I think he handled the fallout better than the average bear.

I wonder who’s next…wouldn’t it be something if Senator Byrd’s phone number was on the list. Hell, he’d be applauded.

Left by Dianne on July 11th, 2007 at 10:12 am

wouldn’t it be something if Senator Byrd’s phone number was on the list.

There’s not enough Viagra in the world…

Left by Robbie on July 11th, 2007 at 1:10 pm

A prostitute??? Doesn’t seem Vitter is being entirely truthful.

Left by kma on July 11th, 2007 at 7:42 pm

Here’s what pisses me off. Ok…so maybe he’s just a man who can’t keep his pecker in his pants, but a couple of days ago I actually sent him a thank you note for the work he did to defeat the illegal immigration bill. And, I think to myself, now we can’t count on you anymore cause you’re shamed in the Congress and when we really need you, you’re not gonna be able to stand up there and hold your head up and FIGHT like you did before..

Shit

Left by Dianne on July 11th, 2007 at 8:00 pm

I watched Dan Abrams discuss this with Larry Flynt.

First question: Suppose he acted as a complete hypocrite. I want Larry Flynt (or others) to point out why acting like a hypocrite is wrong (ie what is your epistemological basis)? Defining what hypocrite means does not equate to showing it is morally wrong. In other words, how do you know for sure that it is wrong? Did God tell you in the Bible? Then, you better hold to all of it or you are being logically inconsistent.

Second question/point: All of us have done something at some time or other that goes against our own value system. There is not a man, woman or child on this planet who has not violated their own code of ethics (which is amazingly flexible anyway). Guy says I don’t go to church because it is full of hypocrites. The pastors says, “Come on in, there is room for one more.”

Third point: Larry Flynt’s reasoning suggests that since everybody has violated their own code of ethics, they should, therefore, only vote for and speak on behalf of Larry Flynt’s policy positions. This seems a strange and contorted argument to make.

Fourth point: Is it not possible that voters care about how Senators vote on bills (and their policy positions) more than they do about their personal morality?

Fifth point: What if (and in this case it appears not to be the case) some congress person committed adultery or whatever, apologized to their wife and did not repeat it? Does this mean that they are expected to remain silent forever?

Left by robert on July 12th, 2007 at 9:24 am

Yapping about family values while routinely breaking the law by patronizing escort services is pretty damn hypocritical. How much weight one wishes to give such transgressions is up to the voter. It might not be important to some, but very important to others. It shouldn’t be hidden under some b.s. that it is a private family matter or “God forgave me.” I wonder about someone who knowing his position would break the law and his marriage vows and not think he would eventually get caught. It shows a lack of judgment.

Left by kma on July 12th, 2007 at 9:56 am

I wonder about someone who knowing his position would break the law

Didn’t the alleged transgressions occur before he became a Senator?

Left by Robbie on July 12th, 2007 at 10:39 am

I’m not sure of the time frames. Prior to being elected to the senate, wasn’t he a representative?

Left by kma on July 12th, 2007 at 10:57 am

Larry Flynt apparently has at least 25 more names to add to the list. This ought to get interesting.

Left by Dianne on July 12th, 2007 at 1:06 pm

Robbie…you doubt Senator Byrd? lol

Left by Dianne on July 12th, 2007 at 2:50 pm

Fourth point: Is it not possible that voters care about how Senators vote on bills (and their policy positions) more than they do about their personal morality?

Actually, Robert, the aspect of these scandals most galling to me isn’t the personal hypocrisy of Senator Vitter- we’ve become accustomed to the likes of Haggard and Swaggart and Foley telling us how to live our lives while going about with hookers or drugs or freaking teenage boys.

It’s the political hypocrisy of the religious right that makes me sick. I used to have a modicum of belief in the sincerity of their politics yet they can be sure to stand by their man after he gives credit of his redemption to God (a courtesy that was never given to any liberal). Over and over we hear about the ‘importance of character’ from this crowd. Yet liberals who have attended church their whole lives have their faith questioned by right wing blowhards while junkies and johns get re-elected with their support.

So what is it? Is faith in God the glue of the religious right or is it just fealty to an authoritarian agenda? I guess we’ll find out on Election Day.

Left by Preston on July 13th, 2007 at 7:35 am

I like the way the Kennedy clan does it. Screw everybody, literally and figuratively, go to confession and the whole country will claim you’re a hero.

Left by Dianne on July 13th, 2007 at 2:37 pm

Wow, forty years ago to bring up Kennedy…why not blame Clinton. I think the narrow minds are missing that he ran on Family Values and he is a hypocrite…THAT IS WHAT IS GOING ON! All neo-cons should move to Alabama and marry your sisters!

Left by billy clinton on July 17th, 2007 at 1:33 pm

the narrow minds are missing that he ran on Family Values and he is a hypocrite

And the Dems ran on a platform of cleaning up the corruption in Congress. Talk about Hypocrites — this might be the most ethically challenged Congress ever (on both sides of the aisle).

Left by Robbie on July 17th, 2007 at 1:53 pm