In a letter to the editor of the Post Review, Robert Walz, wrote:
It is a bit strange that the party that promotes "family values," doesn’t walk its talk. Neither McCain nor his running mate, Sara [sic] Palin are good examples. McCain cheated on his first wife, obtained a marriage license for his second before his divorce was final, and then used her family wealth and connections to win a "safe" Republican seat in a state he had never lived in. Sara [sic] Palin, a former Catholic, like her daughter, was pregnant before she married (her first son was born less than nine months after she eloped).
Do they represent wholesome family values? Is the "shotgun" wedding for her 17-year old daughter in anyone’s best interest? How about the DUI her husband got?
This is typical Democrat rant about the Republican Party of family values being full of hypocrites who should not be in political office because they don’t practice family values which they preach. Let’s start to analyze Robert Walz’s reasoning.
Walz wants us to conclude that McCain and Palin are hypocrites because they talk about family values but don’t walk that talk. However, he doesn’t actually say that. Rather he says, "It is a bit strange that the party that promotes 'family values,' doesn’t walk its talk" (my emphasis). He implicates McCain and Palin by implicating the party—the political party is a hypocrite. This is the old "guilt by association" argument—a person is guilty because the party is guilty.
While McCain and Palin are guilty because the party is guilty, Walz knows the party is guilty because his two examples, McCain and Palin, are guilty. This is circular reasoning.
By his standard of guilt by association, Mr. Walz would be self-condemned. Consider, if Walz is a member of an organization that avows a certain standard of behavior and Walz does not act accordingly, then, by his own measuring stick, he too would be a hypocrite. I doubt he would like to be implicated personally on the basis of that organization’s failure to abide by its own standard.
Second, a person’s own stated standards are a measure by which a person should be judged. A person may be a hypocrite if she violates her own standards. Walz assumes Sarah Palin was pregnant prior to eloping (which he himself cannot prove). And he assumes that as a young person, she held the standard that premarital pregnancy is wrong. Only then can she be regarded as a hypocrite. Walz is claiming to know two pieces of information that he actually cannot know to be fact.
We do not need to excuse McCain’s or Palin’s behavior. However, we should identify Walz’s behavior for what it is. It is actually hypocritical of Walz to apply his two standards to others which he would hate to be applied to himself. By his own measure of guilt by association, he would certainly be a self-condemned hypocrite many times over.
And by his own measure of assumed personal standards, anyone could insist that Walz holds to a standard of personal behavior without proof and all departures from that assumed standard would be regarded as hypocritical.
None of us ever wants to be judged by the measures which Walz has condemned McCain and Palin and her daughter. Indeed, he would not either.
Walz wants us to conclude that McCain and Palin are hypocrites because they talk about family values but don’t walk that talk. However, he doesn’t actually say that. Rather he says, "It is a bit strange that the party that promotes 'family values,' doesn’t walk its talk" (my emphasis). He implicates McCain and Palin by implicating the party—the political party is a hypocrite. This is the old "guilt by association" argument—a person is guilty because the party is guilty.
While McCain and Palin are guilty because the party is guilty, Walz knows the party is guilty because his two examples, McCain and Palin, are guilty. This is circular reasoning.
By his standard of guilt by association, Mr. Walz would be self-condemned. Consider, if Walz is a member of an organization that avows a certain standard of behavior and Walz does not act accordingly, then, by his own measuring stick, he too would be a hypocrite. I doubt he would like to be implicated personally on the basis of that organization’s failure to abide by its own standard.
Second, a person’s own stated standards are a measure by which a person should be judged. A person may be a hypocrite if she violates her own standards. Walz assumes Sarah Palin was pregnant prior to eloping (which he himself cannot prove). And he assumes that as a young person, she held the standard that premarital pregnancy is wrong. Only then can she be regarded as a hypocrite. Walz is claiming to know two pieces of information that he actually cannot know to be fact.
We do not need to excuse McCain’s or Palin’s behavior. However, we should identify Walz’s behavior for what it is. It is actually hypocritical of Walz to apply his two standards to others which he would hate to be applied to himself. By his own measure of guilt by association, he would certainly be a self-condemned hypocrite many times over.
And by his own measure of assumed personal standards, anyone could insist that Walz holds to a standard of personal behavior without proof and all departures from that assumed standard would be regarded as hypocritical.
