Bringing new meaning to the word
Email This Post
- 
Print This Post
- Hypocrisy (hy.poc.ri.sy): The practice of claiming to have standards or beliefs that are contrary to one’s real character or actual behavior.
I’d say the above just about defines the present-day GOP, and it is because of this that I cannot even take the party seriously. I’m more than sure that the GOP will find its way back to power because it’s part of the serendipitous ebb and flow of politics (but not because they are smart and know what they are doing). In the meantime, the GOP is distinguishing itself in a bunch of very negative ways. One of its most distinguished characteristics is its level of hypocrisy. Now, there are many types of hypocrisy but - since the GOP is intent on appealing to Christians on the fringe - let’s just focus on that. It has been clear for quite some time (think back to 1994’s Gingrich revolution) that the GOP’s primary political strategy is to blur the line between church and state. Apparently, they feel they have some edge here. You know, the party of family values and all that drivel…like they have some divine lead on that count. Well, somebody forgot to tell the GOP that it actually has to walk the walk as well.
The GOP is very quick to jump on issues of morality. They definitely best the Democrats on that one, but I think that’s intentional. They come out of the box swinging on the issue of same-sex marriage (Oh, no! We must protect the sanctity of marriage - one man and one woman!), but they absolutely lose their mind over abortion (Baby killers! Murderers!). Now these crazies are even decrying women who take birth control as murders. Sorry, but that’s just plain crazy. No other word works here. Yet, rather than building its base to put itself in a position to maybe win again, the GOP is intent on solidifying its complete sell out to the Christian conservatives. The problem here is the whole perception-reality thing.
While the GOP has no problem going after the GLBT community and pro-choice advocates and painting them (and their supporters) as sinners, it remains strangely mute on its own band of heathens. Where do we begin? Should we go back to Larry Craig, a key GOP Christian, and virulent sponsor of anti-gay legislation? He was caught propositioning another man in an airport men’s room. Only problem was that the recipient of Craig’s advances was undercover at the time, and Craig was arrested for “homosexual lewd conduct.” There was, of course, no need for alarm. Craig reassured his constituents that he wasn’t gay. Whew. Personally, I was glad because idiots like Craig give gays a bad name. I was also worried about his constituents there for a minute. I always worry about people from Idaho. Funny thing is that this isn’t the first time questions about Craig have come up. There have been questions about his sexuality because of incidents dating back to 1967. Who knew? The GOP, of course. Because another gentleman with prominent Republican connections reported having oral sex with Craig in Union Station somewhere around 2004.
How about David Vitter? Here’s another paragon of virtue, or at least 
that’s how he was sold. Sold is really it. That’s what this is all about, after all. Vitter was a rabid proponent of the 2006 effort to amend the U.S. Constitution in order to create a permanent ban on same-sex marriage. In spite of all the issues facing the country in that year, Vitter openly stated that no issue was more important than protecting the institution of marriage from the queers (and I say that with great affection because I am one). Luckily, the American people recognized that the Constitution has never been used to deny civil rights, only to advance them. It was never a popular cause.
Then, a funny thing happened to Vitter on his way to holier-than-thou. The great marriage protector’s number was discovered in the phone records of the notorious “D.C. Madam.” Just a year before, during his campaign for the senate, Vitter had been accused of carrying on a lengthy affair with a French Quarter prostitute by a member of the Louisiana Republican State Central Committee. Vitter denied it then, but there was no denying it after his number was found. Vitter moved on into Plan B, where you contritely apologize and say you’ve been forgiven by your God. That’s what he did. He had a conversation with his wife, his marriage counselor and his God. He’s been forgiven. He’s keeping that private, of course, for his family’s sake. Everything’s okay now. He’s back to normal. Yeah. And he’ll never do that again, by the way.
Here’s a blast from the past. We’ve got Newt Gingrich, that serial cheater in rehab. He’s transforming himself into a Christian, probably making a case for a run in 2012. No worry that he’s a confessed cheater, working on marriage no. 3, and recipient of a congressional reprimand on ethics charges. He’s a Christian, dammit. Here are some of the Newt’s new preachings:
“The first job we have as Americans is to reach out to everybody in the country who is not yet saved, and to help them understand the spiritual basis of a creator-endowed society.”
