Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A Blast from Vitter's Past

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:38 AM
Original message
A Blast from Vitter's Past
In the fall of 1998, David Vitter felt compelled to weigh in on the national debate over the possible impeachment of President Bill Clinton for lying about sex. Vitter was not yet a member of Congress; he was a Republican state representative. And in an October 29, 1998, opinion piece for the New Orleans Times-Picayune, Vitter took issue with a previous article, written by two law professors who had argued that impeachment "is a process of removing a president from office who can no longer effectively govern; it is not about punishment." Given that Clinton was still a capable chief executive, they had maintained, impeachment was not in order.

Vitter, a graduate of Harvard University and Tulane law school and a Rhodes scholar, was aghast at this amoral position. He blasted the law professors for criticizing those congressional Republicans pushing for Clinton's impeachment. Their argument that impeachment is "not primarily about right and wrong or moral fitness to govern," he wrote, was utterly wrongheaded. He continued:

"Some current polls may suggest that people are turned off by the whole Clinton mess and don't care -- because the stock market is good, the Clinton spin machine is even better or other reasons. But that doesn't answer the question of whether President Clinton should be impeached and removed from office because he is morally unfit to govern."

<snip>

In considering impeachment, Vitter asserted, Congress had to judge Clinton on moral terms. Decrying the law professors' failure to see this, Vitter observed, "Is that the level of moral relatively and vacuousness we have come to?" If no "meaningful action" were to be taken against Clinton, Vitter wrote, "his leadership will only further drain any sense of values left to our political culture."

<snip>

Vitter, who is married with four children, has been a vigorous advocate of family values, championing abstinence-only programs and calling for a ban on gay marriage. In a statement his office rushed out on Monday night--before he could be outed by Hustler magazine--Vitter said he had committed a "serious sin" and claimed that "several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling." I seem to recall that Bill Clinton took a similar stance after he acknowledged his affair with Monica Lewinsky. That, though, did not prevent Vitter from calling for Clinton's forcible removal from office.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/thenation/20070711/cm_thenation/3212734
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Throwing Stones Donating Member (730 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 09:54 AM
Response to Original message
1. payback's a bitch /nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClintonTyree Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:00 AM
Response to Reply #1
2. Naw.....
he's been "forgiven" by the lord and his wife. :eyes: Reich-Wing christians all get that big "get out of jail free" card because they're....well....Reich-Wing christians. ;) Everything is cool in Vitterland.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:01 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. There was a time when personal lives were off limits in politics
But this is hypocrisy on steroids. No way should he get a pass.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Throwing Stones Donating Member (730 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:30 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. For the most part, it would be nice if personal lives were still off limits
But when someone holds him or herself out as holier than thou on an private matter, be it fidelity or sexuality, they deserve scrutiny and public condemnation when the words don't match the actions.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Lasher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Jul-11-07 10:40 AM
Response to Reply #4
5. If you don't want to be judged then you shouldn't judge others
It's not a new concept but it's a pretty good rule to live by.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Apr 26th 2024, 09:30 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Editorials & Other Articles Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC