a) The people that condemn Senator Vitter cheating on his wife but do not condemn President Clinton for his cheating on his wife.
or
b) People like Senator Vitter whose political agenda mainstay has been "family values".
For those that are having a hard time deciding, here is the definition of Hypocrisy:
hy·poc·ri·sy (h-pkr-s)
n. pl. hy·poc·ri·sies
1. The practice of professing beliefs, feelings, or virtues that one does not hold or possess; falseness.
2. An act or instance of such falseness.
2007-07-20 04:24:35 · 18 answers · asked by Kerry R 5 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
I will say answer B. Only because as a Conservative, our whole focus is family values and when you get nut jobs like Vitter or even Mark Foley who get caught not practicing what they preach, they make conservatives everywhere look bad.
There are conservatives out there, like me, who don't just talk family values, but DO THEM and LIVE THEM.
But only the political nut jobs who talk them yet don' t live them get the attention.
2007-07-20 04:27:01 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 6⤊ 1⤋
Why do conservatives still use President Bill Clinton as an example for negative values? Do you not understand the meaning of hypocrisy? Bill Clinton lied about having an affair but ran the country like an Fortune 500 corporation. America was in the greatest shape during his administration. He eliminated the nation's deficit and had alliances throughout the entire planet. He was an excellent President unlike our current fool. Bush has ruined this nation's reputation as a world power. He has destroyed our economy and ruined foreign relations. He could care less about this country or it's people. He is about making money and killing anyone in his way to make it. He is the biggest hypocrite we have ever had in office...
2007-07-20 05:34:44 · answer #2 · answered by John J 3 · 2⤊ 0⤋
A. It's hypocritical to criticize Vitter for committing adultery, and at the same time, believe Bill Clinton was an angel. Both Clinton and Vitter are hypocrites and anyone who picks sides on this issue based on their political party is also a hypocrite.
2007-07-20 04:27:58 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 1⤋
I deplored Clinton for what he did the office of the President, and said so when it happened. I still think that today. I think backlash against him is why we have Bush now. So no, I am not a hypocrite. Vitter needs to go now.
2007-07-20 04:31:44 · answer #4 · answered by El Duderino 4 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I would say they are all hypocrites but I guess the first people would be more so going by your definition because Vitter always knew what he was doing was wrong. He never claimed that prostitution was a good thing and he knew it was the wrong thing to do.
2007-07-20 04:28:31 · answer #5 · answered by gerafalop 7 · 3⤊ 1⤋
Either/or, and I don't see it as a big issue. I am a hypocrite in that I don't always obey traffic laws even though I support them. They do keep me safer than I would otherwise be from myself and those who would drive even worse than I do sometimes.
The fact that we sometimes give in to temptations doesn't mean we shouldn't oppose the very things we may have done. If you ever drove after having too much to drink, does it mean that you shouldn't take the keys away from someone who is about to drive drunk? What if they kill themselves or someone else -- which is worse, a bit of hypocrisy or a death?
If we all had to be perfect to support any laws, there would be no laws protecting us from anything. Do what you think is right, support policies you believe in, even if you fail to follow your own beliefs sometimes. We can overcome our hypocrisy easier than we can overcome the results of setting no standards for our conduct.
I should point out that I'm not sure that sex between consenting adults, even prostitution, should even be illegal (we could sure use the tax dollars if it were legal and taxed, and maybe regulating it rather than outlawing it would reduce transmission of STDs). The point is that if you think something is hurting your community, you should speak out against it even if you have participated in it.
http://www.yaktivist.com -- A place to discuss developing nonlethal weapons and nonlethal pregnancy termination technology.
2007-07-20 04:35:24 · answer #6 · answered by Yaktivistdotcom 5 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Interesting thought there; real hypocrite.
When Clinton played around it wasn't a federal case, because he never played the holier than thou card. He was a bit of a playa, but he never claimed to be other than flawed.
He sure never stood up and pointed fingers at all the other men in congress and tried to get out of things like Bush does.
Right now, Republicans are looking a Newt, Rudy, and Mc Cain, all of whom have had affairs, and Newt, and Rudy have each had three wives. Clinton's had affairs, but only one marriage. Republicans have had not only Foley, but the man who was supposed to take over from Newt had to leave...due to his having an affair. All that time all of them were lambasting Clinton for his affair. Maybe if they all did more honest congressional work they wouldn't have time for all that hanky-panky
2007-07-20 04:38:58 · answer #7 · answered by justa 7 · 1⤊ 1⤋
Vitter is a hypocrite.
His 'I'm more like Lorena Bobbit' wife is a moron.
And anyone still concerned with the Clenis needs to get a life.
2007-07-20 04:31:48 · answer #8 · answered by Joe M 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
Vitter is the hypocrite becuase he promoted the values he broke. Those that judge the two situation differenctly are jus biased hacks.
2007-07-20 04:28:08 · answer #9 · answered by Bye-Partisan 3 · 4⤊ 2⤋
they are both hypocrites. where are the people who blasted Clinton for cheating on his wife? still blasting him maybe?
Sen. Vitter is obviously a hypocrite, but also a man.
2007-07-20 04:28:10 · answer #10 · answered by ? 6 · 4⤊ 1⤋