Think Progress has the story (there's more in it about the FRC), but as far as Republican "pro-family" deadbeat-dad Joe Walsh is concerned, the headline says it all.
Paul Krugman, who's been writing about hypocrisy lately, has the best comment. Krugman talks about the differences between left and right on this issue and notes (my emphasis):
Now that’s real hypocrisy — and if the past is any indication, it won’t matter at all for Rep. Walsh’s career. ... [I]f a conservative politician who preaches stern traditional morality is caught engaging in actions that are at odds with what he preaches — buying sex, taking wide stances in restrooms, or, in this case, stiffing his family even while preaching family values — he may well ride right through the scandal. Witness what’s going on now with Herman Cain.Nice setup.
How can this be? Here’s what I understand: on the right, “moral values” are considered to be, literally, God-given principles. And a politician is well-regarded for advocating those values, no matter what he does personally. Instead of his personal behavior devaluing his political position, his political position excuses his personal behavior; a philandering politician who preaches the sacred bond of marriage is considered a good man because of what he says, no matter what he does.
For me the explanation is a combination of (1) the Cause being so God-given, that all operatives are pre-forgiven by nature of their participation ... and (2) that funky, hypocrisy-ridden mess called faith-based religion.
In faith-based religions — to my knowledge, all born-again types are among them — you're good based on what you believe, not based on what you do. Deeds-based religions say, "Show me what someone does, and I'll tell you if he's good or bad." Faith-based religions are just the reverse.
What better way to cover slime in glory — pre-crime indulgences, sold only to Movement operatives, based only on what they advocate. No bad deed goes unrewarded. Again, nice setup.
GP
