER: Right.
RUSH: Do you want to let Larry Flynt determine who your senators and congressmen are?
CALLER: Oh, God, no!
RUSH: Well, you remember the name Bob Livingston?
CALLER: Of course I do.
RUSH: Well, what --
CALLER: Of course I do. He blew it, being speaker of the House.
RUSH: What did we get out of that deal? Here you've got Bill Clinton torquing interns in their in the Oval Office. Livingston comes out and says what he says, and he resigns. None of the Democrats ever resign. They get résumé enhancements. The Republicans do a good enough job of shooting themselves in the foot as it is, without this stuff coming up every now and then. I think life would be nothing without understanding and forgiveness.
CALLER: Well, you don't make decisions when you're aggravated and I'm going to hold off for a while, but I'm really scared to death of the Republican Party now, and also you get Republicans in the State Republican Committee people asking for his resignation. I mean what -- what -- what...? Democrats don't ask for that. Like you said, they don't ask for resignations.
RUSH: Of course not. They're résumé enhancements. They're résumé enhancements for these guys. They can kill women and rise to the highest reaches of the United States Senate!
CALLER: That's right. They do. It's frustrating as hell. It really is. I'm not going to ask for it back. I'm going to hold off for a while.
RUSH: Look, the point is, there's a double standard out there. Everybody gets married takes a vow, Republican and Democrat alike -- and the Democrats keep talking about commitment, commitment, commitment, when they start talking about gay marriage, for example. "Gay marriage! We gotta have gay marriage. People who are committed to one another, we must make that possible for them to cement their vows under the eyes of the law," blah, blah, blah.
Okay, fine. They take vows, too. If they violate their vows, nothing happens to them because they supposedly don't run around talking about family values and morality. So they get a pass? Because they don't talk about values and morality, they are free to be as perverted and depraved as they want with no consequences, but because Republicans do talk about morality and values, when they slip up, just like Democrats do, gone. "You hypocrite! You better get outta here! You're not worthy of our leadership." None of them are worthy of our leadership if we're going to judge 'em this way. So there's this double standard. We've sat around here and we've accepted this and we've taken it so long. What Vitter said is right. Just because he fell off whatever, just because he committed his sin, doesn't mean he doesn't know what sin is. It don't disqualify him from sitting in judgment over things that are right or wrong, because everybody makes mistakes. Hopefully you learn from them. But when you make a mistake, the left wants to disqualify you from having any say so in it anymore. Even worse than that, they say, "If you didn't sign up to go to the Army, you have no business talking about war! If you're not an astronaut, you have no business talking about the space program!" They're trying to shut us up. They're trying to stifle speech any which way they can. If we're going to willingly throw away our decent people over something that happens across the human spectrum, well, then we deserve what we're going to end up getting. Nobody can say they maintain the highest standard possible, I don't care if they are a preacher, I don't care if they are in the highest levels of whatever business is oriented around morality in this country; nobody is clean and pure as the wind-driven snow. I hope the answer helped.
Here’s another Double Standard on Morality Alert:
When Democrats commit immoral acts (or essentially any act for that matter), Rush ignites the flamethrower. When Republicans commit immoral acts, Rush points to the Dems’ alleged double standard.
It smells.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Gotta laugh when you mention Louisiana voters. Wow.
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
True, they’re not priests or rabbis, but I don’t think the public is asking them to be. I think we’re just asking them to be reasonably upstanding, to not have sex with prostitutes and commit other acts of similar heinousness.
The media is OUR enemy as much as any other group! I can't think of any other American institution I'd like to more see brought to their knees.
The media is OUR enemy as much as any other group! I can't think of any other American institution I'd like to more see brought to their knees.
Our guys need to ask dems running for office if they feel sex outside of marriage is OK. Is it really "anything goes"? Maybe we should ask them while they're sitting with the little woman...
Put them on the record. Let's see if reporters are making assumptions...
Vitter not only disgraced his family but he broke the law.
“Does anyone remember when the Bush twins were caught drinking under age and the days of media “attention” given to them, compared to the media “attention” paid to Al Gore III?
The media is OUR enemy as much as any other group! I can’t think of any other American institution I’d like to more see brought to their knees.”
Al Gore is not a sitting president, as George W Bush was at the time of the coverage of his daughters. Had Al Gore III been arrested 8 years ago, you would have seen plenty of coverage. Plus, for what it’s worth, 2 young girls drunk in public as a matter of habit is a meatier story, more sensational and therefore more newsworthy in that the story could be expected to sell more papers and magazines and attract more viewers. Perhaps.
Also, tweak your assumptions and one could just as easily come to the opposite conclusion than the one you came to: if the media covers the sins of the children in direct proportion to the relevance the media places on the parents (i.e., highly relevant parents = more media scrutiny of the kids and vice versa), then a lack of coverage of Al Gore III could be interpreted to mean that the media doesn’t see Al Gore II as all that relevant. And isn’t that a good thing? I’m not saying this is true, just that it’s based on underlying assumptions that have just as much merit as those on which your post is based.
Regarding your desire to see the media “brought to their knees” (I wonder what that would look like in policy terms? I shudder to think, actually), I can’t seem to find your contentions reflected in the writings of any of the Founders. In fact, I find the opposite.
David Corn finds a Senate phone no on the DC Madam’s list—asks folks to track it..Dan Riehl does—it was Senator Moynihan’s office (probably one of his Dem aides).LOL
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/233290.php
By writing "bringing them to their knees," as you must know, but enjoy being argumentive, is not a literal statement. Or you sympathize with the conservative hating media who have absolutely despised Bush from the beginning.
If I spare you my sanctimonious defense of the media, will you spare me your simplistic world view?
Until a year ago I lived 3 blocks away from Jenna in Georgetown, DC, and saw her myself a couple times in neighborhood bars, and once in a diner on a Sunday morning after what looked like a hard night out. She wasn’t sober, but neither were there big bad media wolves salivating over her shoulder. There’s nothing sanctimonious about my defense—she had a reputation for frequenting the bar scene like many others of us her age. The media was inevitably there when the twins, as you pointed out, were underage. The point of my post was that I don’t see any evil media conspiracy here.
Yes I know “bringing them to their knees” is not a literal statement, but your point that you’d like to see the media institution essentially annulled (if not punished) was clear and, I would argue, somewhat misguided.
But maybe it’s because I make a living in part by generating media, and have done so for some of the most stalwart conservatives in Congress. The challenge has never been overcoming the media’s liberal bias. It’s always been finding that hook that’s going to sell.
One more thing: the volume of media coverage also largely hinges on the quality of the images, if there are images. In the case of the Bush twins, you had clear visuals of them in the act of underage drinking, so that also fueled the story. If you had photos or video of Al Gore III in handcuffs on the side of the police car (assuming there are none—I haven’t seen any at least), then you’d have seen those images all over the place, and they would have fueled the story.
What is Vitter’s position on the feds role on escort services? When has he legislated that?
I appreciate your replies and the time you took to explain your point.
Ms. Palfrey published her complete phone records July 9 - that's what started this round of the Vitter saga. Now that the list is out there. we'll see what turns up. There are enough people looking through the list from all sides of the political spectrum that I'm sure we'll get a pretty complete reckoning.
Are their marriage vows worthless? If they don't mean it when they take the vow, I assume their oaths are worth nothing as well.
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.