There are lessons to be learned from the Great Capitol Hill Sex Scandal of the Summer of 2007 except I’m not exactly sure what those lessons should be.
But first, we’ve got to come up with a better name. Something catchy. Something that will fit easily into newspaper headlines. Something that rolls off the tongue and spits out of the mouth with the proper amount of indignation and contempt. Something that will fit in that space under the TV picture where the “crawl” of headlines rolls by all day long.
“Pantygate?” Not bad but needs work.
“Progate?” Too obscure.
“Ho’gate?” Don’t go there.
“Zippergate?” Getting warm. As in “Why can’t these “family values” Republicans keep their zippers zipped?
I will say to my Republican friends that it does no good to whine about double standards. You’re going to have to concede the hypocrisy point to our Democratic friends on this one. If your going to lecture people about the sanctity of marriage as it relates to banning gay unions or campaign on a platform stressing “family values,” it would be best if you didn’t go whoring around on your wife, wetting your wick at $300 a pop.
Mindboggling stupidity.
And it appears that more good news for the GOP is on the way. The Hill reports that Larry Flynt, pornographer, guardian and promoter of public immorality, and paragon of Democratic party virtue, has smoked out a few other lawmakers whose inability to resist the temptations found in Washington, D.C. fleshpots will no doubt be making headlines soon:
Larry Flynt, the porn-industry magnate who first linked Sen. David Vitter (R-La.) to the escort service of the “D.C. Madam,†said Wednesday that his investigators are tracking more than 20 leads on alleged congressional sex scandals.As Vitter remained missing in action for two Senate votes on defense policy, Flynt insisted that he exposed the conservative lawmaker’s sexual indiscretions only because they contradicted Vitter’s longtime defense of the “sanctity of marriage.â€
“If someone’s living a life contrary to the way they’re advocating … then they become fair game,†Flynt told reporters. “I don’t want a man like that legislating for me, especially in the area of morality.â€
Should this condemnation of hypocritical behavior include Mr. Flynt? After all, his magazine is full of good looking, shapely models, women who were are told in a rather disappointing disclaimer that the stories and descriptions accompanying the girlie pictures do not necessarily reflect the lifestyle or moral character of the woman being photographed.
Full disclosure, Mr. Flynt. How many of those models really would like to urinate all over their lover? How many would like to perform other scatological sex rituals that you seem so nauseatingly obsessed with in your magazine?
America wants to know, Mr. Flynt! They deserve to know! Have any of these models ever done the do-do on you?
Considering that most of the Republican party would like to oblige Mr. Flynt’s curious proclivities toward bathroom sex and take a dump right in his lap, maybe he could get a couple of good photospreads out of it.
Flynt setting himself up as arbiter of American morals is funny enough. But the kicker is that he apparently has no intention of publishing the names of Democratic lawmakers caught with their pants down:
The 20-plus new leads, Flynt said, come from the newspaper ad and not Palfrey. The Hustler publisher, arrested and jailed multiple times during his decades-long career, vowed to provide clear proof and only out lawmakers whom he perceives to be hypocrites.“You guys always know, [from] the past, I deliver,†Flynt said. “And if I fail to, the mainstream media will crush me like a bug.â€
The Vitter scandal has touched off new anxiety among Republicans over whether their party will pay the price for members who fail to live up to their moral principles. Flynt, an unabashed Democrat, acknowledged that the GOP provides him with easier targets.
First, it’s hard to crush a bug who lives in a sewer. But does anyone else find it riotously amusing that Flynt gets to decide who’s a “hypocrite” and who isn’t?
The publisher of a magazine that promotes gratuitous and consequence-free sex is now sitting in judgment of people who have simply followed his formulaic lifestyle and engaged in a little slap and tickle with a willing partner. Despite his magazine’s clear message that there’s absolutely no downside to having easy morals, that in fact, it is a preferred way to live one’s life, Flynt is about to lower the boom on people for living up to his own misogynistic credo.
Why should whether they are “hypocrites” matter to him at all? In Flynt’s moral universe, you’re only a hypocrite if you don’t screw anything that moves three times a day. The idea that anyone who visits a prostitute – married or not; spouting allegiance to family values or not – should be held up as an object lesson in sanctimony by the purveyor of a publication that features the most nauseating racist, homophobic, and chauvinistic cartoons while showcasing women in the most degrading way imaginable is beyond funny, beyond satire – it is beyond belief.
And lest anyone take me for a bluenose, readers of this site know my affection for classic porn from the 70’s and 80’s as well as the early 90’s and the advent of videotape. It is not the fact that Flynt is a pornographer that makes him such lowlife pond scum. It is his own sanctimony, his own shtick as Champion of the First Amendment. He deliberately abuses that freedom not in order to express himself but to bully and browbeat his ideological foes while lowering the bar of acceptable political combat to unheard of and unimagined levels. For this reason alone, we should condemn this execrable man to slither in the shadows and back alleys of society where his kind belong.
Anything Flynt comes up with will be used by the Democrats to try and make a larger point about Republican hypocrisy. As I said above, this is fair game. But perhaps – just perhaps – Democrats will want to look a little harder at who their allies are in this sexfest. The excrement smeared on the bodies of Flynt’s models may just migrate to the faces of Democratic politicians who attempt to tar an entire political party using the actions of a few hypocrites who don’t have the good sense or common decency to remain true to their wives.
7:46 am
A Sporting Chance: Promote It Like Beckham…
Football’s David Beckham is coming to Hollywood. But does the aging English sporting star still have what it takes to bring a touch of stardom to the L.A. Galaxy, and some much-needed publicity to Major League Soccer? By Rick Moran,......
9:07 am
Not a big Republican fan, but Rick is right. A few more of the family values crowd will be shown to have feet of clay.
But, is this really less hypocritical than the good liberals a few years back, proclaiming unending dedication and fealty to the poor, the immigrants, the great unwashed, having illegal aliens working as domestics at substandard wages without benefits?
We all sin and fall short (and for Rick and other non-religious types, we all step on our pecker every once in a while).
Messages have greater value than the messengers. Grow up.
10:05 am
It’s actually an interesting marketing strategy by Flynt to increase circulation by outing certain high profile customers or are we supposed to believe philandering pols don’t read Hustler?
10:10 am
Isn’t the ‘edge’ of the hypocrisy where the subject utilizing prostitutes, an illegal act, is serving in a body that could make the act legal? Flynt just wants to target Republicans so he broadens the ‘edge’ to opinions beyond the specific: the illegality of prostitution.
Granted that prostitution laws are today state law but I see no reason why the feds couldn’t create a ‘right’ to prostitute one’s self.
10:11 am
I agree. If Senator Vitter wants to bang multiple prostitutes while wearing a diaper, the so be it. If he then wants to go to Washington and mock gay people while preaching about his awesome family values, then fine.
Who the hell is Larry Flynt to call out his hypocrisy? I mean, Flynt is a total hypocrite himself right? Scum of the earth and all… It’s not like Flynt ever did anything to actually help this country.
2:28 pm
How is Flynt hypocritical on this? He isn’t attacking the Republican perverts for their adulterous lifestyles per se, but calling them out on the very issue that is the bedrock of their morally superior, God-fearin’, we’re-better-than-you values platform. We’re all sinners, remember… But it takes a “scum of the earth”(according to one poster here)like Flynt to point out that those who are keen to judge others’ lifestyles are equally “scummy.” No, no…To find a real hypocrite you’d have to go to, say, another paragon of conservative values: The Rev. Ted Haggard—the guy who railed against the homosexual “lifestyle” on Sunday, but did drugs and got “massages” from a gay prostitute during the rest of the week. THAT’S a hypocrite. Praise the lord!
2:45 pm
The real paradox is that politicians accept money for others to use their office, while prostitutes accept money for others to use their orifice. I see very little difference between the two deals.
