Daylife/AP Photo used by permission
|
I had no particular interest in rubbernecking this Mark Sanford disaster. People make mistakes. The flesh is weak, the heart disobedient and marriages hard. According to the General Social Survey, about 10 percent of married people admit that they have cheated on their spouses…
At the end of the day, aside from the dereliction of duty and malfeasance, this, for me, would be a private matter. That is if it were not for the appalling hypocrisy of yet another social conservative saying one thing while doing another.
There are Democratic sex scandals to be sure, but Democrats didn’t build a franchise on holier-than-thou moral rectitude. The Republicans did. They used sexual morality as a weapon and now it’s shooting them in the foot…
And this kind of hypocrisy isn’t confined to the politicians. It permeates the electorate. While conservatives fight to “defend” marriage from gays, they can’t keep theirs together. According to the Census Bureau’s Statistical Abstract, states that went Republican in November accounted for eight of the 10 states with the highest divorce rates in 2006.
Conservatives touted abstinence-only education, which was a flop, when real sex education was needed, most desperately in red states. According to 2006 data from the Guttmacher Institute, those red states accounted for eight of the 10 states with the highest teenage birthrates.
And, a study titled “Red Light States: Who Buys Online Adult Entertainment?” that was conducted by Benjamin Edelman, an assistant professor of business at Harvard Business School and published earlier this year in the Journal of Economic Perspectives found that subscriptions to online pornography sites were “more prevalent in states where surveys indicate conservative positions on religion, gender roles, and sexuality” and in states where “more people agree that ‘I have old-fashioned values about family and marriage.’ ”
They could avoid this hypocrisy by focusing more on what happens in their own bedrooms and avoiding the trap of judging what goes on in everyone else’s.
So, who actually invented hypocrisy? Republicans or Christians?
Sanford,Ensign….who will be the third Republican.
So, who actually invented hypocrisy? Republicans or Christians?
Ahh yes, the classic chicken or the egg question. We will never know.
I would say that while Republicans and Christian wingdings bond like shit and flies, there is healthy competition amongst them for most hypocritical.
Heh… Yeah, they’re hypocrites. Just like the other side isn’t a bunch of fascists with their views either eh? Totalitarian scumbags on the right Totalitarian scumbags on the left. Pick your poison neither believes in freedom just forcing their views on everyone else.
You really want people to pay for this blog?
To hear Democrats tell it sex is private and not to be a factor in judging a politician.
Question answered – Democrats not only invented hypocrisy, but ecstatically practice it on a minute by minute basis.
I would think that hypocrisy was discovered shortly after humans developed language. The first sexual scandal involving a politician happened shortly thereafter.
#5 Clinton answered that same question too. When he said he “did not have sex with that woman!”
I think you have to look back far before Christians, Republicans, or Democrats to find your inventor…
This is a kind of weak article. What exactly is the point? That politicians are not flawless human beings? Gee. If only this was the worst thing any politician did. How about the corruption and the buying of Congressional votes by lobbyists? Where this guy puts his dick is of no concern to me. What matters is the faulty legislation he leaves in his wake and how we suffer from that crap!
#7: Agreed. Sex was never invented, it evolved. Otherwise there wouldn’t be any people (or animals, or plants) around.
Stories about fooling around on your mate/girlfriend/boyfriend seem have been around for a long time too, as there’s a lot of that documented in the Bible and many other old books.
Christians? Republicans?
Where did that last question come from?
Isn’t hypocrisy, rather, the _human condition_, and a reality which we all share and take part in?
I enjoy this blog a lot, but I think you stepped over the line from “enlighten” to “incite”, with that one.
#7 Thinker…that’s not hypocrisy, it’s called a lie.
“So, who actually invented hypocrisy? Republicans or Christians?”
Apparently, Eideard, you did.
While Mr Sanford ran off to Argentina, your Dem friends were busy bankrupting the country, writing hasty legislation to tax us all even more for nor real reason except to enrich Dem businessmen and scurrying to make sure they would not be included in the pending health care bill. Hell, if Sanford wanted to get screwed, all he needed to do was stay home and take it up the rectum with the rest of us!
For the record: I am a registered Democrat in the State of Texas. 2010 may see me changing my vote to a candidate who can convince me he or she believes in the Constitution of the United States. You certainly can’t accuse Barack Obamadinejad of that.
#12…that post makes perfect sense in 2006 if you swap all the R/D references. It seems we just can’t win, eh?
“So, who actually invented hypocrisy? Republicans or Christians?”
I could say liberals because they claim to stand up for fairness and the down trodden and yet they love to play lynch mob nor do they stand up for proper conduct when the person being smeared is somebody they don’t like. That would be handing back what the twit that posted this is dishing out.
The sad truth is that hypocrisy is a human failing and the hypocrite that posted the article and wrote the above quote has merely demonstrated that they have it just as bad as anyone else including me.
I am sorry for the Governor’s family but the man did it to himself. Lust makes people stupid.
Last time I checked I believe Obama labels himself as a Christian.
Paul Krugman made an interesting observation of how this is viewed differently by conservatives and liberals:
First of all, there’s a difference in what bothers them. When a liberal politician engages in sexual betrayal, what bothers his erstwhile supporters is the betrayal. When a conservative politician does it, what bothers the supporters is the sex.
the liberal reaction — that the hypocrisy of the moralizers undermines their cause
[the conservative reaction – ] the fact that some of those trying to police what other people do in bed are themselves doing nasty things does not reflect on the cause itself — on the contrary, it shows just how necessary more bed-snooping is.
blog link:
http://krugman.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/06/26/sex-and-the-married-politician/
#15 GigG
>>Last time I checked I believe Obama labels himself as a Christian.
Obama also fancies himself a leader, but as anyone can see that is also lie.
Conclusion: Hopey McChange is a Liar.
This is something the left loves to do. They redefine the definition of a word and then say it’s something that it is not. Setting a standard and then not living up to it is not hypocrisy.
Hypocrisy is setting a standard to which you say you and only you are exempt from living up to the standard because the standard you are violating needs you. It argues against self-serving circular arguments.
So if I say “It’s wrong to cheat on your wife.” and then cheat on my wife it’s not hypocrisy. It’s not living up to my standard, but I’m not saying “It’s wrong to cheat on your wife, but it’s ok if I do it because I run the church, and without us adultery would go un-enforced.” It’s a two part process, without the second part everyone who has attempted to work up to a standard are hypocrites and the word no longer holds meaning.
A good example of hypocrisy is Al Gore. Al Gore says “Americans need to consume less energy because it’s killing the planet, BUT it’s OK for me to use vastly more energy than the average American because I pay for “offsets” to a variety of companies of which I am a member of their boards, and we are saving the planet.” That’s pure hypocrisy.
I am really encouraged to see how many people have stood up to the Republican/Christian-bashing in this blog post. The fact is there are lots of hypocrites and back-stabbers on both sides of the fence.
Also, if you look at the original article, you will find that buried in the chart is the fact the porn subscription numbers are “adjusted for broadband use”. Why is that necessary? I’m not sure that it is. I hope that it is not needed only to skew the numbers to make a pre-determined point, but it wouldn’t surprise me one bit if it were.
“What exactly is the point?”
The point, like virtually every article here lately, is to slam conservatives.
Obviously all evil is conservative, and political hypocrisy does not exist.
“We love gays….but if Obama says screw the gay soldiers, then ok”
“Men in power should never prey on underlings…unless it’s a Dem President”
“Women’s rights are vital…unless an Approved Victim Group is infringing them”
Next will be “Lying: why conservatives are unable to tell the truth”…Gluttony: why conservatives overeat”
…Body odor: Why do conservatives smell bad?”.
Now for “Giving money to JCD: Why some conservatives have stopped”. That one’s getting more popular. I know you won’t miss my hundred-or-so bucks (that’s barely a bottle of wine for you), but at least I won’t be paying to be insulted.