WTF? Are you kidding me? First of all, where is Gingrich getting this drivel? From our forefathers? I think not. But let’s put that aside for a minute. Someone should tell Newtie that Bible 101 teaches you about intent. Intent is critical from Buddhism to Catholicism. Hypocrites need not apply. You need to do this stuff for the right reasons. Are your intentions sincere, Newtie? I don’t think building a pathway to an election by feigning (and exploiting) spirituality counts as sincere. Gingrich spoke these words at none other than Lou Engle’s (false prophet, by the way) “Rediscovering God in America” conference hosted by the Rock Church in Virginia just a couple of months ago. Oh, yeah, it was also broadcast on GodTV, proving once again that mankind has transformed religion into one of the biggest businesses in America. Remember the words of Mark Twain, “Religion was invented when the first con man met the first fool.” No truer words were ever spoken.
But now we’ve had the Big Kahuna: Nevada Republican John Ensign, once
touted as a potential go-to guy for the GOP in 2012. The proverbial Mr. Clean. NOT. Ensign recently confessed to an affair with the wife of one of his staffers. Nice touch. The families knew each other. This guy reigns as the Grand Marshal of the Hypocrites Parade. He’s the only Charismatic in the Senate, a born-again member of the Pentecostal International Church of the Foursquare Gospel (that’s a freakin’ mouthful). Whoa. Not only that, but he’s a prominent member of the Promise Keepers, that nifty little cult that positions itself as an evangelical group. And that’s about as serious as you can get, because Mr. Ensign violated two of the key Promise Keeper codes of ethics:
- A Promise Keeper is committed to practicing spiritual, moral, ethical and sexual purity.
- A Promise Keeper is committed to building strong marriages and families through love, protection and Biblical values.
Oops. Sorry, mistake. Er. Um. This is the biggest mistake of my life. If I could take it back I would. Blah. Blah. Blah. Yeah, well, of course you would, Hoss. You would because you are politically screwed. Don’t worry, though, Ensign remains committed to his job in the Senate. As of right now, he won’t be resigning. This adds and extra dose of hypocrisy because Senator John Ensign was right on the front lines back in 1998, demanding that President Clinton resign over the revelation of his affair with Monica Lewinski. Remember that? Referring to Clinton, Ensign said, “He has no credibility left.” And so, the worm turns, Mr. Ensign. He clearly forgot that self-righteous judgment for political gain will almost always come back and bite you in the butt some day. He’s getting his now. Let’s hope it’s the gift that keeps on giving.
Historically, marrying church and state has never led to a successful or sustainable government. Take a more modern-day look around the Middle East right now for more proof. One has simply got to wonder what the GOP is thinking, if it is thinking at all. It doesn’t much matter, though. It’s pretty clear that the GOP cannot live up to its own standards and, until it does, it’s a just a political party bathing itself in a giant vat of hypocrisy.
Comment by Pamela Lyn on 23 June 2009:
You forgot Rudy G
Deb, while I don’t always agree with your view of Christianity, you are spot on when it comes to pointing out the hypocrisy of those who practice the politics of self-righteous judgment. They forget that the Bible that they profess warns us about standing in judgment of others and reminds us that our salvation is by grace not by our own goodness.
Every person who calls themselves a Christian should realize that the world sees this hypocrisy and as a result is turned off from the very faith that we say that we want to share with them.
Maybe one day more Christians will behave more like Jesus and just sit down with the proverbial “tax collector” have dinner and talk.
Pamela Lyns last blog post..nn404 Not FoundnnnNot FoundnThe requested document was not found on this server.nnnnWeb Server at comluv.comnnnnnn
Comment by Murry on 23 June 2009:
MORE HATEFULNESS AND CLAPTRAP.
Comment by Ivan Hentschel on 23 June 2009:
Hey Deb:
No dissertation on hypocrisy (especially here) would be complete without some mention of its corollaries. While fully embodied by many members of the GOP, they can also be found in and espoused by most any conservative of any ilk, who is blind to logic, Democratic dog/wolves in blue sheepish clothing, theocratic ”leaders” of any sectarian-cultic nature and Faux News commentators. You might also include Dana Perino, Don Rumsfeld and almost everyone else who spoke for the Bush White House.
And please bear in mind that EnsignVitterCraigGingrich disease is much like Alzheimer’s: the next day most people who are afflicted with it can’t remember a thing. This in part is because of the variations I have compiled here:
-Hyper-crassy: similar to hyper-activity but shows complete, unfeeling crass indifference to the realities, implications and long-term ramifications of being an immoral, two-faced idiot. Lying out of both sides of your mouth at the same time is a job requirement.
-hypo-dermus: a combination of a dirty syringe (hypodermic) and a pachyderm (elephant). Lives in a three-ring circus of illusion and make-believe and spreads germs. Smells bad and makes other people sick.
Hippo-contentment: A state of being overweight, overbearing, over-fed and completely cocooned in a government, religious or broadcasting job which guarantees that you understand nothing about the human condition. You must be able to say, “I feel your pain”, in order to qualify for this description.
-Hypno-cratic: believes in and practices the theory of trying to make people believe, through political deviousness and speech, that right is wrong, wrong is right and that plumbing your neighbor’s wife is no more immoral than plumbing the neighbor’s kitchen sink. Taking the hypnocratic oath of office allows you to accomplish this. If all else fails, join the Catholic Church or cry large tears before a fundamentalist congregation with your wife standing at your side. It also helps to be gay and tell everyone you are homophobic.
-Hypoid-ovoidism: the mental aberration which allows you to utilize egghead legal-ease that makes hypnocracy possible.
-hypno-critical: a mesmerized state of mind which enables you to selectively criticize, demean and linguistically defecate on everyone else who does not agree with you, while claiming a purity of purpose and immunity from any blame or responsibility, whatsoever. Also spelled, “Holier than thou”.
-hyper-critical: much the same as hypno-critical but practiced with much less competent research and wherein you are allowed to do this in newspaper editorials, television broadcasts and systemically hate-filled blogs, from pulpits and in treatises. See Pat Buchanan, Glen Beck, Sean Hannity, Joe Scarborough, Sarah Palin, Pat Robertson and Richard “Dick” Cheney. Nominees for this category include Rahm Emanuel and any of the “military analysts” who work for MSNBC.
Call me before you write another one of these, will ya, Deb? This post mortem work is really troublesome.
Ivan Hentschels last blog post..nn404 Not FoundnnnNot FoundnThe requested document was not found on this server.nnnnWeb Server at comluv.comnnnnnn
Comment by ihentschel on 23 June 2009:
Oh, Murry:
All of that time and observational energy, devoted to discussing a matter so infectious and injurious to the national moral fabric, and all you can come up with is two descriptors,totaling five syllables?
You are exposing yourself on the street corner of anti-intellectualism, and it isn’t pretty.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 23 June 2009:
And as usual, Murray, another response based in pure blah and name calling. I expected nothing else from you. BTW, you spelled your own name wrong.
Comment by Murry on 23 June 2009:
More nonesense from tweedle dee and tweedle dumb. You get in each other way.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 23 June 2009:
Yes, Murray/Richard…whomever. And you get in ours. BTW, how do you continue to call facts claptrap. Is none of this proven? Are all these links lies? Are all these admissions false? I think not. And the hypocrisy is rampant and is not lost on THINKING Americans.
Comment by Murry on 23 June 2009:
Obviously SANCTIMONY KNOWS NO REGION, RELIGION, PARTY or PERSON. Yet you color muich with one crayon.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 23 June 2009:
Blah.
Comment by FemmeFatal on 23 June 2009:
Not sure what Ivan means here about Deb checking in first? but I am hooting hysterically over the “hypnocratic” one! Ivan you are brilliant. Murray, you are very disappointing. Please discuss the facts - is Deb wrong? I have not seen any contrary facts. Let me tune into Rush and Tom O’Reilly - am sure they have some type of spin that might please you. At least have the decency to add criticism.
Deb - right on. It is all so pathetic and disgusting. How about the proverbial phrase about those who live in glass houses should not cast a stone? Then again these GOP guys probably live in bullet proof glass, paid for by the American public no less.