3:37 pm
Apparently, the late Sen. Daniel Patrick Moynihan has joined the list of clients.
Dead Democrats don’t count .. of course.
6:22 pm
so nobody here has a problem with:
“Do as I say, not as I do.”
you say: Flynt, an unabashed Democrat, acknowledged that the GOP provides him with easier targets.
how does that translate to:
he apparently has no intention of publishing the names of Democratic lawmakers caught with their pants down.
6:26 pm
Are you taking remedial reading courses at Washington U?
“The 20-plus new leads, Flynt said, come from the newspaper ad and not Palfrey. The Hustler publisher, arrested and jailed multiple times during his decades-long career, vowed to provide clear proof and only out lawmakers whom he perceives to be hypocrites…”
Are you naive or just stupid? Do you actually believe that Flynt will consider any Democrats caught up in this scandal “hypocrites” and therefore not publish their names?
Go back to sleep now. Don’t you have a test or something tomorrow?
6:59 pm
>Are you taking remedial reading courses at Washington U?
>Are you naive or just stupid?
>Go back to sleep now. Don’t you have a test or something tomorrow?
Now I understand why this blog is called Right Wing Nut House. Anyone who doesn’t drink the kool-aid is attacked personally. Your powerful reasoning is overwhelming….NOT. Because you have eschewed reason and substituted an ad hominem attack.
I stick with my initial question. Nothing that you quote supports YOUR contention that this is just partisan gotcha politics. It’s just your (fevered) opinion.
>Do you actually believe that Flynt will consider any Democrats caught up in this scandal “hypocrites†and therefore not publish their names?
He says he is crusading against hypocrisy. Only time will tell if this is true. Suppose he does expose a dem. What will you say then?
Too bad the real right wing nuthouse (that would be the White House) is falling apart at the seams. I’m sure the next 18 months are going to be a very painful experience for you and your followers. And your head will probably explode after the 2008 elections. But raging at others is not going to change anything.
7:02 pm
Ad hominen would be without merit. Your stupidity deserves worse.
Calling that smut peddler a crusader for anything except his own self aggrandizement puts you in league with little children who believe in Santa Claus.
7:14 pm
It never rains but it pours…
Rep. Bob Allen arrested on sex charge
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/orl-bk-boballen071107,0,4502405.story
I mean honestly. You go to high class hookers, you get busted for your phone records, you go for a little cottaging, you offer your favours to a policeman.
Oh well, you’ve got to laugh.
8:01 pm
“Ad hominen would be without merit. Your stupidity deserves worse.”
Suddenly you become tolerant of opposing viewpoints?
hypocrisy has everything to do with those who espouse a public POV, then practice their vice
under cover. Is that simple enough?
1:05 am
“hypocrisy has everything to do with those who espouse a public POV, then practice their vice
under cover. Is that simple enough?”
Why yes. Yes it is. Too complicated for you however because you didn’t read what I wrote:
I will say to my Republican friends that it does no good to whine about double standards. You’re going to have to concede the hypocrisy point to our Democratic friends on this one. If your going to lecture people about the sanctity of marriage as it relates to banning gay unions or campaign on a platform stressing “family values,†it would be best if you didn’t go whoring around on your wife, wetting your wick at $300 a pop.
Isn’t that what I said. About hypocrisy? I think I defined it excellently. Too bad you didn’t read it.
You’re dumber than the college kid.
8:46 am
“It is his own sanctimony, his own shtick as Champion of the First Amendment.”
He lives his credo, the hypocrites do not.
It is hardly sanctimony, but self-derogation that he espouses. But you seek to level the playing field for all the good hypocrites who haven’t been caught yet. You attack him for
saying what is true. Don’t be upset with the messenger.
“He deliberately abuses that freedom not in order to express himself but to bully and browbeat his ideological foes while lowering the bar of acceptable political combat to unheard of and unimagined levels.”
Abuse of freedom? Now THAT’s hypocrisy.
8:51 am
It is beyond belief you are defending this partisan witch hunter. There is not a noble bone in this man’s body. He’s a bloodsucker.
It nauseates me that you defend him. You are beyond the pale if you find anything in his “credo” (“if it feels good, do it”) that doesn’t reek with hypocrisy when he then turns around and in essence says “even though I have no standards in my personal or professional life, I am going to sit in judgment on you and hold you to a standard that I piss on every month in my magazine.”
You can’t see it. You won’t see it. So what’s the point?
9:12 am
“So what’s the point?”
Only speech you and I agree with is, ‘protected speech’?
You must love the conservatives of SCROTUS.
9:32 am
“even though I have no standards in my personal or professional life, I am going to sit in judgment on you and hold you to a standard that I piss on every month in my magazine.â€
That’s interesting, because that’s exactly the way I feel when I hear moral champions like Vitter, Haggard, and Fallwell (God rest his soul). At least with Larry Flynt, you know EXACTLY what you’re getting. Plus, whatever his motivation, Flynt has done more to protect our beloved constitution than any of the so called moral majority. I do not like having my bedroom legislated, especially by such sinners.
9:35 am
Flynt is very good at protecting his own bank account – and augmenting it. He saw a way to dupe the left into supporting his crusades – that he turned into a mockery when in court. The fact that so many have fallen for it must give him no end of amusement as he chortles all the way to the bank.
You’ve been had by one of the greatest bunko artists of the 20th century if you believe there is an ounce of integrity in that man’s body.
9:40 am
His integrity, or lack of it is not the point.
You do understand protected speech, don’t you?
1:05 pm
Protected speech? Why, yes you can say what you want. This concept also allows others to point out the merit of what you say as well.
1:22 pm
“He saw a way to dupe the left into supporting his crusades – that he turned into a mockery when in court.”
Apparently, the Supreme Court fell for his shenanigans as well. Fools! And again, scumbag Larry Flynt has done more for America ANY of his detractors.
But wait! What Flynt did is somehow diminished because he was protecting his bank account!? HOW MUCH MORE F’ING AMERICAN CAN YOU POSSIBLY BE!?
9:08 am
“Mindboggling stupidity.”
It’s hard to follow your rant. Does this refer to “whoring” family values Republicans or Democrats making the argument Republicans’ behavior should match their political rhetoric?
But this is clearly stated: “The publisher of a magazine that promotes gratuitous and consequence-free sex is now sitting in judgment of people who have simply followed his formulaic lifestyle and engaged in a little slap and tickle with a willing partner.”
How could you miss by a country mile Flint’s obvious point in his expensive little exercise in exposing Republican Congressmen? Larry Flint is more than happy to have them whore to their libido’s content. What bothers him is these are the same pack of adulterers who went after Bill Clinton over Monica (oh, it wasn’t about the sex
). These are the same wear-it-on-your-sleeve moralists who endlessly grouse over Hollywood morals. They chase homosexuals back into the closet to save the sanctity of marriage. The pretend to be protectors of Christian values.
Is what’s making the bile come up your throat on this one, Rick, the knowledge that Larry’s right? Republicans want to claim exclusive claim to family values in America. Look at a right-wing demagogue like Bill O’Reilly, the “no spin” “cultural warrior.” He constantly rants about the left being nothing but immoral “secular progressives” who “hate America” or are “un-American.” Of course, there’s no one into self-love more than Bill O’Reilly who has his own sex scandal problem but that doesn’t keep right-wing hypocrites like him from sanctimonious displays of moral purity. Former Republican presidential candidate Pat Robertson for many years ranted against the left being a bunch of immoral “secular humanists” who hate God and religion.
That’s Larry’s point. Like your love of “classic porn,” the Republican Party should admit they’re human and quit the sanctimonious liberal-bashing citing moral superiority. Few Congressmen, liberal or conservative, are shining examples of Christian piety or morality. Republicans need to dump the thin, self-serving illusion.