Well, we’re talking about Bill Bennett here, so let’s talk about him. Of course he’s a hypocrite because he not only talks about personal responsibility and the dangers of indulging in an assortment of vices in such a permissive society, but also uses the argument that these reflect larger personal failings and this type of moral laxity has direct, detrimental impacts on the culture and society as a whole. Marijuana. Gay relationships (let along marriage). Divorce, cohabitation and single parenthood. All are vilified and seen as signs of a slippery slope toward America’s downfall.
But look out! It turns out another activity that most anyone would consider a “vice” (losing milliions of dollars in gambling) doesn’t count! This is an activity that’s illegal in many places, has a proven association with addictive behavior, and has unambiguous ties with crime in various circles, but somehow, all the reasons and rationales behind his other crusades don’t apply here. This is called “convenient”.
This is like someone railing against adultery who’s caught licking out a woman who’s not his wife. His defense: “Eating isn’t cheating”, and because he didn’t specify the parameters of what consituted “adultery”, he absolves himself of any accusation of hypocrisy.
This is, naturally, bullshit.
This type of situational morality, especially when it flies in the face of what most people associate with certain terms or code words, is hypocritical in spirit if not by the letter. This is especially true if his audience consists of people who are most likely to hold the same interpretations of these terms and code words. I can claim that all vegetables are evil, but when you find me eating green beans, assert, “Oh, well that’s a legume!” It may be something I can rationalize all day about, but it’s not going to convince anyone with two brain cells. It’s disingenuous and best and dishonest at worst. So while people are very happy to let Bennett slide on this type of technicality, it’s self-serving (or perhaps empty-headed) sophistry.
From Slate:
From The Nation:
From The National Review: