Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Roland · 05-03-2003, 08:09 AM

Yet another member of the self-appointed �morality police� has been exposed for what he really is � a two-faced hypocrite who is, it turns out, as screwed up as the rest of us.

The man in question here is the former Secretary of Education, Bill Bennett, the author of the best-selling �Book of Virtues,� who has made a fortune peddling his own brand of finger-wagging on TV and radio talk shows as well as on the lecture circuit around the nation. Well, now we discover that Mr. Bennett, for all his holier-than-thou pronouncements, turns out to be an inveterate gambler. That�s right. The Washington Monthly has obtained documents from several casinos indicating that Bennett has lost about $8 million in the last decade, mostly playing video poker and high-stake slot machines.

So what�s wrong with that, you say? Isn�t gambling legal, after all? Of course it is, but then, again, is it appropriate for someone who makes a living out of telling the rest of us that we should avoid indulging our own vices be setting such a poor example? I wonder how many people who bought his �Book of Virtues� will be pleased to discover how he spent all their hard-earned money.

Bennett�s response to this disclosure? The kind of obfuscation and rationalization that we would expect to find coming from Bill Clinton, a man whose transgressions Bennett never tires of trumpeting to the world. Bennett says, �I�ve gambled all my life and it�s never been a moral issue with me. I liked church bingo when I was growing up.� Damn! I always knew church was a bad influence! Better he should have been hanging out in pool halls than in those church basements which are obvious dens of iniquity from which our children should be forever protected.

When questioned about the matter, Bennett would only say that he has basically �broken even� over the years (is lying, along with gambling, now going to be identified as a �virtue�?), equating his situation to that of a person who drinks alcohol but who is not an alcoholic. Funny, but that logic never seems to extend to homosexuality. I mean, would Bennett be willing to admit that a person can be engaged in a monogamous homosexual relationship and still be �moral�? After all, as long as a person doesn�t do something to excess, I guess it must be OK. That sure seems to be the case with Bennett, but, then again, he gets to make the rules, so he may be exempt from his own edicts.

I guess that one of the �virtues� NOT expounded upon in Bennett�s book is the one that goes, �Those who live in glass houses shouldn�t throw stones.�

bd-from-kg · 05-03-2003, 11:53 AM

Golly, it turns out that a human being is imperfect. Hold the presses!

How old are you? Twelve, maybe? To those of us who've been around a while this sort of thing isn't even news. The reason this sort of thing isn't generally reported is that if it were, no one would want to hold a position that made him a public figure.

Welcome to the real world.

Roland · 05-03-2003, 12:22 PM

Gee,

I wonder if you took such a cavalier, egalitarian attitude when Bill Clinton gave into his "weaknesses." Did you just shrug it off as his being "human"?

If you can't see the hypocrisy of a man setting himself up as an arbiter of morality while all along indulging in his own "weakness," then I guess you will let anybody slide as long as he bears the same political stripe as you.

You may want to be lectured by people like this, but I certainly do not.

Grad Student Humanist · 05-03-2003, 02:33 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by bd-from-kg
Golly, it turns out that a human being is imperfect. Hold the presses!

How old are you? Twelve, maybe? To those of us who've been around a while this sort of thing isn't even news. The reason this sort of thing isn't generally reported is that if it were, no one would want to hold a position that made him a public figure.

Welcome to the real world.

Sorry, it is news when the man we're talking about is America's self-appointed morality police.

So once again the surface is scratched to reveal yet another hypocritical Xtian. Guess most Xtians in this country haven't read their Bibles in a while. If they had they'd realize that Jesus was much more concerned about the sin of hypocrisy than he was about abortion, homosexuality and the rest of the hot-button issues that make the Xtian right so hysterical.

Jon Curry · 05-06-2003, 02:31 PM

Quote:

Yet another member of the self-appointed �morality police� has been exposed for what he really is � a two-faced hypocrite who is, it turns out, as screwed up as the rest of us.

How is it hypocritical to on the one hand consider yourself an expert on virtues and on the other hand engage in activites that you don't think are immoral? Why can't I condemn adultery and at the same time smoke two packs a day when I don't think smoking is wrong? There's nothing hypocritical about that.

Roland · 05-06-2003, 04:03 PM

John -

Gee, isn't it just so nice that he gets to pick and choose the activities he considers "immoral"? And what do you know, he DOESN'T choose the activity that HE finds so fun and entertaining. Ain't that precious.

This guy is such a phony, it's sickening.

Ab_Normal · 05-06-2003, 04:25 PM

Mmm, sweet sweet schadenfreude... I especially like the fact that the organization he fronts for (or is it his organization?) has made statements against gambling, as quoted in this thread.

christ-on-a-stick · 05-06-2003, 04:34 PM

Grad Student Humanist said:

Quote:

Sorry, it is news when the man we're talking about is America's self-appointed morality police.

I agree, that's what makes it "news".

Quote:

"I view (gambling) as drinking. If you can't handle it, don't do it." As the drug czar under George Bush I, William Bennett could not preach loudly enough about the danger of inhaled tar found in marijuana cigarettes. Yet, he seems oddly subdued about the problems associated with gambling. His longstanding argument that drug use causes homelessness, crime, emotional and physical abuse, suicide, and financial ruin is equally applicable to legal gambling.

(emphasis mine). Another interesting thing to note is that while Bennett has insisted that it's never been a "problem" for him, he has also now claimed that he will cease his casino activities entirely. Why? If he honestly does not believe that he has a problem or is doing anything he should be embarassed of, why stop? Oh - that whole pandering thing.

Jon Curry · 05-06-2003, 05:29 PM

Quote:

Gee, isn't it just so nice that he gets to pick and choose the activities he considers "immoral"?

Ummm, isn't that what everybody does?

Quote:

And what do you know, he DOESN'T choose the activity that HE finds so fun and entertaining. Ain't that precious.

So, if he had said in the past that gambling was wrong and he engaged in it you'd criticize him as a hypocrite, and yet he hasn't said that he thinks gambling is wrong and you criticize him anyway.

But anyway, again, the point is, you're wrong. He's not a hypocrite at all.

the_cave · 05-06-2003, 06:47 PM

It is a little funny (if you can call losing 8 mil "funny"), and yeah, he does seem to be justifying it in a very unhealthy manner, but so far as I can tell it merely proves that Bill Bennett has a very bad habit, that we should not emulate. I've never heard or read him say "I'm a paragon of the virtues that I promote." He isn't the one who came up with any of the material he collects in his books.

Seems to me he'd only be a hypocrite if he said "These things are really bad--except for me." But what if he said "These things are really bad--especially for me." Doesn't that merely make him, as some have said above, human like the rest of us? (I admit he didn't say this, but he didn't say the former, either.)

Most of us behave badly from time to time--does that mean we should never recommend good behavior?

It seems the only way for Bennett to satisfy this kind of criticism would be to burn all his books and go about preaching the virtues of gambling. Would you really support that?

(Having said all that, clearly he should have admitted the folly and waste of his habits. That would have been the best solution, and he didn't take it.)

05-03-2003, 08:09 AM	#1
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: California Posts: 748	The "Man of Virtues" Not so Virtuous After All? Yet another member of the self-appointed �morality police� has been exposed for what he really is � a two-faced hypocrite who is, it turns out, as screwed up as the rest of us. The man in question here is the former Secretary of Education, Bill Bennett, the author of the best-selling �Book of Virtues,� who has made a fortune peddling his own brand of finger-wagging on TV and radio talk shows as well as on the lecture circuit around the nation. Well, now we discover that Mr. Bennett, for all his holier-than-thou pronouncements, turns out to be an inveterate gambler. That�s right. The Washington Monthly has obtained documents from several casinos indicating that Bennett has lost about $8 million in the last decade, mostly playing video poker and high-stake slot machines. So what�s wrong with that, you say? Isn�t gambling legal, after all? Of course it is, but then, again, is it appropriate for someone who makes a living out of telling the rest of us that we should avoid indulging our own vices be setting such a poor example? I wonder how many people who bought his �Book of Virtues� will be pleased to discover how he spent all their hard-earned money. Bennett�s response to this disclosure? The kind of obfuscation and rationalization that we would expect to find coming from Bill Clinton, a man whose transgressions Bennett never tires of trumpeting to the world. Bennett says, �I�ve gambled all my life and it�s never been a moral issue with me. I liked church bingo when I was growing up.� Damn! I always knew church was a bad influence! Better he should have been hanging out in pool halls than in those church basements which are obvious dens of iniquity from which our children should be forever protected. When questioned about the matter, Bennett would only say that he has basically �broken even� over the years (is lying, along with gambling, now going to be identified as a �virtue�?), equating his situation to that of a person who drinks alcohol but who is not an alcoholic. Funny, but that logic never seems to extend to homosexuality. I mean, would Bennett be willing to admit that a person can be engaged in a monogamous homosexual relationship and still be �moral�? After all, as long as a person doesn�t do something to excess, I guess it must be OK. That sure seems to be the case with Bennett, but, then again, he gets to make the rules, so he may be exempt from his own edicts. I guess that one of the �virtues� NOT expounded upon in Bennett�s book is the one that goes, �Those who live in glass houses shouldn�t throw stones.�

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

05-03-2003, 11:53 AM	#2
bd-from-kg Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2000 Location: King George, VA Posts: 1,400	Golly, it turns out that a human being is imperfect. Hold the presses! How old are you? Twelve, maybe? To those of us who've been around a while this sort of thing isn't even news. The reason this sort of thing isn't generally reported is that if it were, no one would want to hold a position that made him a public figure. Welcome to the real world.

05-03-2003, 12:22 PM	#3
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: California Posts: 748	Gee, I wonder if you took such a cavalier, egalitarian attitude when Bill Clinton gave into his "weaknesses." Did you just shrug it off as his being "human"? If you can't see the hypocrisy of a man setting himself up as an arbiter of morality while all along indulging in his own "weakness," then I guess you will let anybody slide as long as he bears the same political stripe as you. You may want to be lectured by people like this, but I certainly do not.

05-06-2003, 04:03 PM	#6
Roland Senior Member Join Date: Mar 2003 Location: California Posts: 748	John - Gee, isn't it just so nice that he gets to pick and choose the activities he considers "immoral"? And what do you know, he DOESN'T choose the activity that HE finds so fun and entertaining. Ain't that precious. This guy is such a phony, it's sickening.

05-06-2003, 04:25 PM	#7
Ab_Normal Veteran Member Join Date: Aug 2002 Posts: 2,842	Mmm, sweet sweet schadenfreude... I especially like the fact that the organization he fronts for (or is it his organization?) has made statements against gambling, as quoted in this thread.

05-06-2003, 06:47 PM	#10
the_cave Veteran Member Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: Earth Posts: 1,443	It is a little funny (if you can call losing 8 mil "funny"), and yeah, he does seem to be justifying it in a very unhealthy manner, but so far as I can tell it merely proves that Bill Bennett has a very bad habit, that we should not emulate. I've never heard or read him say "I'm a paragon of the virtues that I promote." He isn't the one who came up with any of the material he collects in his books. Seems to me he'd only be a hypocrite if he said "These things are really bad--except for me." But what if he said "These things are really bad--especially for me." Doesn't that merely make him, as some have said above, human like the rest of us? (I admit he didn't say this, but he didn't say the former, either.) Most of us behave badly from time to time--does that mean we should never recommend good behavior? It seems the only way for Bennett to satisfy this kind of criticism would be to burn all his books and go about preaching the virtues of gambling. Would you really support that? (Having said all that, clearly he should have admitted the folly and waste of his habits. That would have been the best solution, and he didn't take it.)

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.