Video: Vitter’s wife stands by her man
posted at 6:56 pm on July 16, 2007 by Allahpundit
Share on Facebook | printer-friendly
They finally surfaced this afternoon in Metairie after a run-in with the paparazzi yesterday — at church. He’s not going to be vice president or, perhaps, even a senator for much longer, but it sounds like he’s not going to be divorced — or de-schwanzed — either. Small mercies, etc.
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Blowback
Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.
Trackbacks/Pings
Trackback URL
Comments
Comment pages:
Why would this cause him to resign? It’s not like he did it in the Capitol rotunda (that we know of at least).
SouthernGent on July 16, 2007 at 7:07 PM
Why give the media any statements ? They’ll just bash
you over the head with it and declare themselves oh ! ! so
needing to know and analyze
Texyank on July 16, 2007 at 7:10 PM
A great and amusing column from Mac Johnson on Vitter here. Heterophobia feared indeed!
MT on July 16, 2007 at 7:12 PM
I got the feeling they wanted to do a smackdown on the media…and I don’t blame them. I believe he will get re-elected. Everything you have been hearing lately about this subject surfaced when he first ran for office. It’s old news.
lsutiger on July 16, 2007 at 7:13 PM
lsutiger
I am with you on that. I think to speak was to make them (the media) go away. With him going back to Washington, so will the media. She wanted to get in some jabs to say how salacious they have been.
The church was the last straw I think. It was time to make them go away.
I think she wears the pants in that family, not that that is bad.
WoosterOh on July 16, 2007 at 7:26 PM
I saw an article some time ago where she was interviewed around the time that Clinton was in all his “Monica troubles” and she said that if her husband ever cheated on her she would do what Lorene Bobbitt (spl?) did.
I guess that she was all show and no
go!Sad what some women will put up with.
MB4 on July 16, 2007 at 7:29 PM
Thanks MT – good on Mac Johnson.
Hillary ClintonWendy Vitter stands by her man. Globe and media keep spinning.Entelechy on July 16, 2007 at 7:30 PM
DRAT!
I guess that she was all show and no
cutgo!Sad what some women will put up with.
MB4 on July 16, 2007 at 7:31 PM
The media, the lefties and the righties better watch those 46 lbs of the D.C. Madam’s (not Nancy Pelosi’s) phone records. Probably loaded with ‘treasures’ none would like discovered. It’s goin’ to be a looong hot summer.
Entelechy on July 16, 2007 at 7:35 PM
Some bored soul really ought to coin a “Godwin’s law” for mentions of the name “Bill Clinton” in any discussion involving adultery.
tad on July 16, 2007 at 7:45 PM
Whoops! Sorry! I thought this was the Augusto Pinochet thread.
*slinks away*
RushBaby on July 16, 2007 at 7:47 PM
Wait a minute. When Clinton had his extra-marrital affair didn’t the liberal media say it was a private matter?
boomer on July 16, 2007 at 7:54 PM
Saw it live down here in New Orleans.
If I were in the media I wouldn’t want to mess with his wife!
Seriously though, this is a story because Senator Vitter made such a big deal of chastising Clinton for screwing the interns. In short he was done in by his own hypocrisy. Barney Frank had a freakin’ gay brothel running out of his home and he walked away scot free because the Democrat Party has learned that you can’t be called a hypocrite when you embrace the darkest aspects of the American soul as part of your moral platform and core values.
The story that hasn’t been really covered is that Vitter’s press conference has ticked off many Republicans. Today Bobby Jindal is officially announcing his candidacy for Governor. He has spent the day flying all over the state for rallies. Vitter chose the very moment that Jindal was returning to Baton Rouge to “make it official” to hold this press conference.
P.S. Jindal holds Vitter’s old Congressional seat so it isn’t like they don’t talk.
highhopes on July 16, 2007 at 8:00 PM
That pitiful, benighted woman…
Enrique on July 16, 2007 at 8:03 PM
highhopes, I agree, the timing was just wrong. That said, if he runs again, I’ll vote for him again. The key issue for me was that this week was not the first time his wife learned about this – he dropped out of the governor’s race in 2002, confessed it to her, and they got into marriage counseling way back then. This is old, old, news. And Jindal is going to win in any event, unless somebody catches him in a diaper on Bourbon Street.
Laura on July 16, 2007 at 8:17 PM
All Vitter has to do is hang around until Bobby Jindal is sworn in as governor, then resign. But he better not wait long after that. Seriously, Vitter should resign within 48 hours of Jindal’s inauguration.