Comment by ihentschel on 23 June 2009:
Dear Femme: Please do not let that be fatal: my guess is that it would be a great loss for all of us. Deb is a friend and comrade and she knows full well I am pulling her literary leg. She needs no help from me. Hypocrisy and satire go hand in hand…usually. And it is my lifelong dream to be a hypnocrat and take the hypnocratic oath. After doing so, you can talk yourself into anything. Try it sometime when you feel like being a conservative.
And I think you mean “Bill” O’Reilly? Which in fact is properly pronounced, “Oh,really?”, as in “you must be kidding!” That is what comes to mind when we are trying to discuss serious matters and the comments that come back are not even from the same planet that the rest of us live on. And are mis-spelled sentence fragments to boot. Even. Usually.
Comment by Murry on 23 June 2009:
Indeed who is running this railroad?
Comment by ihentschel on 24 June 2009:
June 24: Yesterday, Deb railed and ranted about the likes of Craig, Vitter and Ensign and the hypocrisy that they all emblazon and wear so proudly. I thought we were at an end…until today! The elusive hiking-not-hiking SC Gov. “I won’t take any education stimulus money” Sanford turn out to actually have been in Argentina, on Father’s Day weekend (leaving a wife and four kids at home, alone), screwing his long-time “secret” girlfriend.
So spare us the stupid and ill-conceived railroad metaphors (that don’t work anyway), because your boiler is out of steam and your caboose just got rammed from behind. And yes that is an homophobic allusion.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 24 June 2009:
Well, things just keep getting better every day for the GOP. Now, rising star Mark Sanford has shot himself in the…okay, foot. It’s pretty clear to me that the conservative, bible belting Republicans ought to maybe lay off telling others who they can and cannot marry until they figure out wtf marriage is all about. They just don’t get it.
And Murray/Richard, whomever you are, I’m afraid that in spite of you calling my post claptrap, the fact is that the GOP has redefined hypocrisy and made it their very own when it comes to this “family values” garbage.
Comment by Richard on 24 June 2009:
Sandford is a hypocrite. Not because he is a republican or Democrat because he is a hyporcrite. Bill Clinton used a taxpayer pair intern as an official OVAL OFFICE FELLATRIX.
hYPORCRISY KNOWS NO GENDER, NATION OR IDEOLOGY.
Comment by murry on 24 June 2009:
are you certain this has been cleared by your handler?
Comment by FemmeFatal on 24 June 2009:
Bill, Bob, Tom, Dick, whatever his name is - how could i possibly have gotten HIS name wrong - I prefer Franken’s name for him: Bill O’Lielly. Oops! Sorry about that Ivan
Last time I checked Bill Clinton hadn’t signed up for some “Promise” and then basically broke every one of the Commandments of the Promise. I don’t condone Clinton’s, Jackson’s, Edwards’, Spitzer’s or any other Democratic philanderer’s actions; however, I do feel they are a step above the hypocrites in the GOP that are on their soapboxes about family values and then turn out to be sh*tting on those values behind the scenes.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 24 June 2009:
Way to go, Femme!
And Murry, by the way, I assume you are referring to Ivan as “my handler?” You are absurd, really. We simply share the same political ideology, much as you and — say, Richard or Joker. It’s no different. And really, nobody is condoning what Bill Clinton did. Nor Eliot Spitzer. The fact is, however, these guys don’t spend their days and nights telling other people how to live. They don’t spend taxpayer dollars trying to amend the Constitution to deny one group of people their civil rights. That seems to be ALL the Republicans can do these days. They’re useless.
Comment by FemmeFatal on 25 June 2009:
Ohmygod Deb you have to write something about Sanford’s emails: the part about the two special body parts is SOOOO compelling! What person in their right mind these days doesn’t know that HIS/HER EMAILS WILL SOMEDAY BE FOUND! Those poor kids! Can you imagine all the household speeches to the kids about “promises kept, fidelity, chastity” etc etc. After this heartbreaking part of their young lives they should turn into real fine men don’t you think?
