Because when I heard about Sen. Vitter’s last night, I KNEW Tim would have a post up by 7 AM.
And in Sen. Vitter’s defense, his was a true act of patriotism. He has just chosen to destroy marriage before teh gays get it.
by John Cole| 29 Comments
This post is in: Previous Site Maintenance, Republican Stupidity, General Stupidity
Because when I heard about Sen. Vitter’s last night, I KNEW Tim would have a post up by 7 AM.
And in Sen. Vitter’s defense, his was a true act of patriotism. He has just chosen to destroy marriage before teh gays get it.
Comments are closed.
Zifnab
His marriage is only going down in flames due to a calculated scorched earth policy!
c. mohr
Sen. Vitters is from Louisiana, about which its ex-Gov Edwin Edwards once famously observed:
“the only way a politician in Louisiana is going to get in trouble for sex is to get caught in bed with a live boy or a dead girl”.
OTOH, ex-Gov Edwards didn’t make any pretense of adhering to any virtuous “family values” sort of sexual morality beyond perhaps refusing to sleep with any woman he hadn’t met :=)
Nash
If we (The Not-John) created Sheehan and she is, you know, to be worn around “our” neck for all eternity and beyond because of your say-so and there is no statute of limitations or get out of jail pass, shouldn’t you similarly have to wear Vitters for all eternity, John?
After all, Thomas Jefferson kept slaves!
Then again…
The built-in weakness of the “hypocrisy” card I’m playing, even as in jest here, is that it is almost always misdirected. The “hypocrisy” card is curiously ineffective for those who have no ability to feel shame or regret or even simple honesty. Much to my rhetorical regret, you have, and so my playing the card is really for nothing but snarkish effect and in order to hear myself speak.
But this last is a serious comment: I fully agree with your comments about Sheehan. However, I’ve a sincere warning to make. It’s a very short trip from calling them like you see them to the Broderesque “a pox on both your houses” to being a concern troll. Or maybe concern troll comes in between. I get so confused these days.
Isn’t it much worse to be a concern troll than a hypocrite? Aren’t there federal guidelines on this?
Okay, maybe it wasn’t so serious.
Faux News
Funny thing about teh Gay Marriage destroying marriages of heterosexuals: of the several hetero couples I know who marriages failed they all were due to financial problems and/or adultery and/or “irreconcilable differences”. Every time I asked them if it was because of Lesbians (the nice ones, not the dyke gang members who scare Bill OReilly) getting married in Provincetown, all my friends just laughed and said “no”. I’m sure if Vitter’s marriage fails it’s because of Gay marriage, not because he paid some Leather Vixen to whip his ass because he had been naughty.
Tim F.
Yeah, like you were going to let the Sheehan story go unmentioned, mister pot.
Nash
See? Teh gays’ invidious campaign to destroy heterosexual marriage and other orthodoxies is so deviously effective that they completely fool even you, faux.
Are your marriage certificates are belong to them. The end is nigh.
ET
c. mohr – thanks for that quote it brings back the old days and is still true today – in LA. Can’t say I am at all surprised that a LA politician would get caught up in this little drama, I miss my home state sometimes. It always seems to provide some political entertainment.
Paul L.
As a rightwinger hack (as labeled here), I should be defending Sen Vitters.
I should use the LA times Tim Rutten as a template.
However I find this funny.
David Vitter’s Wife During Lewinsky Scandal: I Wouldn’t Be Forgiving Like Hillary
ThymeZone
Or as we call it, the Kiss of Death.
demimondian
Deal Mr L.: We regret to inform you that your designated “right-wing hack with weak jackalopes” position has been occupied by the true master of weak right-wing jackalopes: don surber himself. As such, we have no current need for your jackalope release services.
We look forward to future opportunities to work with you, however, and, you can be sure, will be in contact if we find ourselves without a weak and sickly jackalope release service in the future.
Sincerely yours,
demi “clippy” modian
ThymeZone
Look, how am I supposed to attack you relentlessly if you keep writing funny material?
I thought our agreement was, you write the concern troll stuff, and I come in with the flames and the jokes?
Dammit. Is there a new bargaining agreement in effect and nobody told me?
Dreggas
LOL.
Andrew
Yeah, we’re all going to have to submit to bi-annual drug testing, and Gene Upshaw is refusing to pay medical benefits to retired posters.
ThymeZone
Already I have scars all over my index fingers from all this typing and the surgeries!
The horror! I shoulda played football after all.
Pb
What’s this, truth in advertising? You’re slipping!
Yeah, I thought that was hilarious… good luck, Mr. Vitter!
The Other Steve
Who? I’m serious. Who?
Oh MY GOD!
The nerve of that man, caring for his children! Doesn’t he know that this country has no room for men who care for children!
BTW, didn’t the LA Times endorse Richard Nixon for President? It’s always been a fairly conservative newspaper.
Chad N. Freude
Dude, you are so out of touch. The Times hasn’t endorsed a presidential candidate since Nixon, and accorsing to the (“alternative” newspaper) LA Weekly, the Times has undergone a “leftward evolution in the years since [the ’70s]”. (It has endorsed Schwarzenneger for Gov.) It fairly consistently takes liberal editorial positions.
On local politics, it appears to be inconsistent in deciding who gets what kind of coverage. There’s the covering-up noted by Rutten, but they have gone after the lying, law-breaking (but apparently fidelitous) city attorney with a zeal that could be characterized as more than necessary.
The thing with Mayor Hahn was legit. He put personally taking care of his kids ahead of running the city, which may be a fine thing but is not helpful to the other 3694820 residents of the city. (He was a lousy mayor regardless),
Chad N. Freude
I’m so embarrassed.
Paul L.
You should refer to the dog trainer category of patterico.com
Chad N. Freude
Paul L –
On the Patterico website, under the headline
it says
That paragraph (and the entire story) do not allege what the headline claims. The “1991 document and several people familiar with the matter” are making the allegation. The Times is reporting what the sources are alleging. The paper itself is not alleging anything. (The entire Times story, by the way, reports on the statements of both sides and seems to give all of the he-said she-said one could wish.) Patterico’s headline is an allegation that is falsified by the story he quotes.
Tulkinghorn
Actually, here in Mass. we managed to have a gay divorce before our first gay marriage, so Vitters was just getting ahead of himself. It is that urge to vigilantism that bring them down every time.
Paul L.
“Facts” disappearing without a trace from LAT bombshell on Fred’s abortion lobbying; Update: Sununu rips ABC reporter over Fred lobbying story
ConservativelyLiberal
Eh, I whupped Tim last night in posting about this here in another thread.
Slowpoke…
Heh, heh… Slow Poke…
Chad N. Freude
Paul L –
Aside from the entertainment value of the Hot Air posting (which diminishes with its length), what is the point? The microscopic parsing of the wording of fragments of sentences and the blinding revelation of an editorial policy that the word pro-life is more offensive to some readers than the word antiabortion is to other readers proves … what?
And… is there any significance to Sununu’s response to the question about Thompson meeting with his staff? Many words, much anger, but no “yes”, no “no”, no “maybe”, no “I don’t know”. Is there a possibility that the angry attack on the questioner is meant to distract the audience from noticing that he’s not answering the question? Do you know whether Thompson met with Sununu’s staff? Do you think that the answer is irrelevant? Are you selective about the points you choose to address?
Just curious.
demimondian
Dear Mr. L:
Thank you for your expressed interest in supplying us with weak and infirm jackalopes. We are very interested in the samples you sent us regarding alleged modifications of an article about Sen. Fred Thompson and his duplicitous conduct about his past support for abortion rights. The jackalope you provided was truly remarkably weak and decrepit, yet it’s death throes nevertheless attracted several potential marks. Truly, a fine specimen.
As we have said, however, we currently have a supplier who appears to meet our needs. The stunningly poor health of your jackalopes has, indeed, caught our eye, however, and we would be interested in your forwarding us a price quote for a two-week supply. If your rates are sufficiently favorable, we might consider adding a second supplier.
Sincerely your,
demi “clippy” mondian
jake
Obviously human being = Republican in Hatch’s dictionary.
numbskull
I don’t care if Vetter had sex with a box turtle, as long as the turtle consented, but is it that prostitution is legal in D.C. and LA? It appears that Vetter broke the law several times and in several places.
Have charges been brought against Vetter? If not, why not?
ConservativelyLiberal
IOKIYAR…
HunterBlackLuna
Charges? Against a Republican?! If a Democrat even THINKS you want him to follow the wishes of the anti-republican majority, he pulls out of the entire debate faster than our troops ought to get out of Iraq.