None of us ever wants to be judged by the measures which Walz has condemned McCain and Palin and her daughter. Indeed, he would not either.
8 comments:
Sorry, I take exception to your reference to Sarah Palin as "sic." She maybe, but I cannot confirm it. However, I can confirm that she was pregnant when she eloped. Check the dates and unless her first pregnancy was shorter than nine months, well the evidence is conclusive.
With respect to hypocrisy, McCain and Palin are your candidates. Your choice of them is a reflection on your values which certainly stand in contrast to your public positions. It is like McCain condemn lobbyists and then hiring them for your campaign.
I personally believe Palin is a distraction to draw attention away from McCain. She certainly is not qualified.
Too bad the Republican party has drifted away from the values of Lincoln and Elmer Anderson. Your ticket is truly a "McPain."
The best defense for a hypocrit, is to call someone else a hypocrit.
While I do understand and forgive others for their human fraility, should it be extended to organizations that claim to be holier than God.
All of this is a distraction to the failed policies of the Republican party that has brought us recession and a war without end. We have the worse unemployment in 25 years and infrastructure that is literally falling into the river.
We call this political accountability at election time. Prepared be held accountable.
To anonymous who commented at 12:22 pm:
Please note that [sic] is a Latin word. It is used to indicate a writer is reproducing a quote as it was originally written. I put [sic] in my quote to indicate that the original writer misspelled Sarah’s name as Sara. That Latin notation means I did not misspell Sarah’s name when I reproduced the quote. Also, it does not have any reference to her being sick.
You, yourself, cannot confirm Sarah Palin was pregnant when she eloped, just as I had stated that
Walz himself cannot know that to be fact. It may be a fact (I don’t know), but you cannot confirm it by the length of her pregnancy because she may have given birth early for any number of reasons. My point was that the writer assumed she was guilty without being able to prove her guilt. I am trying to keep Walz and you honest. He and you are assuming what you want to prove.
If in the end it is confirmed by someone who can bear witness that Sarah Palin was pregnant prior to marriage, it changes nothing what I wrote about hypocrisy.
Finally, by repeating your idea that McCain and Palin are hypocrites, you completely missed my point in writing about hypocrisy. Please go back and study what I wrote. Start with the last paragraph in my post and then follow what I said as I moved to that conclusion.
I do understand the Latin reference to "(sic)". I also know that Sarah Palin's first name ends with an "H." My reference to Sarah not being "sick" was only to add a little humor.
Again, lets be clear, I am not being hyprocitical when I point out the personal failings of the McPain ticket. What I am saying is that the Republican party is the first to crticize others for their moral failings, but they fail to look at their own. It is like scripture, accusing others, but failing to looking at the splinter in their own eye. So if that statement by Jesus makes Jesus a hypocrit, than I guess, I am one too.
McCain cheating on his wife and Palin engaging in sex before marriage are personal matters. They are and should be forgiven if they are repentant.
These are distractions, ways the GOP tries to change the subject and refuse to be accountable for their political outcomes.
No matter how you slice it, Palin as mayor and Governor trough of federal pork, i.e. earmarks. Also, her taxation of the Oil Companies in Alaska, in effect, made the rest of us pay for bonuses send to every eligible Alaskan.
Most Americans have expressed concern about the Bush-Cheney abuse of power, but that pales in comparison to Palin. Her husband has already said he is above the law in refusing to testify during the investigation of Sarah Palin's abuse of power. What does that say?
The real problem, of course, is that Republicans and McCain, in particular, fail to take an responsibility for the economic mess they helped create through their policies of deregulation.
An the ultimate hypocrisy, McCain as reformer. Look who is running his campaign and heads his transition team; all special interest lobbyists.
Sarah Palin may be your best weapon, a total distraction to the failed Republican policies that has left us in mega-debt as a nation: a trillion dollars for the war, a trillion dollars for tax cuts for the rich -- that producing nothing, like Republican Senator Ted Steven's bridge to nowhere, a trillion dollars in economic bail-outs -- reversed welfare, and a trillion dollars in trade deficits that have weaken the American dollar.
There is much more ... the growing gap between the rich and poor, the increased poverty rates, the decline in our credibility as a nation everywhere, our arrogance measured by refusing to sign and honor treaties -- kind of like what we did to the Indians in America's genocide, failure to do anything about the #1 threat to our survival global warming, and on and on.
