[quote name='bmulligan']Statute of limitations on prostitution is probably five years. Then there's the burden of proof that a crime actually took place. Dates and times and participants all have to be recorded as facts, which probably don't exist. Admitting to an encounter with a prostitute in 1990 and your phone # showing up on a pimps phone record isn't quite enough to warrant a criminal prosecution. Unless, of course, he lied while under oath to a grand jury about the behavior.[/QUOTE]
I'm sure Palfrey is *more* than happy to, what do you Americans call it - 'plea bargain'?
As far as admittance, here's the by line from FOX News: "NEW ORLEANS — Louisiana Sen. David Vitter apologized again Monday to constituents and friends for his connection to an alleged prostitution ring in Washington, D.C., but said he's been to church and marriage counseling and has received forgiveness from God and his wife."
Now, he didn't ask for forgiveness from God and his wife because he was playing Yahtzee with Palfrey and her 'employees.' I think that's a safe assumption.
Also, sure, you are correct that reveling in other people's falling short of an ideal is improper form. However, the aspect of hypocrisy must not be ignored in the slightest (not because it is delicious - though it is - but because it reminds us what an imperfect ideal "family values" is, because it reminds us that we should be skeptical of everyone elected to office, and because we should be wary of those who try to impose moral values at the individual level on politics, generally speaking).
However, a true person who apologizes would do so upon the occurrence of the act, and NOT after the public revelation of the fact. He apologized not because he is sorry, but because he was caught. You might (rightly) say that makes him remarkably similar to other politicians. Nevertheless, this, of course, is a cynical slogan that one would use to allow politicians to abuse their power and exist as hypocrites. It is a defeatist attitude that allows for unchecked use of power, because, since all politicians do this or that, we might as well let them get away with it.
Like Mark Foley, this man is yet another Republican politician that exposes the moral and sexual hypocrisy about the Republican party. Should we look to someone else for moral guidance and family values? Perhaps Newt Gingrich, who delivered divorce papers to his wife while she was in the hospital for major surgery, and eventually maried the intern he was having an affair with (all during the Clinton scandal, mind you)? Perhaps Rudy Giuliani, who has had more wives than anyone else in Washington? Should we trust his word? I bet his ex-wives have contrary opinions of his vows and promises.
Look, I know you're the kind of person who struggles to identify patterns in society, but how many Republicans have to be exposed for not living up to the "moral" standards they espouse before you realize that they are as morally corrupt as they are financially?
EDIT: Before I forget, Clinton was impeached (although he did not resign from office due to being "morally unfit for office," as suggested by the then-
ing-prostitutes Mark Vitter). In addition, let me make this perfectly clear:
HE WAS ACQUITTED; GET OVER IT.
Man, if I had a ruble for every time you knee-jerk
s bring up Clinton, I'd make Microsoft look like
in' paupers.