Ali-Bubba on July 16, 2007 at 8:28 PM
BTW, I really hate politicians with zipper problems — their power is derivative, and the people didn’t elect them to office so that they could use the office for their own sexual gratification.
Ali-Bubba on July 16, 2007 at 8:29 PM
Mrs Vitter,
Dump him. Take his cash. Take his car. Take 1/2 his future earnings. Your hubby is a creep. I don’t care if he begs, pleads, and bribes……..kick his butt to the curb.
Limerick on July 16, 2007 at 8:34 PM
I did have to hear on NBC and CBS how Vitter is “one of the most conservative members of congress” which was retarded
Defector01 on July 16, 2007 at 8:47 PM
Heard the press conference on WWL radio (New Orleans) this afternoon on the way home. I don’t think that there really is anymore to be said. The clip misses some important parts of the statement by Vitter.
Later on WWL the normal sports show had all callers talking about Vitter. I would say that it was easily 10 to 1 in support. At that, some of those not supportive of him admitted that he could possibly win their support with his future actions.
If only Clinton had handled the Lewsinski issue like this there would have been no lying under oath and no impeachment.
Of course, Vitter is very very wrong for his actions, he admits this readily. To all those who held him on a pedestal, he does have feet of clay, they got wet, and he fell off of the pedestal.
I am sure glad that Vitter was there on the floor debating the immigartion bill.
I am sure glad that Vitter was at Louisiana Office of Emergency Preparedness after Katrina. I was there to witness some of the goings on. The other senator was walking around, or standing still, as if she was in a drug induced (haldol or thorazine) zombie like state. Vitter was working and working hard like a doctor in an emergency room.
Kermit on July 16, 2007 at 8:49 PM
She calls him her best friend. Best friends don’t go f-ing around behind their best friends backs. You can’t call cheating a moment of weakness, when you know what you’re doing the minute you unzip your fly.
Once a cheater, always a cheater. He’d probably f’ed his country if given a chance. I don’t care which party – it’s inexcusable.
Kini on July 16, 2007 at 8:52 PM
So basically, none of y’all care that this happened five years ago and as far as anyone knows, not since? It’s completely irrelevant to you that he voluntarily confessed it, took a break from politics and presumably made amends years ago?
That’s a pretty high standard you have there. Good luck with that.
Laura on July 16, 2007 at 9:02 PM
It IS inexcusable, as Kini notes above me. I applaud the people here who are consistent in their beliefs on this matter. At the beginning of this thread, there appeared to be a number of people stating the, “what’s the big deal” opinion about this. Unfortunately, had this been a Democratic Senator, all those same people would have been calling that Senator a sleazebag.
People, let’s try to be consistent. And I applaud those on this board who are.
asc85 on July 16, 2007 at 9:02 PM
Oh, grow up.
She can call whoever she wants her best friend and she can forgive whoever she wants.
It can’t be excused? Ever?
No one who has ever had an affair can ever be rehabilitated.
Very Christian attitude of you. Let him who is without sin cast the first stone.
Christoph on July 16, 2007 at 9:03 PM
Hear, hear.
Christoph on July 16, 2007 at 9:07 PM
He won’t get my vote again. He postured so well about Bob Livingston and Clinton in 1998 and 1999, the very year he was committing whatever “sin” his wife forgave him for.
Many were quick to criticize Jese Jackson for carrying on an affair while at the same time “counseling” Clinton during the impeachment proceedings and he (Jackson) was not even an elected official, so his personal life should have been left alone. A liar is a liar no matter what the political party. The Clintons were criticized for their hypocrisy and the Vitters deserve no less. Excuses along the lines of “well the Clintons lied about everything” are weak. Pick a better reason that he should be given a pass.
If he was involved with a prostitute he broke a law, period. Doesn’t quite square with his hype about illegal immigrants being lawbreakers.
He lied about this, what else has he lied about?
Parse the words – call the two different types of crimes, I don’t care.
Had this been a Democrat (and may very well be depending on whose names come out on the “list”) would the Republicans been nearly as philosophical and willing to make excuses for them or would the bonfires have been lit with calls for their resignation?
There is no rule saying he must resign and I’d rather leave it to the voters of Louisiana to decide his fate in 2010. May not be the result I’d prefer but the people responsible for his employment will get their chance.
But seeing the Republicans rally around Vitter gives Hillary the very protection she needs when the criticisms about her “staying by her man” go into full bore during a general election. She can simply reply “This criticism from the party who just recently flip flopped regarding Vitter?” Not my sentiment but you can bet she will be prepared.
Accountability – supposed to be the hallmark of the GOP.
Bradky on July 16, 2007 at 9:33 PM
Republicans don’t have to wear hair shirts, either. Let his voters decide.
Stormy70 on July 16, 2007 at 9:38 PM
mjkazee on July 16, 2007 at 9:40 PM
Can you please give me an example where it CAN be excused?
The only ones I can think of is if he had a choice between murdering someone, raping someone, molesting a child, or having sex with a prostitute…well then I suppose I could excuse him.
Other than that…
asc85 on July 16, 2007 at 9:40 PM
oh oh.
Not old enough to remember T Kennedys antics in Fla?
mjkazee on July 16, 2007 at 9:41 PM
So, you’re all (well, not all but most) saying if you ever really screw up, you can never learn from it and move on? Then why the heck do we ever let anyone out of prison? Once a criminal always always a criminal? We have the ability to change and grow. And yes, if it were a dem I’d say the same thing.
I think those taking the “but what about MORALS?” highroad forget that the only pure person to walk the earth was Christ. He came to show us just how flawed we are and that if we wanted to change, it was within us to do it.
JackieK on July 16, 2007 at 9:42 PM
For the great work that Vitter did against the surrender of US sovereignty, he deserves a few hookers. I prefer that my politicians get their needs filled by professionals, rather than feeding on those around them. Any problems are between Vitter and his wife.
I do have problems with the blackmail angle, but politicians who have affairs with amateurs are more open to blackmail than those who go to hookers.
progressoverpeace on July 16, 2007 at 9:42 PM
This evidently took place outside of the office and off public grounds. That makes it a private deal to be dealt with between him and his wife. Do I approve, No. But it is not anyone else’s business. She forgave him and that is all that is needed. I guess he can be thankful he is not married to some of you.
mjkazee on July 16, 2007 at 9:46 PM
The more the left squeals on this, the more I like this guy. Good on his wife. What would I do in her place? The same. He didn’t rape someone, like Clinton. AND she is NOT blaming “a vast left wing conspiracy” that he visited hookers. If Barney Frank, Keith Ellison, Jefferson, et al can stay in office, he can too. The difference here to me is that he came forward, a Dem wouldn’t. Conceal, blame others, bully, and close ranks is their motto. Let the voters decide on his fate.
CrimsonFisted on July 16, 2007 at 9:50 PM
No but they could just as easily be quiet and let Vitter speak for himself.
And the woman who ran the operation faces jail time – an illegal act occurred. Has nothing to do with public or private grounds.
Bradky on July 16, 2007 at 9:53 PM
Clinton was alleged to have raped someone – he was never charged, much less convicted. Same as with Kennedy and Mary Jo Kopechne.
Personal opinion is that behavior of both cried injustice but the fact is that they were not charged or convicted of a crime and using those as the normal reaction when a Republican gets caught doing something is disingenuous.
Bradky on July 16, 2007 at 9:55 PM
I doubt that I’m social liberal, perhaps something more like a social moderate. But I strongly object to the idea that the Democratic Party or people like me have embraced the worst part of American culture. I find it exceeding unlikely that the huge bulk of Democrat think going to a prostitute is fine and and dandy.
What we do think is that we should just keep quiet about this. What we do think is it that is more than a little bit creepy to throw someone in stocks for information that never should have been revealed. What we do think is that America would have been better off with the Clinton impeachment and the resulting time wasting sideshow if they Democrats try to impeach George W.
I feel the pain of Hilary Clinton and Wendy Vitter, and I certainly think neither is a stupid woman. Can’t we be a little less voyeuristic? Can’t be a little less bitter old church ladies?
thuja on July 16, 2007 at 10:01 PM
Vitter wasn’t caught but announced before he outed, so to speak. Just because Clinton and Kennedy were not charged, doesn’t mean I cannot use the accusation of rape (or murder), that is very credible, to compare it to someone who visits hookers, is fair. Barney Frank ran a gay prostitution ring out of his office and still keeps his job. That is also a fair comparison.
My point was, Mrs Vitter did not blame everyone else in the world for her husband’s behavior, like Hillary did. Bill (and herself) were NEVER to blame in her view, everyone else was. Big difference.
CrimsonFisted on July 16, 2007 at 10:05 PM
Other people’s bad behavior doesn’t excuse our own – I don’t think that’s really up for debate here anyway. Vitter cheated, Vitter lied about cheating, Vitter regretted it, dropped out of the governor’s race, confessed to his wife, and got marriage counseling five years ago.
Personally I don’t see the need to draw and quarter him for it. If he had NOT resolved this issue on his own years ago without being forced to, IF IT WAS CURRENTLY GOING ON, then I would have a lot more to say about it. But he did. I’m not going to see a Democrat put in that spot because of something Vitter repented of a long time ago, especially given Vitter’s correct positions on immigration and the war. If it was current, or if it happens again, then I couldn’t give him my vote. But as it stands now, I’m going to give him another chance. He’s earned it.
Laura on July 16, 2007 at 10:16 PM
I can’t imagine paying for it. And my wife would likely string me up by my innards if I pulled a Vitter.
But is it possible that his marriage was in a rough patch? Is it possible that he was not being satiated at home? Would it have been better if he had an actual affair of the heart wherein he professed his love to another woman and broke up his family?
I don’t know. I’m asking.
Some men are pigs. Some men are dogs. But many a good man has been married to a cold woman. Some just endure bad marriage despite their own unhappiness. That does NOT seem to be the case here, but I hear a whole lot of moral certainty from apparently infallible perfectionists.
I’m selling discounted stones to residents at the Glass House Condominium Complex.
The Race Card on July 16, 2007 at 10:23 PM
asc85:
He did have sex with a prostitute.
At any rate, your sense of forgiveness is very limited.
So no one who has ever had an affair should be forgiven, ever?
What a lovely society that would be. Should we merely stone our doctors, police officers, soldiers, politicians, bankers, bakers, and hairdressers who may have had an affair or should they simply spend their lives in complete loneliness being despised by everyone?
Vitter did a bad thing. Kudos to his wife for having the moral courage to forgive him and I wish them both well from here-on out.
Christoph on July 16, 2007 at 10:29 PM
It’s tells me a lot about your character, Christoph. Or does marriage mean anything anymore? You take a vow in marriage for Christ’s sake. So, NO, it can NOT be excused. Forgiveness is another thing. So not to be confused by the difference, A Christian attitude is to forgive the sin, but it doesn’t excuse the sin. There are consequences to the actions you decide and cheating on your partner tells quite a bit about your character. Since you don’t know the difference between a couple of dogs doing it in the middle of the road and two humans who can control themselves, I suggest you search your feelings the next time someone cheats on you. So take your holy’er than thou attitude and pick up a stone.
Kini on July 16, 2007 at 10:42 PM
That is hilarious coming from you, Kini.
Mrs. Vitter obviously believes it means something. She fought hard to save hers.
Mr. Vitter, I’m sure, begged for forgiveness and sought counselling.
You should look at your own holier than thou attitude.
Christoph on July 16, 2007 at 11:07 PM
Laura,
“This is old, old, news. And Jindal is going to win in any event, unless somebody catches him in a diaper on Bourbon Street.”
The Vitters are doing all the things the Clintons should have done. This will be a dead story UNLESS the categorical denials of connection to the New Orleans whores can be refuted.
As to Jindal, I don’t share your optimism. I’ve heard far too many people in the northern parts of Louisiana state that they won’t vote for Jindal because of his skin color/heritage. I’m guessing these are isolated bigots but what worries me is that too many people are acting as if his eventual election is preordained. Bobby (who I like a lot and am a strong supporter) has yet to come out on the issues that matter when one is governor.
I spent the weekend along the Gulf Coast in Mississippi. Just as devestated as the section of the upper 9th where I work but an utterly different vibe. I want a governor and mayor who are part of the solution! God help us if C. Ray actually wins is soon-to-be-announced run against Jindal.
highhopes on July 16, 2007 at 11:12 PM
Bradky,
So you aren’t a Vitter fan. What about the fact that he made his statements at the same time Bobby Jindal was arriving for the big finish to his announcement tour. Do you think it intentional or coincidental? More importantly, do you think Jindal has support in Northern Louisiana? I’m not getting a good vibe about GOP support for somebody that doesn’t look like any other “Bobby” in the state.
highhopes on July 16, 2007 at 11:17 PM
This dickhead should resign. Banging whores? Have some shame, dude.
Unlike Democrats, we conservatives do make judgements on right and wrong.
