jdobbin Posted July 10, 2007 Report Share Posted July 10, 2007 (edited) It looks like Hustler magazine broke the story. http://blogs.abcnews.com/theblotter/2007/0...er-call-pr.html A call from Hustler magazine may have prompted a Louisiana Republican senator to expose his past with an escort service run by the so-called "D.C. Madam," the Blotter on ABCNews.com has learned.Sen. David Vitter, R-La., sent a statement to the New Orleans bureau of the Associated Press late yesterday confirming that he had used the now-defunct Washington, D.C. escort service Pamela Martin and Associates, whose former proprietress, Deborah Jeane Palfrey, has come to be known as the D.C. Madam, thanks to her high-profile federal prosecution. It seems Hustler magazine is good at exposing Republican Senators and their infidelity. The previous Louisiana Senator resigned for that reason. Edited July 11, 2007 by jdobbin Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 (edited) Yet another "family values" hypocrite. He's done more damage to marriage than the gay folks he fought to ostracize ever could. Edited July 11, 2007 by Liam Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Yet another "family values" hypocrite. He's done more damage to marriage than the gay folks he fought to ostracize ever could. That was my thought as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bush_cheney2004 Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 It seems Hustler magazine is good at exposing Republican Senators and their infidelity. The previous Louisiana Senator resigned for the reason. Yea, it's a lot cheaper than special prosecuters and impeachment, and even then Democrats won't resign! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Yet another "family values" hypocrite. He's done more damage to marriage than the gay folks he fought to ostracize ever could. Really - has he? Because for centuries before men were getting caught cheating on their wives but the institution of marraige did pretty well for itself. Now this one man has done that much damage to it? Amazing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shakeyhands Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 ... to the family values ideal, not marriage. twist, twist, twist. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 ... to the family values ideal, not marriage. twist, twist, twist. Really - has he? And then I repeat the above with "family values" inserted for marriage. Let's admit it - neither of you have a strong attachment to either concept or its aspirational nature. Rather, this is the standard "hypocrisy" stick that permits you to bash that which you don't really believe. Human's stray therfore there should not be paths. That kind of deal. Right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Rather, this is the standard "hypocrisy" stick that permits you to bash that which you don't really believe. Human's stray therfore there should not be paths. That kind of deal. Right? Au contraire, Pierre. I firmly believe in the strength of family and there absolutely need to be paths, regardless of the fact that people sometimes stray. In the case of Vitter, the man was an insulting homophobe and a hypocrite who campaigned on a platform that positioned him as someone who embodied traditional values -- meanwhile, he's being unfaithful to his wife (a moral shortcoming) and paying hookers (a crime last time I checked). When someone like that puts himself out there as a powerful symbol and is shown to be the exact opposite of what he claims to be, he's a hypocrite. Do you think the man is not a hypocrite? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Rather, this is the standard "hypocrisy" stick that permits you to bash that which you don't really believe. Human's stray therfore there should not be paths. That kind of deal. Right? Au contraire, Pierre. I firmly believe in the strength of family and there absolutely need to be paths, regardless of the fact that people sometimes stray. In the case of Vitter, the man was an insulting homophobe and a hypocrite who campaigned on a platform that positioned him as someone who embodied traditional values -- meanwhile, he's being unfaithful to his wife (a moral shortcoming) and paying hookers (a crime last time I checked). When someone like that puts himself out there as a powerful symbol and is shown to be the exact opposite of what he claims to be, he's a hypocrite. Do you think the man is not a hypocrite? As far as we know he did not hire male prostitutes. If straying disqualifies one from propounding the path one strays on who teaches the path. if ghandi shouted at his retainers - and he did - does that mean he was no longer qualified to preach the twaddle path he did? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SkyhookJackson Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 Personally, other than the fact the guy opines long and loud on a fairly regular basis about the sanctity of marriage and how gay marriage will somehow ruin hetero marriage, I couldn't care less if he hired a hooker. I am curious about where he is today, though. He didn't show up on the Senate floor to vote on an amendment to an Iraqi bill. Suppose the wife carried through with that Lorena Bobbitt thought??? LOL. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 11, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 As far as we know he did not hire male prostitutes. If straying disqualifies one from propounding the path one strays on who teaches the path. if ghandi shouted at his retainers - and he did - does that mean he was no longer qualified to preach the twaddle path he did? I wonder why the Republicans went after Clinton on his affair. There were no prostitutes involved at all. Clinton didn't have to pay for his women. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Liam Posted July 11, 2007 Report Share Posted July 11, 2007 As far as we know he did not hire male prostitutes. If straying disqualifies one from propounding the path one strays on who teaches the path. if ghandi shouted at his retainers - and he did - does that mean he was no longer qualified to preach the twaddle path he did? Hiring a male prostitute is relevant... why? Was that an attempt at some homophobic remark? Having lived a less than perfect life does not disqualify anyone from anything, IMO. St. Augustine lead a life of debauchery, drinking, prostitution, fornication, yet is one of the most revered of all saints. Why? Because he genuinely walked away from his life of sin, but he never claimed to be what he wasn't. Vitter frequented hookers and cheated on his wife while claiming to be a paragon of virtue. In addition, he tried to burnish his own image by casting others as threats to the very institution he, himself, was trashing. You can keep making apologies for him, but it won't make him any less of a hypocrite. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ScottSA Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 (edited) Hiring a male prostitute is relevant... why? Was that an attempt at some homophobic remark? I don't think so. This is a homophobic remark---> "Fags are limp wristed freaks who shame manhood." It's the type of thing I make a point of saying as much as possible in order to convey my disgust, and also because I refuse to bow under to politically correct Nazis who would like to force me to to bow under to right-think. I don't think Sulaco did anything more than make an observation. Edited July 12, 2007 by ScottSA Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mad_Michael Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Yet another "family values" hypocrite. He's done more damage to marriage than the gay folks he fought to ostracize ever could. Yes, it is ironic (and fitting) that so many of these politicians with their bullhorns on 'family values' get caught by this type of thing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 As far as we know he did not hire male prostitutes. If straying disqualifies one from propounding the path one strays on who teaches the path. if ghandi shouted at his retainers - and he did - does that mean he was no longer qualified to preach the twaddle path he did? I wonder why the Republicans went after Clinton on his affair. There were no prostitutes involved at all. Clinton didn't have to pay for his women. Because he comitted a crime while sitting as POTUS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 As far as we know he did not hire male prostitutes. If straying disqualifies one from propounding the path one strays on who teaches the path. if ghandi shouted at his retainers - and he did - does that mean he was no longer qualified to preach the twaddle path he did? Hiring a male prostitute is relevant... why? Was that an attempt at some homophobic remark? Having lived a less than perfect life does not disqualify anyone from anything, IMO. St. Augustine lead a life of debauchery, drinking, prostitution, fornication, yet is one of the most revered of all saints. Why? Because he genuinely walked away from his life of sin, but he never claimed to be what he wasn't. Vitter frequented hookers and cheated on his wife while claiming to be a paragon of virtue. In addition, he tried to burnish his own image by casting others as threats to the very institution he, himself, was trashing. You can keep making apologies for him, but it won't make him any less of a hypocrite. I am not making apologies for him. I am making apologies for hypocrites everywhere. Hypocrisy is usually a sign of a normative world view on matters susbtantial, combined with a desire to impart that worldview, sullied by human falliability. We can disagree on morality but in my humble opinion hypocrisy is but the smallest of sins. Find me a person who's not a hypocrite and I will be worried. He'll be inhuman or amoral. Now please substantiate - did Vitter claim he was a "paragon of virtue"? And in what way did he "trash" the institution of marriage? How does he cheating on hiswife, confessing to her, and her forgiving his past transgrassions (arguably consistently with her vows) undermine the institution. As far as I know they are raising children. So on so forth. Your arguement is silly. I know what you're reselling - homosexual marriage does not undermine the institution, heterosexual misbehavior does. That arguement does not stand up to scrutiny. Though I tend to agree that no-fault divorce has made the vows meaningless in law and perhaps thus less meaningful in society. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xman Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Find me a person who's not a hypocrite and I will be worried. He'll be inhuman or amoral. Finally, some truth!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Because he comitted a crime while sitting as POTUS. His crime was not answering questions about the relationship. The affair itself was not a crime. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xman Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Thy shalt not commit adultery!! A crime against God!! Sex...horrible sex. Atrocities are fine as long as it preserves the American way of life - freedom and democracy. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 (edited) Because he comitted a crime while sitting as POTUS. His crime was not answering questions about the relationship. The affair itself was not a crime. He didn't refuse to answer questions. Rather, he lied under oath. And that is what he was impeached for. Not for having an extra-marital relationship - as you imply. Edited July 12, 2007 by Sulaco Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 Thy shalt not commit adultery!! A crime against God!! Sex...horrible sex.Atrocities are fine as long as it preserves the American way of life - freedom and democracy. Adultery is an atrocity? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xman Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 No. Attacking innocent women and child is the atrocity. That's fine as long as it preserves our American dream. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sulaco Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 No. Attacking innocent women and child is the atrocity. That's fine as long as it preserves our American dream. Well no one is attacking Vitter's wife or his children. Ok wait... I get it... you are trying to change the topic of this thread by posting inane one-liner troll-bait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jdobbin Posted July 12, 2007 Author Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 He didn't refuse to answer questions. Rather, he lied under oath. And that is what he was impeached for. Not for having an extra-marital relationship - as you imply. True, he lied under oath. Are you saying that if he told the truth that he should have been left alone because he acted human? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xman Posted July 12, 2007 Report Share Posted July 12, 2007 (edited) "Ok wait... I get it... you are trying to change the topic of this thread by posting inane one-liner troll-bait." Bingo! Edited July 12, 2007 by Xman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.thumb.jpg.9a49e1b2f22a6d34a345152c50044aa9.jpg)
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.