If you're new here, you may want to subscribe to my RSS feed or email alerts. Thanks for visiting!
Few weeks ago, much fuss was made over Al Gore’s astronomical utility bills and he was labeled a hypocrite because he travels around the world asking people to be more environmentally- friendly. Frankly, the label of a hypocrite can be easily bandied around and at any point of time, people can easily be labeled a hypocrite based on their actions. Not many suns had set when in fact, yet another case of hypocrisy emerged from the Republican fold. Newt Gingrich, a former Speaker and one of the leading proponents of Clinton’s impeachment proceedings revealed that he was having an extra marital affair while censuring Clinton’s action of doing the same. He admitted this on a James Dobson’s radio talk show. James Dobson heads Focus on the Family, a conservative Christian evangelical group. Even he admits that Gingrich is a hypocrite. But you must wonder why Gingrich would choose to reveal all now. Probably, he wishes to get rid of all skeletons in his closet before he announces his presidential bid to avoid any last-minute surprises.
But does merely admitting his transgressions and seeking ‘repentance from God’ absolve him of his actions especially if he seeks the presidency?
In the middle of the heated South Carolina Republican primary battle between George Bush and John McCain in 2000, Dobson issued a personal press release attacking McCain: “The senator is being touted by the media as a man of principle, yet he was involved with other women while married to his first wife.” McCain had long admitted an affair and confessed his guilt and regret, but that wasn’t good enough for Dobson. The fact of the affair alone was enough to disqualify him[source]
So why should he expect any leniency from the social conservatives now? Or the important question is will he?
Defending Gingrich, some may say that Clinton was guilty not of getting a blow job in the Oval Office but lying about it hence the impeachment proceedings. Let us get one thing straight here. The Republicans were united against Clinton not because he lied but because he was exposed of doing something that went against their so-called family values. The lying part only helped them make the legal case for impeachment.
I’m not condoning Clinton’s actions here but any man would deny having sex outside his marriage when accused of it. In addition, Clinton played the card of ambiguous definition implying that oral sex wasn’t exactly sex (he’s a lawyer, after all.) Heck, many teenagers before his time believed so too. Frankly, if politicians are grilled under oath and asked if he had done anything wrong, almost all of them would deny it or take the refuge of ‘what exactly is wrong’. Many legal cases are won on the ground of reasonable doubt. Just as Bush made the case for the Iraq war. He won’t admit he lied, would he? Instead we are spun a tale on how it really isn’t a lie when they claimed they knew there were WMDs in Iraq.
The Republicans’ primary grouse against Clinton was clearly on moral principles i.e. how could he defile the highest office by getting blown by an intern? But then plenty of Republicans are guilty of doing the same too. Many cases have emerged in the recent past that point to blatant hypocrisy. Mark Foley, a U.S. congressman evidently preyed on male congressional pages while sitting on committees trying to rein in child predators. Ted Haggard, a senior pastor of New Life Church after preaching against homosexuality was found to be having an affair with a male prostitute. The list goes on. More recently, Scooter Libby, Dick Cheney’s Chief of Staff was found guilty of perjury among other crimes but the Republicans were quick to suggest that Bush grant him a presidential pardon. What, no respect for law? Whatever happened to the decision of the jury of your peers?
So I guess it is time to keep the hypocrisy argument out of political debates. And that is a sad thing because we are expecting our leaders to be hypocritical in the same way that we aren’t surprised when our leaders lie to us.
Article Tags >> Clinton | Current Affairs | hypocrisy | politics | United States


March 11th, 2007 at 11:32 am reply
I think you protest a tad much about Gore. When the fundamentalist right fulminate about immoral behavior and behave immorally themselves, it reduces their credibility in my eyes, but their message has to be evaluated on its own merits (e.g., if their message is ’sexual fidelity is good’, the message is not negated by Clinton’s or Gingrich’s dalliances).
Similarly, anthropogenic global warming doesn’t cease to be a problem because Gore doesn’t practice what he preaches, but it does allow most of us to have (yet another) laugh at his pompous holiness.
> So I guess it is time to keep the hypocrisy argument out of political debates.
Oh the hypocrisy argument will continue to be used because it’s such a convenient proxy for credibility, which is a rather intellectual concept. The hypocrisy charge turns an intellectual problem into a moral fault, thanks to the petty politics of our time (aside: Which is why Obama’s way of approaching politics is particularly refreshing).
March 12th, 2007 at 10:54 am reply
Time for Gingrich and Gore to check into alcohol rehab.