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 25 June 2009:
This guy is an idiot. He can’t even write exciting love notes. I’m not surprised he was elected in that part of the planet, though. He says all the right things. That’s the whole thing about hypocrites: They can quote the Bible and make sure they apply it to EVERYONE ELSE’S life, but they rarely apply it to their own. Not convenient.
As I’ve told people before: I really do not care about the personal sex lives of these trolls they call public servants. What really frosts me is that these are the bigots who spend their time railing against same-sex marriage and introducing legislation to deny the GLBT community THEIR right to marry when they just can’t get it right themselves.
Are we a threat to heterosexual marriage? No way. The threats to heterosexual marriage are poverty and infidelity. Period. If allowing the GLBT community is a threat to heterosexual marriage, then one has to wonder if it’s a viable institution at all.
Comment by Richard on 25 June 2009:
Deb: Sanford, Ensign, Switzer and for that matter Clinton, JFK and FDR all are/were fools on the sex subject. Sanford’s “love notes” embarrass a 13 yearold overdoses on acne medication. Steering everything to the GLBT agenda is as silly and as counterproductive.
Comment by proletarian on 26 June 2009:
Well once again I see Deb, along with her cohorts of liberalism, has raised the rancor of the opposition. Let me say this, I don’t have any dogs in the hagglings, but for those of you who do not think the Democrats are as hypocritical as the Republicans, it’s time to pull your heads out of the proverbial sand. Especially in regard to Clinton and Spitzer.
Christ, Clinton used to sit in church holding Chelsea’s hand with a simper spread infectiously across his face, while smiling gleefully at his termagant wife. Unfortunatley, if someone were to watch closely they would see him looking furtively askance across the pews at his beloved squeeze, Monica. Lechery would be in his eyes. No, Clinton wasn’t a devout Christian. For him it was more like how he viewed people and politics — use it and abuse it. When the time was right and he could get something out of it, he was a church going fool. At any other time, he fiddled with cigars and young girls panties.
Oh, by the way, isn’t that how Obama views church as well? When it looks good in the public eye he’s all over it. When it doesn’t, he can’t quite find the time.
Spitzer on the other hand is an odiously vile weasel. I can’t believe anyone, Democrat or Republican, could possibly defend his untenable actions. Let alone mitigate the severity of his conduct. He built a career on attacking, excoriating and crucifying prostitution rings, pimps, madams and the like, just to turn out to be one of their biggest clients — infamous customer number nine. Not only that, but he spent tens of thousands of taxpayer dollars to diddle little ol’ Ashley Dupre. I wrote an article about it at the time, and Mr. Spitzer received hypocrite of the decade.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 26 June 2009:
Hey there, proletarian. I was wondering when I’d hear from you. Guess what? You’ll be surprised to know that I also think Bill Clinton and Eliot Spitzer are hypocrites (and a few other things as well). Oh, let’s not forget smarmy little John Edwards. He belongs on the list as well. However, here is my piss off: The GOP in all its forms is absolutely intent on the continual oppression of the GLBT community. Period. And some of these guys, you know, had the absolute nerve to co-sponsor a CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT TO PERMANENTLY BAN SAME-SEX MARRIAGE. Are you serious? Are we going to really use the Constitution to take away civil rights? That has not been done in the history of this country. It is a document to advance civil rights.
Frankly, I don’t care who any of these losers sleep with. It’s personal. But I DO have a problem with guys who can’t keep it in their collective pants telling ME that I’m a threat to heterosexual marriage. No. I’m not. Adultery. That’s a threat. Poverty. That’s a threat. Jealousy. That’s a threat. But not same-sex marriage. That’s the rub, proletarian. Don’t tell me who I can and cannot marry until you can get it right. David Vitter. Larry Craig. They’ve specifically co-sponsored legislation to take away rights from the GLBT community. Sorry, but that’s just the height of hypocrisy. It’s hypocrisy to the extreme.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 26 June 2009:
Hey Richard, it’s not an issue because you say it’s not an issue? Is that right? Well, yeah, for you it isn’t an issue. You’re a heterosexual white male. Nobody has it better in America than you!
But, in fact, Richard, it is an issue for millions of us and we pay taxes and we count just as much as you. That’s a fact. We’re Americans too and we’re covered by the same Constitution. I’ve said this before: There is no paragraph of exception in the Constitution. It’s about all of us. And some of us are being denied our rights. These issues were defined during the campaign of 2008 and they remain issues now. And the GLBT community intends to press on with these issues.
So, yes, when idiots like Vitter and Craig have the absolute gall to co-sponsor legislation denying the GLBT community it’s rights by amending the U.S. Constitution, that’s a bloody issue. Period. The U.S. Constitution has never in the history of this country been used to deny a group its civil rights. It has only been used to advance civil rights, and that’s the way it should be regardless of what the conservatives say.
Imagine the hubris of a group of people who think that they have the right to decide who gets rights and who doesn’t. That’s what it just about amounts to, and the thought is absurd. Tell me, Richard, when does the GLBT community get to vote on YOUR civil rights?
Comment by Richard on 26 June 2009:
Once again you divert almost everything into your homosexual agenda. I did not say it was not an issue - obviously you make it THE issue.
The noncompoop’s sexual behavior who harm their wives, families and associates have nothing to do with the homosexual agenda as you insist. If one part of a homosexual couple did likewise it would have nothing to do with the heterosexual agenda - were there one.
Your crusade for homosexual marriage - right or wrong - doesn’t enter the matter discussed. Insisting evertyhbing relates is, according to polling, the single most offending part of your issue and drives people away rather than pulls them to support.
PERSONALLY I do not care if an individual has sex with a bulldog - when I am told I MUST support that is where I and most others object, and it is a mistake to make it so.
The sub-rosa of Proposition 8s defeat in Cal;ifornia was based on that objection - hence my admonition of making a mistake by trying to link everything to the homosexual agenda.
Comment by Deb Della Piana on 26 June 2009:
Richard, it isn’t an “agenda.” It’s all about civil rights. And, yes, it is relevant when guys like this support legislation that is hypocritical. Sorry. I really do not care of I offend you, frankly. I wouldn’t expect you to support even if I never brought the issue up.
As far as my offending people, I don’t see that. And neither do any of the other places I blog. I offend you. The whole topic is offensive to you, and that’s fine. I will continue on without your support.
Prop 8 shouldn’t have made it onto the ballot. Nobody should be voting on anybody else’s civil rights. I assure you, Richard, that had that happened with the blacks and women, neither of them would be voting today. And you know it. Massachusetts didn’t even honor the issue by putting it on the ballot. Never made it here. The people beat it back and said it doesn’t belong there. And it wasn’t just homosexuals either.
Comment by Richard on 26 June 2009:
You don’t offend me whether you care or not. I just point out your insipient attitude and those of your self-described “comrades” damage your agenda whether you “see” it or not - polling confirmed exactly that.
I recommend you research the meaning of agenda.
Ironically the first civil rights legislsation was in Persia 2,500 years ago. You should notice the US Constitution is a ballot matter because it must be amended by vote and every provision is subject to a ratification vote.
Your arguement is cicular and flawed by convenience.
Comment by FemmeFatal on 26 June 2009:
Um, Richard, did you miss the part about Adultery being the threat to marriage vs. same-sex marriage being a threat? How does that have no relevance to these sanctimonious numb-nuts who preach that faithfulness to god and the 10 commandments is the most important thing. I actually don’t believe “thou shalt not screw a person of the same sex” is one of them. I believe coveting another’s wife and adultery are against these basic tenets of christianity. So sanctimony, hypocrisy on the issue of marriage and trying to force their view on others, is rather the point is it not??
How about this analogy for you: a person who is a rabid anti-gun proponent turns out to have an illegal handgun and blows someone away. Wouldn’t those people who are protecting “their constitutional right” to bear arms have something to say about this sanctimonious and hypocritical moron?? While trying to force their agenda (get it: gun control/marriage between a man and a woman only), they fall way short of their own standards. Do you get it now??
Comment by Richard on 26 June 2009:
Um, adultery is a threat to marriage. It breaches the covenant. I never suggested otherwise. These people, like S anmford and Clinton for that matter, are nincompoops. What does that have to do with homosexual marriage? You can not make an arguement by asserting white is not white but some other color. I very much get the sacrament of marriage. Don yuu get it now?