You and Mr Fusion enjoy pleasuring each other here, and you and Adam keep lying about “listener-supported programming” when you’re getting paid by Mevio, and promising things that never happen on NA.
This was the last straw, JCD, Go fu….you get the idea.
I’ve never cheated on my partner.
On others’ partners sure, but not mine…
I find it delightful that the same conservatives who repeatedly chastised Clinton for his moral failings are now saying they never cared what a politician does in private.
Hypocrisy truly is a special talent of the right wing. They wouldn’t have a platform without it.
What I find bizarre is that hypocrisy seems to be a term used only about sex…when in fact Dems are guilty of it at a stunning level.
There was a “fierce moral urgency” to get rid of the “totalitarian Patriot Act” and reign in the “fascist unwarranted searches and surveillance” that Bush put in…until they are in power, and these things become useful and are being expanded. Now, not a peep.
Hypocrites.
Women’s rights are important until Bush started talking about fighting the Taliban, at which time they became “non-western cultural traditions that must be understood and respected”.
Hypocrites.
Freedom of speech is utterly vital to our freedom when it’s Ward Churchill, but when someone dares ask an unscripted question of a candidate in the midst of the campaign, his act of free speech gets him investigated by state tax authorities and his personal information released to the press by Obama toadies.
Hypocrites.
Bush was “in the pocket of the Saudis”, but when it became obvious that Obama was just as obsequious and had just as many staffers and advisors with oily hands, that no longer matters.
Hypocrites.
The rich and powerful must “pay their share” and not whine about taxes, until it becomes clear that hardly anyone Obama knows actually pays taxes, and they get off without fines or penalties for crimes that would land ordinary proles in the slammer.
Hypocrites.
Hypocrisy a rightwing phenomenon? I think not.
But I’m not enough of a partisan retard to call hypocrisy (or any common human failing) the exclusive province of the Left. Dvorak, on the other hand, seems to think it’s a perfectly normal thing to do.
Adam is increasingly looking like the sane one in this doltish duo.
Umm…
Eidard posted this. Dvorak has not made a single comment in the article as of this posting. Eidard, several people have answered your question appropriately (Hypocrisy has been around since the fruit [or since language, depending on your belief]). I’ll just point out in passing that your question is a false dichotomy.
Sorry Eideard, just noticed the typo.
Liberals are incapable of hypocrisy because they believe in nothing, value nothing, and advocate nothing other than attack those that do have have a moral compass to guide their lives. Their moral and cultural relativism lead them to admire Mao as much as Lincoln.They claim intellectual superiority for such a feat but in the end it is only a thin cover to justify a selfish hedonism that has been this generations calling card for 50 years.
Liberals are incapable of “hypocrisy” because they believe in nothing, value nothing, and advocate nothing other than attack those that do have have a moral compass to guide their lives. Their moral and cultural relativism lead them to admire Mao as much as Lincoln.They claim intellectual superiority for such a feat but in the end it is only a thin cover to justify a selfish hedonism that has been this groups calling card for 90 years.
Peggasus — Yes, Democrats are selfish and Republicans are altruists. Everybody knows that!
@Nimby: Sorry, there’s no such thing as party registration in the state of Texas. Voting in a primary identifies you so you can’t vote in both primaries. I’m betting that you voted in the Democratic primary for Hillary, per Limbaugh’s instructions.
Hypocrisy started when we humans learned the trick of self-consciousness. See Julian Jaynes’ work. Abstract thinking and the ability to imagine and consider options is a relatively new development. Religions with icons were founded before conscious thought: Followers believed that the statues/idols *were* the gods. When we developed higher consciousness, the gods went to the sky because it became obvious that the statues were just statues.
Also enabled with this development: Deception.
For an excellent example, look into the Spanish conquest of the Incas, which took about a day. For example, the Incas had not developed the advanced thinking and had no concept of theft: When you weren’t at home, you advertised this because there was no burglary.
#27, pegleg,
Their moral and cultural relativism lead them to admire Mao as much as Lincoln.
Is this what Boss Limpdick has been ranting lately? Geeze, no wonder the right wing nuts are screwed up.