So he likes to gamble. If he can pay his losses who is harmed other than his bank account? Was it really necessary for the Washington Post to chase down this ground breaking news story about his one bad habit like a fevered terrier?
[sub]
[/sub]
Live by the sword, die by the sword.
I think it is a legitimate story because he has been such an outspoken proponent of morality for so long. Also, it seems his organization, Empower Amercia, has apparently taken a public stand against expansion of casino gambling. It makes him look like a hypocrite. If gambling is not evil, why is he opposed to it publicly? If gambling is evil, why is it ok if he does it?
yep, he should be crucified each and every time he pulls some stupid shit like this. Remember, this is the man who was addicted to cigarettes/nicotine during the Reagan admin when he served as the Drug Czar.
When he was education secretary, he was instrumental in cutting out a lot of student financial aid because “some” students were abusing the system.
Who is harmed?
Who is harmed when an individual is a hypocrite?
If it’s a private individual, only a few people-- friends, neighbors, loved ones, children.
But when the individual is in public life, hypocrsy means people lose respect for a person they migth have once admired.
And when the hypocrite pretends to be a moral leader, all the morals that they advocated are legitmately called into question.
So the news story is more than just a dog-like attack. It was neccessary, in that it requires people to re-evaluate what the man says.
Nail his ass to the wall. With most public figures – Michael Jordan springs to mind – I would say the media is out of line as long as the gamblers pay their debts. I agree with the proposition that it’s their money to spend as they choose.
However, Big Mouth Bill has made a career out of lobbying for “traditional Judeo-Christian ethics.” Most of the people I’ve know who espouse those ethics frown on gambling. Also, since Bill is one of those people who want to ram Christianity down people’s throats, how does he defend spending all that bread on gambling rather than charity?
And if the story is right, then the quote below proves Bill is a stinkin’ hypocrite:
Oh, so if you’re a Republican, you can talk the talk, but you don’t have to walk the walk.
I see.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
A public flogging would be quite an apt and appropriate punishement, especially if administered by an Atlantic City Cigarette Girl.
I’m going to have to agree with the rest of the folks. Normally I’d tell the media to get the fuck out of someone’s personal life, but this man has made his personal morals into public business through his years of moral scolding towards American society. If a man would preach against something, he should take care to apply that preaching upon himself.
“Judge not, lest ye be judged” applies much better here, because its true to context. If you judge someone else by your standards, you sure as hell better be prepared to have yourself judged under the same.
Bill Bennett can eat crow and choke on it.
This isn’t the first time he’s gotten into trouble, IIRC. When he was drug czar, it was pointed out that he smoked, so he switched to nicotine gum. Supposedly, he was chewing something like 7 packs a day.
Moving this the the BBQ Pit.
One would hope that this puts a stop to Uberfuhrer Rehnquist’s weekly illegal gambling meetings, but I ain’t holding my breath on that one.
I’m with Priam. We’ve beaten the dead horse of the “judge not” quotation into the ground and are producing Campbell’s Puree of Horse Soup from it in a Pizza Parlor thread. But the upshot of the discussion seems to be that a slightly later verse illuminates it: “For with the measure with which you judge will you also be judged.” Bill Bennett held people to standards he himself was not willing to live up to, and is justly held in contempt for doing so. Cf. the dictionary definition of hypocrite.
I don’t care if he gambles. It was his moral philosophy that was as empty and baseless as one of those kids eyes from Children of the Corn.
’ Bennett compared the situation to alcohol. “I view it as drinking,” Bennett says. “If you can’t handle it, don’t do it.” ’
Well gosh, Mr. Morality, If I had millions of dollars made in a career esposing morality to lay down on the table, I’d view it like drinking too. I mean what the hell, if I’ve got the money to get plowed every night of the week, is that a problem?
He’s a hypocritical bastard who esposes morality and deserves whatever he gets.
I don’t think this story should’ve been in those 5-minute hourly network radio news updates from ABC.
It’s bizarre that the only hypocrites the media chases down are the right-wing moralizers.
You don’t see the ferver chasing down the “content” of MLK’s character. If you did, you’d probably find 30% of it plagiarized.
Well, speaking as a media guy the King story is 30+ years old. It’d be a little difficult to fluff up a new angle for the lead there.
The funniest part is losing the money on high-stakes slot machines! Math ain’t his strong suit, I’m guessing.
Funny you should mention “pillory”. It was a common punishment for Puritan era persons who were identified as a “common scold”. Myself, I haven’t laughed so hard since they shot Ol’ Yeller!
While I agree that slamming Bennett for moral hypocrisy is perfectly legitimate – the smoking-while-drug-czar is a good example – I fail utterly to see why the fact that he gambles (even if the stakes are high) makes him a hypocrite.
You guys have no idea what Bennett’s net worth is. It is quite possible that he is wealthy enough to easily absorb the losses attributed to him. As long as he’s still paying his mortgage and tending to his family, where is the hypocrisy? I don’t think Bennett has ever said gambling is evil per se (though I would be happy to be corrected if I’m wrong on that).
I mean, really – if someone had told you that Bennett had lost $200 gambling in Vegas, you wouldn’t be calling him a hypocrite. The only reason this is a story is because of the large sum Bennett lost. But you can’t tell if that sum equates to gambling problem unless you know what Bennett is actually worth. A $300,000 weekend at the casino to him might be like a $100 weekend to you or me.
And there are people out there like this. I was once involved in a deal whose principal financiers were extraordinarily wealthy Wall Street types. They would often go out to AC or Vegas and drop six figures over a weekend. But they didn’t have a gambling problem – they just had so much scratch that the amount they lost was immaterial to them. They liked being high rollers and could afford to do it.
Dissonance: Your example is inapt. Bennett is saying that drinking in moderation is OK, so long as it doesn’t consume one’s life (such as by “getting plowed every night of the week,” as you put it). He is saying the same thing is true here – gambling is OK so long as it is done in moderation and doesn’t consume one’s life. No one is suggesting that Bennett lived at the casino, neglecting his work and family for the sake of the slots.
For those of us on the right, this revelation is neither horrifying nor something to be dismissed lightly. Mainly, it’s disappointing and a little embarrassing.
In and of itself, it doesn’t bother me that some people like to gamble. Heck, I’ve put a few dollars on a horse race or football game here and there.
Nor does it strike me as AUTOMATICALLY hypocritical that people can enjoy an activity while still discouraging its expansion or its sponsorship by governments. For instance, while I think betting should be legal, I also think it’s highly distasteful for governments to ENCOURAGE gambling (whether at casinos or through state-sponsored lotteries).
No, what bothers me in this case is how STUPID Bennett was. Even if he doesn’t have a serious gambling problem, he HAD to know how bad this would look when (not if, WHEN) it came to light. HE’s one of the many conservatives who regularly claims that the media is biased toward the left. Well, if he knew that, he should ALSO have foreseen that ANY peccadilloes on his part would be trumpeted in the media, and used to tarnish his cherished causes.
When you KNOW that the media are dying to find dirt on you, you’re an IDIOT if you provide them with anything.
It doesn’t sound like a one time loss…whether it’s $200 or $200,000. It sounds like an ongoing vice, the type of vice that is certainly not part of the character education that Mr Bennett espouses.
I’m guessing he didn’t cover high stakes gambling in this book.