Regarding Boebert, first of all, I don’t really believe the “escort” rumors. Something about it just doesn’t pass the smell test (not that I have any interest in smelling any part of Lauren Boebert).
But here’s where I land on this: if it’s true that she was, and has done a 180, I don’t see that as hypocritical, even if she rages against it now. People change, and can regret chapters of their lives.
Now, if she were to advocate against it while still doing it, then I could see her as a hypocrite. Of course, part of that would seem to entail an actual admission of having had the sort of past that makes these rumors true. If there’s no owning up to it, my sympathies are a bit diminished.
Sure, if you (generic you) own up to your past and explain your 180, then I would not view you as hypocritical. One can reasonably argue “I did this thing and I regret it, I’ve learned from my mistakes, and now I’m against it.” But that’s not even close to what’s happening here, IF any of these rumors about Boebert are true (which I have significant doubts about).
Sure, but if we’re just going to shrug and say people change, then no-one is guilty of hypocrisy ever.
If someone is railing against X, even though they used to do X, they are obliged to mention this, and state why they were wrong before.
* And it’s not enough to say “I was poor and desperate”, which would imply it is still an acceptable choice for someone poor and desperate today.
** Not that I think escort work is necessarily wrong. Personally I would be in favor of legalization. I’m just saying that if a person has made the claim that it’s wrong, period, but then it turns out they used to engage in that work, there’s a hypocrisy there.
The Gold Standard of Hypocrisy remains Eliot Spitzer, who made his name and his career busting prostitutes and their johns, until it was discovered that he was one of them.
Bullshit. He made his name as a DA going after organized crime and sweat shops. If you’re talking about when he was attorney general, it was fraud and white collar crime.
American Muckrakers PAC co-founder David Wheeler acknowledged to CNN that the super PAC had been “sloppy” and had published “inaccuracies” on its anti-Boebert website, though he said it remains confident in the “main points of the story.” His comments came after CNN reporting found that the super PAC had made at least five false statements about Boebert, along with a series of uncorroborated assertions that Boebert says are false and that CNN could neither immediately confirm nor immediately debunk.
Pretty much everything of note is either false or unsupported. But I don’t think any of us are surprised, I mean, several of us would have LOVED for it to be true, because she’s a hateful person and, wait, we hate her. But yeah, sadly seems little to no confirmation of any of the major facts.
Yeah, there seems to be some confusion there, probably because in Cawthorn’s case he had so much dumpster fire material in his very existence that everyone had something they could bring up to take a shot at him, and did, and the NC Republicans went ahead and used it, from whatever the source, to do what needed doing. This particular PAC, it was established upthread, had support from his Democratic opponents.
Do as you see fit, as I said, I have ample, other, factual reasons to intensely dislike her. I’m sure the net hate against her due to the debunking is going to be a zero sum change.
I’ve been sceptical of the escort/abortion allegations but there’s so much other verifiably horrible stuff to hold against Boebert that it’s not like we really needed more to dislike her. Personally I’m hoping the obvious tax fraud is what gets her.
“There was just a mass shooting in Denmark, a country with some of the strictest gun laws in Europe. It’s time to admit that gun laws DO NOT stop mass shootings!” tweeted the Republican gun fanatic, who once had her children pose for a Christmas picture holding assault rifles.
