# Some advice to hypocritical priests/politicians/spokespeople caught in affairs **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 11, 2005, 3:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594 "2005-08-11T15:34:20Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 13
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 8:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/241 "2005-08-18T20:54:22Z")
> [@robertliguori](#): > > I expect that most people’s definition of frugal is ‘not more than I personally spend’, personally. I agree with you. Which is why, in this crowd, Mr. Bennett’s spending is going to be seen as anything but frugal. If we were polling other people who made $58 million in income, however, the results may be different. > [@holmes](#): > > **Bricker** Let’s say I like Bennett made a ton of money being a moralizer. Later it’s found out during that time, my wife and I were swingers. We practiced safe sex with consenting adults, but had lots of sex with people who were not our spouses; together and separate. No one is sick, nor feels damaged by the events; in fact my wife and the other couples say they all enjoyed it. > > Clearly I don’t consider adultry to be a problem and it’s not illegal in the state that I live and practiced in. > > In my books and speeches, I never mention marriage or vows specifically, but I do mention a need for virtue. I however do understand what my audience would consider to be virtous behaviour. > > Am I a hypocrite? If not, why not? If so, why isn’t Bennett? You’re not a hypocrite in that example. Why not? Because you did not put on a false appearance of religion or virtue. You don’t consider adultery to be incompatible with virtue; you never claimed martial fidelity was a virtuous behavior. You’re not a hypocrite. ---
**Author:** ![holmes](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/e95f7d/32.png) [@holmes](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/holmes)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 9:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/242 "2005-08-18T21:05:40Z")
So I can only be a hypocrite if I specifically list a requirement, that I break myself? Is there so such thing as the spirit of the law? I can rail against the lack of morality in the world, but has long as I don’t specifically mention the rule that I break or personally consider it to be a rule at all; I can never be called a hypocrite? Even if I know what crowd I’m playing to believes me to represent and I do nothing to clarify my real beliefs? ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 9:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/243 "2005-08-18T21:09:22Z")
Bricker reminds me of the snapping turtle that continues to cling to what it’s bitten long after its head has been cut off. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 9:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/244 "2005-08-18T21:18:09Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Except that whenever I try to pin down just what sort of spending, and what sort of activities, destroy frugalism, you slip away without answering. Alrighty, then. I’m finished with this because now you’ve either gotten confused are you’re lying. [I specifically offered a bright line.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6474413&postcount=143) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 9:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/245 "2005-08-18T21:19:52Z")
> [@holmes](#): > > So I can only be a hypocrite if I specifically list a requirement, that I break myself? Is there so such thing as the spirit of the law? I can rail against the lack of morality in the world, but has long as I don’t specifically mention the rule that I break or personally consider it to be a rule at all; I can never be called a hypocrite? Yes! Hypocrisy is the false assumption of a virtue. That is what the word means. There are plenty of other negative words to describe your conduct. But “hypocrite” doesn’t fit. > [@](#): > > Even if I know what crowd I’m playing to believes me to represent and I do nothing to clarify my real beliefs? It depends on what “nothing” means. I can envision situations in which you may be considered to adopt a position, even if you say nothing. For example, if you give a speech about virtue, and the person that introduces you praises your commitment to marital fidelity, and then you take the podium without correcting that representation, I’d agree that you have crossed a line. But absent some sort of reason along those lines, I don’t see that “hypocrite” is the right word to use. Words mean something. English is a rich language because we have so many words with such richness of meaning. We can say “stubborn” or “intransigent” or “pigheaded” or “muleish.” Each word conveys the same general sense, and yet each word has nuances that the others do not. Hypocrite is a word with a specific meaning. It refers to a person who evinces a false appearance to virtue or religion. If we are not describing THAT, then we don’t get to use that word. Now, I suppose ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 9:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/246 "2005-08-18T21:23:52Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > Alrighty, then. I’m finished with this because now you’ve either gotten confused are you’re lying. [I specifically offered a bright line.](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=6474413&postcount=143) Oops. So you did, and I forgot that. I apologize. > [@Homebrew](#): > > Are you really so regimented that you need a bright line test? How about placing bets of more than 10% of your income in a year regardless of losses, or losses exceeding 5%. Another take would be betting more than 3% of your annual income in the course of a single month. To address this bright line proposal you’ve offered, we need at least a working assumption concerning Benntt’s income and his losses. May we agree on: [ul] [li]$58 million in income[/li][li]$8 million in gross losses[/li][li]$1.5 million in net losses[/li][/ul] All three figures have some support in the preceding thread. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/247 "2005-08-18T21:26:22Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > Bricker reminds me of the snapping turtle that continues to cling to what it’s bitten long after its head has been cut off. A turtle AND a weasel? Apparently Dr. Moreau and I share an island. Needless to say, this does nothing to address the substance of the debate, and is simply another _ad hominem_ attack. ---
**Author:** ![Homebrew](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/c89c15/32.png) [@Homebrew](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Homebrew)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 9:50pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/248 "2005-08-18T21:50:52Z")
So you don’t see any hypocrisy in being the co-founder of the Empower America organization that adamently opposes gambling and calls it a social ill while at the same time being a high-stakes gambler? Actually there is nothing in the thread or anywhere else that tells us his net losses, which could be 1.5 million if he hit the odds or several million if he wasn’t lucky. But you’re correct that there’s no way to know whether he fails on my, IMHO generous, bright line test. But like my IMHO poll shows, more people think gambling and frugality are mutually exclusive than think a man can lose several hundred thousand a year and be frugal, even if he has Bill Gates money. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 18, 2005, 10:43pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/249 "2005-08-18T22:43:07Z")
> [@Homebrew](#): > > So you don’t see any hypocrisy in being the co-founder of the Empower America organization that adamently opposes gambling and calls it a social ill while at the same time being a high-stakes gambler? No, because he’s merely a co-founder, not the absolute authority for the group. When you share authority with others, compromises must be made. Bennett may not have liked the organization’s position on gambling, but bowed to the will of the others involved… just as someone may not appreciate the Democratic Party being against gay marriage, but continue to support them based on agreement with other aspects of their platform. > [@](#): > > Actually there is nothing in the thread or anywhere else that tells us his net losses, which could be 1.5 million if he hit the odds or several million if he wasn’t lucky. > > But you’re correct that there’s no way to know whether he fails on my, IMHO generous, bright line test. But like my IMHO poll shows, more people think gambling and frugality are mutually exclusive than think a man can lose several hundred thousand a year and be frugal, even if he has Bill Gates money. With all due deference to your IMHO poll, it’s hardly extensive… and at least one person in it evinced a position more along the lines of what I’m saying: Evil Captor said: “I don’t think “frugality” is a concept that makes much sense if you have great wealth.” And please note that I didn’t respond to it. If I had, you may be sure I would have agreed with myself. 🙂 But I agree that more people, if polled, would probably agree with your position. Now let me ask you: how about if we just polled people having a net worth of over, say, $2 million. Would that change the responses, do you think? ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 1:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/250 "2005-08-19T01:16:13Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > A turtle AND a weasel? Apparently Dr. Moreau and I share an island. > > Needless to say, this does nothing to address the substance of the debate, and is simply another _ad hominem_ attack. A debate that has turned into 200 posts over whether a multimillionaire moralizer not mentioned in the OP who has lost millions of dollars gambling is a hypocrite, when the person has preached frugality has no substance. And while the turtle bit may be ad hom (I see it as more relevant observation- you’re not going to yield if Bennett himself, flanked by the angel Sansenoy and the late Judy Garland, came to the boards and said “THOU ART WRONG! I AM A HYPOCRITE!”), this is the Pit, not a Debate arena; it’s the place for ad homs. Whether it’s an ad hom or relevant commentary to say that you are easily the most self-impressed lousy-debater I’ve ever read is a matter I’ll leave to historians. Were there a judge on these boards you’d have been ruled the loser more than 100 posts ago. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 1:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/251 "2005-08-19T01:25:33Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Now let me ask you: how about if we just polled people having a net worth of over, say, $2 million. Would that change the responses, do you think? In my experience, people who have some wealth tend not to be such dumbasses as to gamble extensively. People who _used to_ have wealth are the ones who gambled a lot. ---
**Author:** ![Sampiro](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/2acd7d/32.png) [@Sampiro](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sampiro)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 1:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/252 "2005-08-19T01:58:17Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > In my experience, people who have some wealth tend not to be such dumbasses as to gamble extensively. People who _used to_ have wealth are the ones who gambled a lot. Gladys Knight, Omar Sharif, Mozart, Debbie Reynolds… I was trying to think of a few others who lost huge amounts of money gambling. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 8:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/253 "2005-08-19T08:40:56Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > In my experience, people who have some wealth tend not to be such dumbasses as to gamble extensively. People who _used to_ have wealth are the ones who gambled a lot. You haven’t spent much time in the high-stakes area of a casino at the blackjack tables. NBA stars, Hollywood types, industry folks… Again, when you have a lot, it’s not a big deal to play a lot. What exactly is your experience with high-stakes gambling? ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 8:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/254 "2005-08-19T08:44:04Z")
> [@Sampiro](#): > > A debate that has turned into 200 posts over whether a multimillionaire moralizer not mentioned in the OP who has lost millions of dollars gambling is a hypocrite, when the person has preached frugality has no substance. And while the turtle bit may be ad hom (I see it as more relevant observation- you’re not going to yield if Bennett himself, flanked by the angel Sansenoy and the late Judy Garland, came to the boards and said “THOU ART WRONG! I AM A HYPOCRITE!”), this is the Pit, not a Debate arena; it’s the place for ad homs. > > Whether it’s an ad hom or relevant commentary to say that you are easily the most self-impressed lousy-debater I’ve ever read is a matter I’ll leave to historians. Were there a judge on these boards you’d have been ruled the loser more than 100 posts ago. Again, we’ll have to agree to disagree. I will note that if Bennett himself were to say, “I was a hypocrite,” I’d yield immediately… but if he were to deny it, you would press on and accuse him still. :dubious: ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/255 "2005-08-19T12:48:28Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > What exactly is your experience with high-stakes gambling? I was being somewhat facetious, though not entirely. You actually think if you asked those people you describe if they are being “frugal” that they are going to say yes? Most people don’t consider themselves frugal or not frugal. For most people it’s not an issue. They don’t _care_. And there are certainly more people who have $2 million who never participate in “high-stakes gambling” (though what high-stakes gambling has to do with it when Bennett was just playing poker machines I don’t know) than those who do. Asking outliers to define a word that is used to browbeat the rest of us is pretty damned silly. Bennett is talking to people like me when he moralizes, and his organization is directed at people like me when they pontificate. If your argument is that there is one set of standards (definitions of “frugal,” for example) for people like me, and another set of standards (definitions of “frugal,” for him and his ilk), then you are sure as hell saying that he’s a hypocrite, according to definitions of “hypocrite” that “people like me” embrace. The more you try to peel him off into a subset of humanity for whom the same rules don’t apply, the more horrible he and his defenders appear. When the argument becomes that I can’t even comment on his frugality because I have no experience with high-stakes gambling, then I’ll admit it. I’m completely dumbfounded. The argument is so far from making sense that it’s in another language. I agree. High-stakes gamblers, which Bennett isn’t, probably wouldn’t condemn him. They’d be too busy hoping he’d get into a game with them so they can fleece him, 'cause dude ain’t too bright. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 12:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/256 "2005-08-19T12:48:41Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Again, we’ll have to agree to disagree. \*That \* from somebody who feigns indignation over claims of \*other \* posters’ refusal to admit being wrong? The hypocrisy just keeps on coming, ironic as ever. ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 2:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/257 "2005-08-19T14:11:18Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > Bennett is talking to people like me when he moralizes, and his organization is directed at people like me when they pontificate. If your argument is that there is one set of standards (definitions of “frugal,” for example) for people like me, and another set of standards (definitions of “frugal,” for him and his ilk), then you are sure as hell saying that he’s a hypocrite, according to definitions of “hypocrite” that “people like me” embrace. The same standard applies to everyone. But because the standard is based on PERCENTAGES, not absolute dollar values, it certainly APPLIES differently to everyone, without involving any hypocriscy. If, for example, the rule is, “A frugal person never commits more than 10% of his salary to gambling,” surely you don’t argue that’s a different rule for sets of people. It’s true that the application of the rule means he can gamble $5.8 million and you can’t. But that’s hardly hypocritical. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > That from somebody who feigns indignation over claims of other posters’ refusal to admit being wrong? The hypocrisy just keeps on coming, ironic as ever. Your entire contribution to this thread has been sniping pot-shots at me. **Sampiro** and **Homebrew** are offering valid arguments, arguments which I respect as reasonable, even though I disagree with them. You haven’t done a thing here to clarify the issue; you have just offered snide little pseudo _bon mots_ aimed at me. ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 3:25pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/258 "2005-08-19T15:25:08Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > The same standard applies to everyone. But because the standard is based on PERCENTAGES, not absolute dollar values, it certainly APPLIES differently to everyone, without involving any hypocriscy. No, because _you_ are trying to make it about percentages. Frugality is an _attitude_, not a mathematical formula. It’s about not being willing to spend or waste money. (To me, frugality isn’t a virtue, but then I’m not prone to writing books that claim it is.) ---
**Author:** ![Bricker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/977dab/32.png) [@Bricker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bricker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 4:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/259 "2005-08-19T16:00:23Z")
> [@jsgoddess](#): > > No, because _you_ are trying to make it about percentages. Frugality is an _attitude_, not a mathematical formula. It’s about not being willing to spend or waste money. > > (To me, frugality isn’t a virtue, but then I’m not prone to writing books that claim it is.) First, I think that it’s a stretch to characterize Bennett’s book as a book about being frugal and moderate. He devotes a chapter to Ben Franklin’s essay, which he quotes approvingly. He’s hardly made frugality the bedrock of his book. Secondly, and most importantly… it _IS_ about percentages. A frugal person is not a miserly person. A frugal person may spend money on entertainment and still be frugal. How much money may he spend? Well, that answer is not obvious. It differs between people. Warren Buffet may spend more on entertainment than I and still be frugal… **because he has more to spend**. This is stunningly obvious. Why don’t you see it? ---
**Author:** ![wonky](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/wonky/32/393_2.png) [@wonky](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wonky)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2005, 4:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594/260 "2005-08-19T16:23:01Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > This is stunningly obvious. Why don’t you see it? Because I disagree about the fundamental nature of the word. As does, apparently, pretty much everyone else in this thread and everyone I’ve queried in meatspace. Many of the people I’ve asked say that to them gambling is fundamentally incompatible with frugality and that spending or wasting money for fun is fundamentally incompatible with frugality. Because they, and I, define frugality as the _exact opposite thing_ from enjoying wasting money, or enjoying spending for the sake of spending. Frugality is about saving money where you can. It isn’t just living within your means, which is the definition you keep trying to force on it. It is the attempt to be economical; it is the aversion to spending unnecessarily. And if you come back and claim that Bill Bennett isn’t spending unnecessarily because he _needs_ to gamble, then I’d like to introduce you to a leetle concept called “gambling addiction.” [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594.md?page=12) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/some-advice-to-hypocritical-priests-politicians-spokespeople-caught-in-affairs/316594.md?page=14)