Zach on July 16, 2007 at 11:22 PM
Vitter needs to resign. Banging whores? Have some shame, dude.
Unlike Democrats, conservatives do make judgments about right and wrong.
Zach on July 16, 2007 at 11:27 PM
I do very much so, now that I’m older and much wiser. I can finally ask myself “if I only knew what I know now”, what would I have done different.
If it were me, I would forever always be asking myself, “what is he doing when we’re not together”. You call that a marriage? There’s no trust anymore.
As I said, forgiveness is one thing, excusable it is not.
The act is done, the trust is gone.
It’s been said before, “fool me once shame on you”, I’ll leave you to ponder the rest.
Kini on July 16, 2007 at 11:38 PM
And another point Christoph . What diseases would he pass on to his wife? Can you forgive the little wart on your weenie?
Kini on July 16, 2007 at 11:41 PM
Dude,
Let’s understand the reality here. Louisiana is run by a “rat” who isn’t running for reelection because she did such a poor job with Katrina recovery. There is open speculation that she would appoint herself to fill out Vitter’s seat if he should resign. I doubt she’d actually do it but she would undoubtedly appoint a rabid “rat”- even C. Ray Nagin just to get that trainwreck out of the way in New Orleans.
Do really want to help cement the “rat” thin majority in the US Senate over a phone list from half a decade ago? I’m not asking you to change your opinions just to consider the consequences of them.
highhopes on July 16, 2007 at 11:44 PM
Do you have any proof that he has an STD and didn’t practice adequate sexual safeguards to prevent one?
You’re just malicious, whereas his wife is gracious.
I’m not saying I would forgive as she did… sadly, I might lack the ability… but I respect her for it and I don’t dis her for it as you do.
Christoph on July 16, 2007 at 11:53 PM
And yes, in fact, some people would rather be with the person they love, despite receiving a wart, than be with someone else.
Shockingly, there are people who would make that calculation.
In the extremely unlikely event the woman I love had AIDS or another serious disease, possibly as a result of a transfusion or similar, I would still love her and be with her.
I would take any reasonable precaution… but yes, my love would trump a damn wart.
Christoph on July 16, 2007 at 11:55 PM
Meanwhile, does anyone care for some frozen $000,000s?
Captain America on July 17, 2007 at 12:02 AM
From what I’ve read so far Jindal seems to be sitting pretty well in the election run. The Democrats are going to have to run without trying to get too close to the fact they supported Blanco.
Bradky on July 17, 2007 at 12:05 AM
Vitter announced because he found Larry Flynt was going to publish his name the next day – big difference from “fessing up”. In his news appearance today he refused to answer questions – act like a man and I’ll respect you as a man (directed at Vitter not you).
As to the examples you want to use that’s your choice of course. The problem is that it is almost like a litany you expect to hear anytime a Republican gets caught doing anything. Kennedy, Jackson, Jefferson, Sharpton, Tawana, blah blah blah. As a tactic it has failed to persuade moderate Democrats to switch positions or vote Republican. If anything, it has tended to make them more entrenched.
Like I said let the La voters make the call in 2010. He frequented a prostitute – hence he is lawbreaker, thus I can’t vote for him. Goose meet gander.
Bradky on July 17, 2007 at 12:11 AM
I couldn’t care less about Vitter’s career as a politician. Or the flippin balance of power in the Senate. But I see your point.
Zach on July 17, 2007 at 12:13 AM
No, but I don’t need to have proof that there might be a bullet in the chamber when I play Russian roulette in bed with a stranger.
You misplace spite with mistrust.
You logic is flawed. One is a choice for pleasure – the other to save a life and not a choice. You cannot equate sex with a stranger and a medical procedure to save a life. If you do, then, go ahead and be led around by that little man in your pants.
But since you believe it’s unchristian of me to think so, then I’ll leave you to deal with the consequences of ones actions. I do believe we humans were given a gift of common sense and clarity of thought. Which is why some believe we have souls and a conscience. The inner sense of what is right or wrong in one’s conduct or motives.
Kini on July 17, 2007 at 12:14 AM
And what will your position be if the claims of the New Orleans prostitutes turn out to be true? He denied all of that in 04 when he ran.
Bradky on July 17, 2007 at 12:14 AM
The ends justify the means? Isn’t that what the Democrats get accused of quite frequently?
Bradky on July 17, 2007 at 12:16 AM
His wife looks like more of a man that Vitter.
In the best sense.
More stable and more sensible.
