No Republican can dismiss the hypocrisy that was evident in the Vitter press conference today.

[Maddy McCall]

They know that Democrats (and hopefully some astute members of the media) will say, "But Republicans didn't mind delving into the Clintons' private lives, every bit of which played out in front of the nation in impeachment proceedings."

They've got to have a comeback to that statement. They've got to some way distinguish what happened with Bill Clinton from what happened from David Vitter, in a way that somehow makes their hypocrisy excusable, or in some way that makes David Vitter's "situation" more ethically, morally forgivable.

So, DUers, what do you predict the Republican pundits will say, in response to the statement bolded above?

[treestar]

1. They will say he did not lie about it "under oath."

They start claiming that they are not bothered by what happened so much as that he "lied under oath" about it.

[Maddy McCall]

4. Ok...

so he didn't lie about it under oath.

But how many politicians have been placed under oath to be questioned about their sex lives?

Why didn't they squawk when Ken Starr opened up an investigation into Clinton's sex life? Would they squawk now if an independent council began investigating Vitter's sexual past?

[treestar]

16. That's what I usually say when they start on that one

I forget who it was, but the rethugs in my life they were defending whatever repuke was in trouble at the time - Foley, maybe? With that line. So I argued that Clinton should not have been subjected to questioning under oath about a private matter, and that even lying under oath about this was not really all that important in light of things - one doesn't want Hillary to find out, and I thought it almost justifiable that Chelsea should not hear of it.

They also have their crap argument that it subjects him to blackmail which could harm national security - that could be the case with a Senator too.

[Atman]

6. Then they wonder why we get pissed at no-oath no-transcript testimonies...

...by Bush and Cheney aides. How long do you allow people to look you in the eye and call you "Stupid Motherfucker" before you get pissed off?

.

[salin]

15. which then backs them into the Libby box.

[babylonsister]

2. They won't say a word; case now closed. His wife absolved him. nt

[Atman]

3. Clinton lied under oath.

Case closed.

They won't discuss anything else, regardless of the truth. Republicans are hypocrites and liars from day one. It's the first plank of the party platform.

.

[Maddy McCall]

8. Did they complain when the Clintons' marital privacy was invaded by Ken Starr?

How can they say that marital issues should be private, when they cheered on Starr's investigation into what can easily be considered the Clintons' marital problems?

[maxsolomon]

11. and he didn't "lie"

he parsed. the parsed under oath.

you fuckers.

[Richard Steele]

13. And Clinton wasn't breaking any laws with Ms. Lewinski. Vitter was soliciting prostitutes.

People go to JAIL every damn day for "soliciting prostitutes".

People who aren't Repub Senators who got elected on a "family
values" platform, that is.

[salin]

18. When it says Libby, Libby, Libby on the label.....

cornered - not that they notice being boxed in corners.

[wiggs]

5. They can and they will. nt

[Richard Steele]

7. And what's with this "private life" bullshit anyway? HIRING PROSTITUTES IS A CRIME, last I looked!

What happened with Clinton and Lewinski was certainly
not anything I'd be proud of, but no LAWS were broken.

Vitter can -NOT- say the same! We have PROOF that he
was breaking the fucking law!!!!!! (no pun intended)

So he can blow that "private life" nonsense out his ass!
I'm sure he's familiar with the procedure for doing so.

[Maddy McCall]

10. Yep.

[City Lights]

22. Matthews tried to poo-poo the illegal prostitution because it's just a

misdemeanor. :eyes: Chuck Todd pointed out that lots of Johns get their picture plastered over billboards for doing what Vitter did.

[malaise]

9. Tweety is discussing the statements now n/t

[gatorboy]

19. He agreed with Vitter that it's the media's fault.

Oh boy.. :crazy:

[msongs]

12. Republicans DO NOT apologize, only Democrats apologize nt

[dysfunctional press]

14. wanna bet?

nt

[joeunderdog]

17. Clinton wore big boy undies.

Boxers, I believe.

[monmouth]

20. Clinton "stained" the sainthood of the physical Oval Office......

[baby_mouse]

21. Oh, how could you even ASK? Leave the POOR MAN aLONE.

Oooo... You dang LIBRULS.

[Johonny]

23. Hey at least

Vitter paid for his women. Clinton was too cheap to even pay them.

[Maddy McCall]

24. Sarcasm tag missing?

Edit...shit, sorry. I see that you're speaking in the Republican voice.

My bad. :rofl: :blush:

[Catherine Vincent]

25. I really don't think they can spin it.

But knowing those freepers, they'll come up with something asinine.

[Maddy McCall]

26. And while anyone with any critical thinking skills laughs at their...

inevitable response, Grape-Kool-Aid-Republicans will say, "Yeah, that's the way it is! That's right. Suck it, Democrats!"

:)

[WinkyDink]

27. Illegally hiring prostitutes isn't the same as an affair between consenting adults, according to the

LAW.

Clinton = Philanderer.

Vitter = Criminal.

(I don't make the laws!)

[Maddy McCall]

29. I agree. So what will be the response that Republicans craft, to answer this point?

[AtomicKitten]

28. sure they can and will be oblivious to the hypocrisy

The Dem vs Repub double-standard is already a well-established precedent