So if we really held the Republican party accountable, no one should vote for them.
One other note, you didn't see the Democrats in the last election raising the moral flag on your then incumbent state Representative, even though many Republicans went after the DFL candidate the election before because she reported her husband to the police for DUI. So by your definition, is that not hypocrisy or his your game to distract voters from looking at the real issues.
One final question, have you asked Sarah Palin if she gave birth prematurely to her first child? She also might not have realized that she was pregnant when she eloped. Doesn't it make you wonder why she eloped in the first place.
Oh well, there are more important things, yes?
Oops, I press sent before editing it. Here is the corrected version.
I do understand the Latin reference to "(sic)". I also know that Sarah Palin's first name ends with an "H." My reference to Sarah not being "sick" was only to add a little humor.
Again, lets be clear, I am not being hypocritical when I point out the personal failings of the McPain ticket. What I am saying is that the Republican Party is the first to criticize others for their moral failings, but they fail to look at their own. It is like scripture, accusing others, but failing to look at the splinter in your own eye. So if that statement by Jesus makes Jesus a hypocrite, than I guess, I am one too.
McCain cheating on his wife and Palin engaging in sex before marriage are personal matters. They are and should be forgiven if they are repentant.
They are distractions, ways the GOP tries to change the subject and refuses to be accountable for their political outcomes.
No matter how you slice it, Palin as mayor and Governor fed at the trough of federal pork, i.e. earmarks. Also, her taxation of the Oil Companies in Alaska, in effect, made the rest of us pay for bonuses sent to every eligible Alaskan.
Most Americans have expressed concern about the Bush-Cheney abuse of power, but that pales in comparison to Palin. Her husband has already said he is above the law in refusing to testify during the investigation of Sarah Palin's abuse of power. What does that say?
The real problem, of course, is that Republicans, and McCain in particular, fail to take responsibility for the economic mess they helped create through their policies of deregulation.
And the ultimate hypocrisy is McCain as reformer. Look who is running his campaign and heads his transition team; all special interest lobbyists.
Sarah Palin may be their best weapon; a total distraction to the failed Republican policies that has left us in mega-debt as a nation: a trillion dollars for the war that at best has produced a fragile if not reversible "peace" in Iraq, a trillion dollars for tax cuts for the rich -- that produced nothing, like Republican Senator Ted Steven's bridge to nowhere, a trillion dollars in economic bail-outs -- reversed welfare, and a trillion dollars in trade deficits that have weaken the American dollar, not to mention created massive unemployment in countries like Nicaragua as well as a flood of undocumented immigrants seeking work here.
There is much more ... the growing gap between the rich and poor, the increased poverty rates, the decline in our credibility as a nation everywhere, our arrogance measured by refusing to sign and honor treaties -- kind of like what we did to the Indians in our sanctioned genocide of them, failure to do anything about the #1 threat to our survival global warming, and on and on.
So if we really held the Republican Party accountable, no one should vote for them.
One final question, have you asked Sarah Palin if she gave birth prematurely to her first child? She also might not have realized that she was pregnant when she eloped. Doesn't it make you wonder, however, why she eloped in the first place? Oh well, there are more important things, yes?
anonymous,
Thank you for writing more than enough so we know that your views are irrational. Thank you! Thank you! Thank you! You didn't leave any doubt.
Calling my comments irrational, does not change the FACTS. Republican policies have created the worse economic situation in America since the Great Depression.
Republicans talk about personal responsibility, but they don't own up to it.
No matter how much lipstick you put on a pig, its still a pig. No matter how much you try to make it look like Republican policies work, the truth is that unemployment is over 6% and the national debt will be at all time highs - because of Bush's invasion of Iraq, because of Bush's tax cuts for the rich, because of Bush's economic policies of deregulation and lack of oversight and now bailouts for overpaid, greedy and corrupt Wall Street types. And the really, really scarey thing is Bush's failure to address global warming that has put the whole human race at risk.
Americans rejected Hoover and Bush is today's Hoover.
It might be a good time for you to join other Republicans that are abandoning your sinking ship.
My post was a corrective about a Democrat attacking the supposed hypocrisy of McCain and Palin.
Your views on that topic were irrational and you then dragged in other issues to sidetrack the issue of hypocrisy.
You are just throwing mud to see if something sticks. That is also an irrational approach.
Post a Comment