David Vitter and Larry Craig: Adventures in Irony

Proving that truth always trumps fiction, Senators David Vitter, frequenter of prostitutes, and Larry Craig, denizen of men's rooms, are leading the charge to insert regressive clauses into any and all legislation involving reproduction or STDs. Their efforts prove once again that the letter next to the name means more than actions, allowing the poster children of sexual decadence to thrust their sexual mores on the rest of the world without a hint of self-awareness or irony.

Before, both Senators have been at the fore on the attack on PEPFAR, which provides AIDS relief to poor Africans. Not content merely to help others, Vitter and Craig have pushed for the inclusion of several clauses which inhibit the disbursement of aid. Vitter shows his cahones by voting in favor of a "prostitution pledge," which seeks to prohibit aid from reaching sex workers, a trade with which Vitter is intimately familiar.

Both Senators are also champions of the abstinence-only rule which designates a third of the PEPFAR aid for abstinence-only education and aims at treatment rather than prevention. In the hypocritical worldview of Craig and Vitter, it is more desirable that Africans acquire AIDS than admit of the existence of a society in which their regressive Christian values are not the norm.

More recently, Vitter has emerged as the only Senator opposing the removal of the HIV travel ban, which prohibits HIV-positive non-citizens from entering the US. For perspective, the US is now one of only 12 nations with such a ban, placing it in the company of Sudan, Russia, Libya and Saudi Arabia. Common sense would dictate that a law hatch in the 80s under a climate of fear would be erased once the spread of the disease became more clear, but common sense isn't necessary when you have convictions. HIV is the only disease upon which such a restriction exists, but it is not even a airborne disease, making it more than clear that Vitter's opposition to removing the ban is based purely in his contrived morality and has nothing to do with the biological traits of the disease. One should be cautioned, however, against expecting the application of such a morality to Vitter's own actions.

Finally, both Craig and Vitter have signed on to co-sponsor a same-sex marriage ban (SJ Res. 43), again placing the two Senators most destructive to their own marriages in a position to dictate to the rest of the country what does or does not constitute a sacred contracts. The hypocrisy is blinding. Craig, of all people, is in no position to fight against same-sex relations of any kind, having been caught not only soliciting prostitution, but with another man.

All this points once again to the tragedy of the two-party system, which vaults the letter next to the name above that of conscience, honesty, or logical consistency. To prove your worth to the followers of Falwell and Dobson, one need not practice what you preach, as the mere preaching has become enough.

Related:

Vitter Chastises Spitzer, March 18

Sphere: Related Content

Shorts: Campaign Roundup

Michigan and Florida revisited:

Florida has already thrown in the towel on a re-vote, and the latest out of Michigan has the Democratic leaders in that state proposing a likely-untenable do-over scheduled for June 3. Among the many issues surrounding these two states which continue to exasperate:

• The Michigan plan calls for the DNC to pay for the new primary, something Howard Dean has repeatedly stated will not happen. If the two states exhibited folly in ignoring the DNC's warnings before, they have raised the bar beyond reach in continuing to do so now. To go on so unbudgingly requires either an enormous set of something or a complete lack of rational thought. I'm banking on the latter.



• Several weeks into this conversation, there are still pundits and candidates who call the March 4 elections fair. Again, they ignore the obvious. The DNC stripped the delegates before the primaries were held, nobody campaigned in those states, and Obama wasn't on the ballot in Michigan. To suggest that Obama should have kept his name on the ballot carries the same weight as suggesting he put it on a Canadian ballot. As far as he and everyone else-including the voters-knew, the Michigan ballot counted for just as much. Clinton seems to be chastising Barack for lacking the foresight to see an attempted mid-stream rule change in the future. (Although, considering the opponent, maybe he should have.)

On delegate counts; and ignoring them:

March 4 signaled a turning point in the Democratic race. Not because Clinton put together an impressive set of wins and closed the gap between her and Obama, but because that was the day the pundits forgot about the delegate count.

By all accounts, Hillary netted less than ten delegates on Super-de-duper Tuesday-bowl-mania, but somebody forgot to alert cable news. Obama has more than made up that ground by winning Wyoming and Mississippi as well as gaining some of Edwards' Iowa delegates. Obama's increased his lead since March 3.

Yet, if the actual state of the race hasn't changed, the narrative sure has. But given that the delegates are awarded proportionally and that Clinton would have to win every remaining state by preposterous margins, it's glaringly obvious that she can't catch Obama short of a riot-inciting convention battle.

Will someone please alert the MSM to pay attention to how the delegates are counted and divided up. It's kind of important to your narrative, even if it doesn't sell as well as a soap opera.

Eliot Spitzer redux:

As expected, opinion as to the significance of private affairs on public office is trending on party lines. Clinching the achievement of farce, David Vitter goes as far as to say that he and Spitzer do not share similar tales.

"I have made a very serious mistake a long time ago and I have to live with that every day," Vitter said, according to Jordan's account. "That's not a flippant statement. I need to spend my whole life making up for that." According to Jordan, Vitter turned "a bit defiant" and added: "Anybody who looks at the two cases will see there is an enormous difference between the two of them. The people that are trying to draw comparisons to the two cases are people who've never agreed with me on important issues like immigration and other things."

What, exactly, the differences are, no one knows. Well, besides the fact that Spitzer resigned and Vitter still serves, even having the cajones to add an abstinence-only clause into an African AIDS relief package. For those scoring at home, that's David Vitter: 2, logic: 0.

On the coverage: Please, no more pontificating on what drives a man to cheat. Ask a 15-year-old and move on with it. Coming to the right conclusion doesn't require a committee.

Sphere: Related Content