William Bennett considering lawsuits against casinos

The Las Vegas Review-Journal ^ | Tuesday, July 29, 2003 | ROD SMITH

[Search4Truth]

It seems to me that those who do not value virtue, defend those who don't value it much either. And those who do value virtue, will not be buying anymore of Mr. Bennett's books or lectures.

[MinuteGal]

Dang it all, some of us won or lost a couple bucks in the casino on the "FReeps Ahoy" cruise. There went our virtue!

Good thing I didn't play Snowball Bingo in the Grand Salon. I'd be banned from FR fer shur.

Leni

[VRWCmember]

1. He is not blaming the casino for his gambling.
2. He has not denied gambling.
3. He never extolled on the evils of gambling or the virtue of not gambling.

Therefore, the claim of hypocrisy is a little weak. Hypocrisy usually means doing something that you criticize in others. On the other hand, isn't it amusing that some of those who are getting the most enjoyment out of pointing out Bennett's "hypocrisy" or "moral weakness, i.e. gambling problem" are the same folks who usually deplore any invasion into the privacy of people's private lives?

Do you consider the leaking of private information by the casinos to be a good thing?

[Search4Truth]

It is Mr. Bennets' right to squander obscene amounts money any way he chooses. But no one who values virtue will see it as virtuous. Hence his career as Mr. Virtue is over.

Now Mr. Bennett is free to pursue those who exposed him, and who possess comparable virtues as himself.

I doubt there are few here who defend his lack of virtue, who have even read any of his books. They defend him only because he is a so-called conservative and because they share his lack of virtue.

[Search4Truth]

"Do you consider the leaking of private information by the casinos to be a good thing?"

Irrelevant to the question of Mr. Bennett's virtues, or lack thereof.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

I have read a few of his books, and have two of them on my bookshelf. What does that say about me? Am I not a conservative?

Is Mr. Bennett every quoted as calling himself, "Mr. Virtue", or is that a title the press gave to him?

Are you more virtuous than Mr. Bennett? Can you prove this by any other standard than bashing him over the head and calling him a hypocrite? What is your definition of a completely virtuous human being? The only one that comes to my mind is Jesus Christ, however his case is exceptional.

[VRWCmember]

Irrelevant to the question of Mr. Bennett's virtues, or lack thereof.

Not really, since that is the basis of his lawsuit and you called him a hypocrite for filing the suit.

[Clint N. Suhks]

Someone that loses 10 mil has a self-restraint issue.

First of all he didn't. So your phony argument is moot.

Second, does the wealthy Saudi Sheak have self restraint "issues" if he bets a 100K at a time? Most wouldn't think so, do you have a double standard?

[Clint N. Suhks]

Besides the fact that the 'Bookmaker of Virtues' has exhibited sheer hypocrisy in, for example, being addicted to nicotine while drug tzar,

He quit smoking immediately after he accepted the job. A hypocrite advocates one position and does the opposite, he didn’t do that did he even though “nicotine” was legal? Straw man alert!

Why, this charming citation, when his gambling habit came to the fore, sums things up quite nicely: “I view it as drinking. If you can't handle it, don't do it.”

Where did he not “handle” anything? How does that make him a not virtuous? It DOESN’T!

[Search4Truth]

I do not measure my virtue by the virtues of other men. For that type of virtue is a facade. The only real virtue is that which is accountable to God.

No man is completely virtuous. We all fall from grace. The difference is that virtuous men own up to their transgressions. A virtuous man is as honest with the world as he is with himself.

I am not bashing Mr. Bennett, I am holding him to account for his transgressions. Holding him to his own standards of virtue. As a man who pursues virtue, I can do that; as other virtuous men have called me into account, on more than one occasion.

But then virtue is easy to restore. All one has to do is own up to their transgressions and make amends. That in fact, increases one's virtues.

All I see coming from Mr. Bennett are his efforts to preserve the cash cow that financed his gambling. There is certainly no virtue in that.

[Search4Truth]

"Not really, since that is the basis of his lawsuit and you called him a hypocrite for filing the suit. "

If you need to fabricate statements in order to make you point, then a dialogue with you is a waste of time.

[Bluntpoint]

He is a hypocrit. Period.

You sound like the liberal, bitching and moaning about process and techinicalites of how your gumba got nailed.

You sound just like old school Begala defending Clinton.

[Ken H]

Bennett's 10 Virtues:

Self-Discipline
Compassion
Responsibility
Friendship
Work
Courage
Perseverance
Honesty
Loyalty
Faith

[Pan_Yans Wife]

All I see coming from Mr. Bennett are his efforts to preserve the cash cow that financed his gambling. There is certainly no virtue in that.

Mr. Bennett's legal case is a separate issue from his gambling. He has admitted to the world that he gambled.

Having your private credit or financial information leaked to the press, is an offense that any victim should pursue in a court of law. I doubt you would be so apathetic, if it was your own personal information that was doled out to the press. What if it had been his medical information, his tax records, his credit report? Shouldn't that all be vehemently protected?

[Search4Truth]

"What if it had been his medical information, his tax records, his credit report? Shouldn't that all be vehemently protected?"

Well of course.

I suppose when one can not defend Mr. Bennett's lack of virtue they will change the subject to that of legal issues. I have no interest in the legal issues. My interests are in virtues.

[Pan_Yans Wife]

Did you even bother to read the article that was posted at the beginning of the thread? To quote...

He argued the magazine report stemmed from the release of "some documents" by the casinos themselves which was not legal and violated his privacy rights.

He alleges documents were selectively leaked to create a false impression that he had a gaming problem.

While Bennett did not dispute the legitimacy of the documents and said he had no problem with the reporters who have written stories on his gambling, he told Russert the release of the information was not legal and he is looking into the possibility of legal action against the casinos.

[Search4Truth]

And your point is?

[Pahuanui]

He quit smoking immediately after he accepted the job.

Do you smoke marijuana, by any chance? You seem to have a memory problem. 'Immediately'? He quit not immediately, but rather after a few months, and only after antitobacco advocates paid for full-page newspaper ads "asking President Bush's drug czar, William Bennett, to take a`drug-free challenge' and quit his two-pack-a-day cigarette smoking habit".

A hypocrite advocates one position and does the opposite, he didn’t do that did he even though “nicotine” was legal? Straw man alert!

Wrong. Folded under political pressure alert. Utter cosmeticism alert.

Why, this charming citation, when his gambling habit came to the fore, sums things up quite nicely: “I view it as drinking. If you can't handle it, don't do it.”

Where did he not “handle” anything? How does that make him a not virtuous? It DOESN’T!

I'm sorry, but for a self-professed man of virtue, for someone who makes money bemoaning the decay of America's moral fiber to patently stupid, fawning audiences, to blow millions at games of chance when it could have been spent elsewhere (say, scholarships) is reprehensible.

I'm not suprised you can't grasp that concept.

[AndyJackson]

the release of the information was not legal

If the casinos maintain a credit rating data base for gamblers, then they have a duty to insure that the information is never accessed for improper reasons. If it was, in this case, then I have no problem with Bill Bennett suing and if I were on the jury I would make him owner of the offending casino(s). Maybe the solution is just not to have such a data base, and therefore not to extend credit to gamblers. Sounds like a win-win situation to me.

[Conservababe]

Your definition of virtue is your own.

If you think you were scammed by Mr Bennett because he smoked cigarettes, possibly drank coctails and gambled...then you have a problem.

Mr Bennett is a Catholic and none of the above mentioned is considered a sin. It probably never occured to him that you would consider him less virtous for enjoying these recreations.

But, I think your real problem is that he had the money and spent it in a manner that you would not approve.