Politicians tends to be ego-coddled and don’t like anyone stronger than them.
She may have just intimidated his infantile nature.
I’m sure she can do better.
profitsbeard on July 17, 2007 at 12:47 AM
bahahahah
This whole thing still cracks me up. She’s such a ‘I bring home the bacon and fry it up in the pan, right after I hit my husband upside the head with the pan if he betrays me’ tough-gal a few years ago, and now she’s ‘hit me, whip me, tell me that you love me, then get off my lawn!’
Politicians are such scumbags. They drag their familys through the mud when they get caught being scumbags like they’re being all chivalrous and living the Three Musketeers creed, then they cap it off by invoking the almighty and it’s all okee-dokee.
It’s disgusting how so many of the rich and powerful live their lives while dictating to us how we peons shall live ours… and as it happens in this case it’s the King of Scumbags at the bottom of the barrel that does him in too. Sweet irony.
Larry Flynt: Payback time! … go get em Larry
SilverStar830 on July 17, 2007 at 1:08 AM
(Watching the late edition)
God Bless Wendy Vitter and the Vitter Family.
now leave them alone.
Tru2my2 on July 17, 2007 at 1:48 AM
Kini,
Yes, and the vow includes “till death do us part,” not “till one person cheats.”
mikeyboss on July 17, 2007 at 9:17 AM
A woman with character and backbone…
MM, Ingraham, Murphy. Mrs. Vitter is in good company.
Senator Vitter may have learned a lot from this woman. Now, let’s zip it up and move on.
saved on July 17, 2007 at 9:26 AM
No, I’m fairly certain there’s malice in your tone. You sound like a woman who was scorned and unable to forgive.
It’s a tough thing to do. I personally know. But that doesn’t mean that it isn’t sometimes the right thing to do.
Personally, I don’t know if Mrs. Vitter has done the right thing or just the convenient thing. I do know she must be regretting her words about Hillary and now realizes the pain of being cheated on is compounded by the fact that you’ve been hurt by the very person you love the most. But only God can say if she did it out of love of for the reason Hillary “forgave” Bill all those times.
Esthier on July 17, 2007 at 9:36 AM
You’re right about the people upstate – for example in Jena, outside Alexandria, it’s 85% Repub, yet they overwhelmingly voted for Blanco against Jindal. But then, right now they’ve got felony charges against 6 black kids for a high school fight, where in the reverse situation several days earlier, (white kids beating up a black kid) only one charge of simple battery was filed, and has not been prosecuted in seven months. Black kids had a shotgun pulled on them in a convenience store parking lot, and when they disarmed the guy and ran to tell the cops, they were arrested for aggravated battery and theft of the gun. The white guy wasn’t charged. Evidently that’s just how they roll upstate, the racist b@$tards.
So yes, I agree Jindal has a problem upstate – it’s David Duke territory. On the other hand, if C Ray runs, Jindal gets the upstate vote because they’ll hate Nagin more, and loses about half the New Orleans vote. Still probably a Jindal victory, albeit a closer one. The key is to keep Boasso off the ticket; if so it’s a lock for Jindal.
Bradky, as I wrote at 10:16 PM, if it were currently going on, that would be a different story, especially because it would be a “second offense.” I would have to be very strongly against his opponent in order to vote for him again in that case; I would probably just stay home.
Laura on July 17, 2007 at 9:51 AM
These incidents tend to remind me of one of the more powerful (for me, at least) concepts in New Testament theology. That God will forgive us even for the things that we cannot forgive ourselves.
Jaibones on July 17, 2007 at 9:52 AM
Seeing hookers and wearing diapers? He’s an embarrassment. He needs to resign.
Blake on July 17, 2007 at 9:56 AM
I believe he was referring to a woman who he hasn’t yet met, not a woman who has cheated on him. I don’t know if you’re currently married or if you will ever be dating in the future, but if you will, then I sincerely hope you don’t expect any potential mates to have completely spotless pasts.
In fact, as you’ve shown here, one need not sleep with a stranger to wake up with an STD. If Mrs. Vitter did get one from her husband and decided to leave him, are you then arguing that she should be denied another love in the future?
Look, I believe in absolutes, but you’re seeing the world in too much black and white without looking at the human aspect.
