Bush blows $1 Billion on anti-sex campaign

[fable]

For myself, I don't think it's anybody's business what they do in private, as long as they don't hurt someone--and as long as their private behavior doesn't contradict their public behavior while they're holding public office.

Tobias clearly fits that category. At least he had sufficient sense of shame to resign. Gonzales has none, but serves under the pleasure of the President, since there is no constitutional provision for "cabinets." Consequently, he can continue to make a mockery of his office while doing great damage to the DoJ that's under his purview.

It wouldn't surprise me if after Bush left office, some of the better governmental lawyers in the US began vetting ideas for placing the cabinet under some sort of Congressional oversight.

[Chanak]

I agree that their sexual behavior in private life should essentially be their own business...unless, as fable points out, they make sexual issues prominent in their public behavior and policy making, as members of this administration and the "conservative" crowd are prone to do.

Really...which would appear more dishonest and scurrilous: a lawmaker who supports the legalization of prostitution using a "call girl" service, or one who takes a stand on "family values," speaking against extra-marital sex, abstinence as the answer for teenage pregnancy and AIDS prevention, etc, using a "call girl" service? Of particular concern are how these individuals wish to invade the private lives of all Americans, turning their rhetoric into law. When they are exposed doing things that fly in the face of their "official" platform, it merely exposes them as the hypocrites they truly are, and people who cannot be trusted one whit. To condemn others publically regarding their private lives, and then engage in activities that earned their public condemnation, is to place oneself in a dangerous position. They'll be judged as they judge others. Not a religious truism, just a truism in general.

[fable]

The right-wing of the Republican party is still playing the "we're more pure than anybody else" card, so perhaps this will prove effective against a larger field of players than might otherwise prove the case. I'm thinking of several comparable instances in John Major's cabinet: most spectucularly, Tim Yeo, Minister for the Environment and Countyside, who had to resign after creating a child out of wedlock with a Tory councillor, Julia Stent, and Stephen Milligan, Tory member of Parliament who was found dead from auto-erotic asphyxiation, after having first dressed as a woman and tied himself up. When a Prime Minister makes claims to superior moral fiber for his party, this kind of thing tends to take off the edge. As much can be said of some of the theo-conservatives, are they're now called. I wonder if any will show up in that call madam's ("Pamela Martin & Associates") list.

[fable]

Just a note that Tobias's own department as Global AIDs Coordinator was at an all-time low for morale during his tenure. Bush and Rice may have "loved him," as the Washington Post reported, but a December 2006 poll (sample: 386 US AID foreign service officers) noted that only "21 percent thought Tobias had been doing a good job in getting resources for the agency and its workers.” Literally none of the 368 workers felt morale was "excellent," and only 12% thought it was "good." 68% said conditions at the agency had worsened; only 6% thought it was improving. So he wasn't merely hypcritical. His incompetence is also in the time-honored tradition of this administration.

But hey, he did force his employees to insist that any U.S.-based group receiving anti-AIDS funds take an anti-prostitution “loyalty oath,” and that's the important thing, right?

[Chanak]

I think it's important to point out the form of hypocracy we are seeing here. It's foolish to presume that anyone is immune to being hypocritical. However, when it comes from a group of individuals who publically condemn the very behaviors they are guilty of doing, regularly defame others for their lack of "morals," disdain for "traditional family values," and so on, it sticks out like a sore thumb. When they turn their crusades into publically funded policy as the Bush administration and their supporters have done, it borders on the criminal. That is where my own outrage stems from. I personally could care less if someone uses a "call service." I'll publically state that as well.

Can the same be said of the self-righteous syncophants? I don't think so. I foster no disdain nor outrage towards any politican or bureaucrat who isn't on the "moral bandwagon" if any of their personal business in this vein comes to light. That's the point. They have nothing to worry about. The self-righteous have a great deal to be worried about, however.