L.A. Daily News - Chris Weinkopf






November 09, 2003
Los Angeles, CA
Site Search

Enter search term

Advanced Search


Newsletters
Classifieds
Place an Ad
Automotive
Employment
Real Estate
Rentals
Newspaper Ads
Obituaries
Archive Search
Business
Business Directory
Antelope Valley
Columnists
Crossword
Film
Food
Good Sports
Health
Horoscopes
Info
L.A. Life
Marketplace
News
Opinion
Mariel Garza
Chris Weinkopf
Your Opinion
Patrick O'Connor
Write A Letter
Their Opinion
e-thepeople.com
Personals
Santa Clarita
Simi Valley
Special Sections
Sports
Sports Challenge
Subscriber Services
Traffic Report
Travel
U-Entertainment
Weather


EMAIL ARTICLE LINK TO ARTICLE PRINT ARTICLE
Article Published: Saturday, November 08, 2003 - 7:05:31 AM PST


OTHER COLUMNS
Oct. 26
- Council endorses SB 1645

Potential presidents puf pass punishment
By Chris Weinkopf


Where, o where, have the Hypocrisy Police gone?
Last month, they were out in full force, roundly condemning
talk-radio giant Rush Limbaugh after his announcement that he
was
addicted to prescription painkillers. But now, with three
Democratic
presidential candidates all but begging for their condemnation,
the
defenders of drug-policy consistency are nowhere to be seen.
Way back then -- in October -- culling thousands of hours of
radio
broadcasts, the Hypocrisy Police dug up an offhand comment in
which
Limbaugh bemoaned the social damage wrought by illegal drug use,
noting that offenders "ought to be sent up." Among the social
libertines, for whom the only true sin is the rejection of
social
libertinism, this was just too much. Limbaugh was branded a
capital-H hypocrite for supposedly falling short of his own
lofty
standards.
But if Limbaugh is a hypocrite, then what does that make
presidential candidates Howard Dean, John Kerry and John
Edwards?
At last week's "Rock the Vote" debate, all eight Democrats
running
for the White House were asked if they had ever used marijuana.
Four
of the candidates replied no, with Sen. Joseph Lieberman noting
that
he was, once again, "giving unpopular answers in Democratic
debates." Carol Moseley Braun refused to answer. But Dean, Kerry
and
Edwards admitted -- to loud applause from the MTV-demographic
audience -- that they had not only smoked pot but also,
presumably,
inhaled.
Does that make them capital-H hypocrites?
As governor of Vermont, Dean worked just last year to kill a
bill
that would have legalized the use of marijuana for medicinal
purposes.
Kerry, who has played both sides of the medical marijuana
debate,
declined to co-sponsor legislation authored by fellow
Massachusetts
Democrat Rep. Barney Frank that would stop federal agents from
harassing sick patients who use the drug to relieve their
suffering.
Edwards has remarked that he has no objection to the Justice
Department's arresting pot-smoking AIDS and cancer patients.
This is just the question of medical marijuana, mind you. While
the
candidates might waffle on whether the drug should be made
available
to the critically ill, none even pretends to support legalizing
it
for recreational uses, the likes of which all three, by their
own
admission, have engaged in.
Limbaugh might have once quipped about sending up drug users,
but
Dean, Kerry and Edwards, in their capacity as lawmakers,
actually
have sent up drug users. And, unlike Limbaugh, the drug they
illegally used was never prescribed to them by a doctor for a
legitimate medical condition.
Certainly this should be fodder for the Hypocrisy Police, no?
After all, literally scores, if not hundreds, of pundits quickly
seized the opportunity to stick Limbaugh with the
"double-standard"
tag. Jesse Jackson joined the fray. So did Al Franken, who
couldn't
deny taking pleasure in Limbaugh's suffering.
Even Kerry got into the act, joking: "There are two ways for you
to
have lower prescription drug costs: One is you could hire Rush
Limbaugh's housekeeper or you could elect me president of the
United
States."
Yet neither Jackson nor Franken -- let alone Kerry or the
countless
others all too eager to make sport of Limbaugh's alleged
hypocrisy
-- have uttered a peep about the three would-be presidents who
would
jail cancer victims for using a drug for medical treatment that
they've used for fun.
Apparently only conservatives can be hypocrites.
And apparently the Hypocrisy Police care less about snuffing out
philosophical inconsistencies than in bludgeoning their
political
opponents for their personal failings.
Lost on the Hypocrisy Police is that there are two sorts of
hypocrisy. The first is the inevitable consequence of trying to
maintain a moral order in a fallen world. Most everyone disdains
lying, cheating or stealing, for example, yet there's not a
person
among us who, at one time or another, hasn't lied, cheated or
stolen. Does that make us all hypocrites? In a sense, yes, but
it's
better to be a hypocrite than to live without shame or
conscience.
Then there's the second, more odious form of hypocrisy -- paying
lip
service to a certain set of standards not because one truly
believes
in them, but for opportunistic and manipulative purposes --
i.e.,
the minister who insincerely preaches the virtues of tithing
because
he's skimming the collection plate.
Or to use a more timely example: The pundit who skewers his
political opponents for "hypocrisy," while turning a blind eye
to
his political allies' contradictions.
Like most every other vice, hypocrisy is one from which no one
is
immune, least of all the Hypocrisy Police.
Chris Weinkopf is the Daily News' editorial page editor. Write
to
him by e-mail .

RETURN TO TOP


InformationCopyright © 2003 Los Angeles Daily