Esthier on July 17, 2007 at 10:07 AM
I live in Louisiana and will vote for Vitter when he runs again in 4 years. I hope this incident has allowed him to grow as a politician and understand that morals are something for the church or you personally and not something that we should legislate. It would thus make him a better conservative in that he hopefully will understand the need to “leave us alone”. I know very few Louisiana politicians that don’t actively see prostitutes, unless they are gay. As to breaking the law, he broke a misdomenor. That is equivalent to speeding on the highway. This man has really done a good bit for the conservative cause and I hope he will continue to do so. I only wish that I knew how to get into that brothel.
davidcaskey on July 17, 2007 at 10:16 AM
Kini and Bradkey have done an excellent job in describing my feelings on this issue, so I will not further comment except to say that I KNOW Vitter had sex with a prostitute…I guess you didn’t understand the context of my original note.
asc85 on July 17, 2007 at 10:35 AM
Like Hillary, his wife is an idiot. Get rid of him, sooner than later. Since when have women become careless enought to allow themselves to become doormats in the public eye?
Diapers? hookers? Anyone who votes for him is irresponsible and a complete ideaologue, obviously.
AprilOrit on July 17, 2007 at 11:12 AM
Show me a perfect politician, please. Voting is all about making the best choice of the available field of candidates. A personal disgrace dating back half a decade does far less to disqualify him than the current behavior of many in Congress that directly affects our national security, personal liberty and our bank accounts. Is Vitter perfect? No indeed. But y’all need to quit acting like he’s the worst politician Congress has ever seen.
Laura on July 17, 2007 at 12:05 PM
This guy was rated 100% by the Christian Coalition for heaven sake. And he’s a liar to boot, than apologizes with no explanantion for his filthy behavior. You want to attack Liberals for the same behavior and then get caught with your hand in the same sorted cookie jar – well you end of looking like a horse’s ass, big time.
The college Republics are planning on protesting him and I hope they do.
You pay for whores while it office and engage in diapers and kink as a Christian candidate, well you will pay big time.
AprilOrit on July 17, 2007 at 12:15 PM
I don’t think it is an unreasonable belief that his behavior demonstrates a lack of judgment.
Blake on July 17, 2007 at 12:49 PM
As bad a lack of judgement as BCRA and shamnesty?
April, what explanation would satisfy you? What apology more than he’s given would suffice? Do you think back when he dropped out of the Gov. race in 2002, confessed to his wife and entered marriage counseling, he should have had a press conference and told all? What do you think the effect of that would have been on his family, and would it have been worth it?
Laura on July 17, 2007 at 1:27 PM
Inappropiate behavior of any kind does not belong in politics, period IMHO. I am sorry I just do not approve of his behavior, it’s inappropiate. I am glad he apologized but he needs to go.
We do not need our elected officals engaging in diaper tricks with paid trollops.
AprilOrit on July 17, 2007 at 2:46 PM
Of course. You pay for your actions while the Democrats don’t.
I honestly no longer see why Republicans should care at all about the indescretions of politicians. It ONLY hurts our side and has no impact on the Left.
You say we shouldn’t be hypocrits? Fine, let’s not bother with any of them Left or Right, after all, nothing happens to the Left when we show our worthless outrage and only bad happens to the Right as a party when we show it to our own side.
The Left doesn’t care when its people show a lack of moral character, even those who run as Christians.
The Left doesn’t even care about hypocrits who champion the causes they care about. After all, the biggest Global Warming people waste more carbon than any of us could dream of wasting even if we had a few hundred extra years to catch up.
So why should we care about any of this? It only serves to destroy our own party.
Esthier on July 17, 2007 at 2:51 PM
He should be forgiven by those who were wronged through his actions, after showing sincere remorse and repentance. He should also immediately resign public office and never seek election to such again. This is not an inconsistent position.
I don’t care how “good” of a politician somebody is. I don’t care if they have changed. They have destroyed their public trust by abusing their position to satisfy personal appetites, and that terminates their qualification to hold office, in my view.
Then again, I believe that adultery should still be an enforceable crime with appropriate penalties.
In my worldview, it does NOT hurt “our side” to castigate and penalize one of our own who is a moral failure, it strengthens us. The problem is when it is not done consistently. The Left is consistent, in that they don’t care what you’ve done, if you’re a D then you’re alright. So the “correct” thing to do is become that? Not a chance, thankyouverymuch.
Freelancer on July 17, 2007 at 3:10 PM
People need to butt out of his sex life and let Sen. Vitter do the work of the American people.
Where have I heard that before?
/sarcasm off/
freebird on July 17, 2007 at 3:57 PM
As Bill OReilly says, “One has nothing to do with the other. You cannot excuse bad bahavior by pointing to the bad behavior of others.”
What he did had nothing to do with the Democrats, it had to do with him and his bad judgement.
Democxrat candidates usually do not run on a moral platform, Republicans do. Thereofre, it’s a moot point.
AprilOrit on July 17, 2007 at 5:35 PM
I don’t understand this whole hypocrisy thing. I mostly don’t understand Republicans skewering there own candidates because of so-called “hypocrisy”. For all the “religious” Christian moralist, I recall a particular character saying forgive them for they know not what they do.
Let me get this straight: If as a child I stole something from the local grocery store, I can never say that stealing is wrong?
or…
If I got a DUI, I could never say that I think there should be laws against drunk driving?
What so interesting is the definition of hypocrit has now evolved to mean that a person who cannot in any way, shape, form, or fashion following his beliefs. From this logic, I think all of you Christians with this faith are forever doomed to go to hell. For one: you are incapable of forgive like the man you possess to believe in did. For second: you are NEVER going to be perfect. You will always be sinners. You lie, cheat, steal. You know in your hearts you do. Therefore, none of you have the right to cast the first stone. But that fact, you too are hypocrits. Show me the perfect person then maybe Jews are right and the Messiah hasn’t already come. Maybe I ought to be worshipping you.
By the way, I won’t wish that if you ever found yourself in the same position, you get trashed as a person like you so freely do this man. I pray that you’re wrongs go punished appropriate to the crime… no more, no less…
As for the Senator, I say that I find it an admirable quality that he confessed, asked his wife for forgiveness, and recommitted himself to his marriage, AND went to counseling. It’s a heck of a lot more respectable to, say, Antonio (last name outta change). That’s one that chairs Mrs. Clinton’s campaign out here. But she’s not hypocritical. Antonio never ran on ‘FAMILY VALUES’
Sultry Beauty on July 17, 2007 at 7:35 PM
By the way, President Clinton go in trouble because he lied under oath, not because he had an affair. People seem to always forget that fact.
Sultry Beauty on July 17, 2007 at 7:39 PM
I am not a Christian, I am a Jew aqnd I do not consider myself a moralist, but I have nothing but contempt and disdain for moralists who hold office and talk the talk but never walk the walk. And prove to be nothing but hypocrites.
Vitter had an absolute fit over Bill Clinton and guess what? He’s playing on the side big time. with dirty diapers no less.
There is nothing worse than a hypocrite in political office, plain and simple. They just are not trust-worthy.
AprilOrit on July 17, 2007 at 8:25 PM
Sorry… but that’s moralizing, my dear, whether you think you are or not. You are passing judgement on another human beings’ actions.
Being hypocritical about this as I see it would be if you could answer yes to the following questions: Does the state the Senator live in have laws forbiding adultery? Is adultery a legally punishable offense? Is the Senator requesting that adultery be outlawed? Is he wanting to pass laws that make it a legally punishable offense?
If he went after Pres. Clinton regarding his adultery, did he do it because he thought he “lied under oath” or he just committed adultery? And if he shamed Pres. Clinton for committing adultery, was it merely because he committed adultery or because he was truly unrepenting, never truly attempted to reconcil his behaviour, never stopped doing things that continued to embarrass his wife in public, or admitted that he did something wrong? As I see it, Senator Vitter may have committed adultery, but he admitted his wrong to the person he actually did harm to and made an honest attempt to rectify and correct his mistake. I don’t see Pres. Clinton doing any such thing.
I’m sorry but I feel that no poltican, no human being in fact, could meet your lofty, moralizing standards.
Sultry Beauty on July 17, 2007 at 10:09 PM
President Clinton is over, you are living in the past. The last time I checked President Clinton was not in office. You are making excuses because he is a Republican.
This has nothing to do with politics other than the fact that Vitter lied, he ran on a Conservative Christian platform and did not fulfill his moral promise.
If one is going to talk the talk they better walk the walk, or walk on out of the political picture, period.
AprilOrit on July 17, 2007 at 10:32 PM
Switch and bait. I didn’t bring up Pres. Clinton. You did. You used it to justify that Senator Vitter was a hypocrit. I responded to your commment to disprove your contention.
Stay on topic and please don’t accuse me of something I’m not guilty of doing. Your verging on hypocrit status yourself.
Sultry Beauty on July 17, 2007 at 11:38 PM
Comment pages: