Bennett's Good Works

The Washington Post ^ | Monday, May 26, 2003 | John DiIulio

[sitetest]

Recently William J. Bennett, best-selling "Book of Virtues" author, conservative commentator and Republican leader, admitted publicly that he has a vice: excessive gambling. According to published reports, over the past decade or so the former U.S. education secretary and drug czar bet several million dollars playing slot machines at Las Vegas and Atlantic City casinos. When the story broke, Bennett's critics called him a hypocrite, even though he had never spoken out against gambling or denied previous reports that he gambled. Some suggested that, because Bennett was so hard on President Bill Clinton and so outspoken on other controversial issues, he deserved harsh treatment and kicking while he was down. Now some prominent conservatives, both inside the Beltway and beyond, are suggesting that the gambling revelation will render Bennett's civic and media career kaput.

My reasons for hoping they are wrong about Bennett's future have nothing to do with partisan loyalties (I am a Democrat), little to do with policy preferences (though we often agree, we have also taken opposite positions on welfare reform, mandatory minimum drug penalties, government reform and other issues) and everything to do with personal knowledge about his character. Off and on for 15 years, I have joined the burly Irish Catholic on professional projects and witnessed the onetime philosophy professor and his wife, Elayne, contribute their time, energy and money to numerous charitable causes and civic good works. Yes, Bill Bennett was a soft touch for high-stakes slots, but let the record show he has also been a softie when it comes to helping others.

[B Knotts]

To be fair, I think he spent $8 million on gambling over the years, but did not lose it all. In fact, at some point, he (laughably) claimed to have come out about even!

[rellimpank]

--committing perjury and obstruction of justice about sex with a twenty-one year old intern WAS illegal--

[sitetest]

Dear B Knotts,

It doesn't really matter what others believe about gambling. The charge is hypocrisy. If Dr. Bennett believes that there is not level of recreational marijuana use that is unharmful, he may be wrong (but I don't think he is), but it isn't wrong for him to base his views of what the law ought to be on his view. That he feels that laws ought to continue to forbid the use of marijuana is reasonable, given the fact that he considers marijuana use always harmful, at least to the user.

Since he doesn't think that gambling is inherently evil, and is not always (or even usually) harmful to anyone, that others might think otherwise isn't really relevant. It certainly isn't hypocrisy for him to engage in an activity which is not inherently wrong, (and is not considered inherently wrong by his own church), while denouncing something that he believes is always harmful.

"Mr. Bennett's heart was closed to the people he was locking away for marijuana use."

That's a judgement which I think outruns the facts. If he believes that marijuana use is harmful to the user, it may be that in his heart, he believed that legal sanctions were for the good of the user, as well as the rest of society.

"Should he be surprised now that many people (including many who were on his side) are turning a cold shoulder to him in his time of difficulty?"

Surprised? No. Disappointed? Yes.


sitetest

[sitetest]

Dear Tooters,

"Yes. In the minds of many- it's already dead."

"The minds of many"? I'm not sure that I care about the minds those who can't distinguish between something truly evil, and something which is morally neutral, at worst.

But objectively, the good done lives on. Those educated because of his efforts will not lose their education because evil-doers try to harm a good man's reputation. Those who grow up and become productive, generous, charitable people because of the help they directly received from Dr. Bennett will be a testament to his good deeds long after he is dead, and long after the evil-doers have smeared him are dead, as well.


sitetest

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

I don’t give a flip what Clinton does…as a private citizen. As president of the U.S., he represented the Office of the President of the United States, which comes with a separate code of conduct appropriate to that position. Clinton continuously disgraced that office.

[KDD]

I don't care about the legality of what he did. It was morally repugnant and I and many others condemmed him from that aspect. He was unfit to be President. He placed himself in a compromising position.

Bennett is a director of Empower America, together with former vice presidential nominee Jack Kemp, former U.N. Ambassador Jeanne Kirkpatrick, former U.S. Rep. Vin Weber of Minnesota and former Secretary of Defense Bill Cohen.

Empower America opposes the proliferation of casino gambling, and its co-chair, Kemp, recently lambasted lawmakers who "pollute our society with a slot machine on every corner."

The group also recently published an "Index of Leading Cultural Indicators" that reported 5.5 million American adults as "problem" or "pathological" gamblers.

When reminded of studies that link heavy gambling to divorce, bankruptcy, domestic abuse and other family problems he has widely decried, Bennett told The Washington Monthly he compared gambling to alcohol. "I view it as drinking," Bennett says. "If you can't handle it, don't do it."

Hypocrite thy name is Bennett.

[Courier]

"are suggesting that the gambling revelation will render Bennett's civic and media career kaput."

While the Democrats sit at Presidential debates with Al Sharpton and that is perfectly normal.

I need to find a tiny island somewhere where life makes sense.

[sitetest]

Dear Courier,

"'are suggesting that the gambling revelation will render Bennett's civic and media career kaput.'

"While the Democrats sit at Presidential debates with Al Sharpton and that is perfectly normal.

"I need to find a tiny island somewhere where life makes sense."

LOL. Indeed. Perhaps we might remember that Rev. Al proclaims himself a minister of the Gospel of Jesus Christ.


sitetest

[Gatún(CraigIsaMangoTreeLawyer)]

There is a lovely small island 20 miles off the Pacific coast of Panama called Taboga with some nice homes. I would move there, but the only way to get there is by boat, and I get seasick.

[William Terrell]

Public Sub Government_Process()

ConstitutionalGovernment = False

While cannabis = bad
    cannabis = illegal
    While cannabis = illegal
        cannabis = bad
    Wend
Wend

ConstitutionalGovernment = True

End Sub

[Congressman Billybob]

There is a central dishonesty in this (and many other) articles. They claim that he has "lost $6 to $8 million dollars." Anyone who has ever played penny ante poker, as I do every Tuesday, knows what is wrong with this assertion.

Bill Bennett is not a member of the House of Saud. He is not Bill Gates or Warren Buffet. He could not lose that kind of money and not blink. The truth is obvious -- he did not LOSE that much money, he only GAMBLED that much money. Here's the proof of that:

I play in a game where the maximum bet (on the last card) is $1, and the maximum number of raises is three. We play split the pot games, so most players stay in. The average pot is about $40. In the course of an evening, we play 90+ hands, and seldom do any players either win or lose more than $100.

This is the important point. In the course of an evening, every player puts into the pot -- actually gambles, as it were -- about $1,000. So if you use that TOTAL figure, rather than net losses (or gains), all of us are "gambling" more than $50,000 a year -- and none of us could afford to lose that kind of money in a year. But that has NOTHING to do with our total losses (or gains).

I feel 99.9% confident that the reporting on Bill Bennett's "gambling" is making the exact same, perhaps deliberate, error. The cited figure cannot be his total losses. It is, intead, his total money put at risk -- which has no connection to his total losses.

Congressman Billybob

Latest column, now up FR, "The Knight of Draper's Liquor Store."

[Salvation]

**Critics shout "hypocrisy" at Bennett, but does his behavior negate what he was promoting? Are the points that he was stressing any less valid? I think not.**

Walking the Walk
or merely
Talking the Talk.

It would seem that Bennett is walking the walk. Not just empty words.

[Congressman Billybob]

Dear Ladies and/or Gentlemen,

In citing the "$8 million" figure, you are buying into a factual lie that is easily exposed. See my post #32 on this thread. As the saying goes, "Do not believe everything that you read," which is the new motto of the New York Times.

Congressman Billybob

[Matchett-PI]

"The reason so many people came down on Bennett so hard for hypocrisy was that he vehemently attacked pot smokers who defend their habit with the excuse that they're not hurting anyone else..."

Did the phony hypocrites who "came down on Bennett so hard" grow up in, and be indoctrinated by, a church that teaches that there are no limits to the amount you may spend at the gambling tables it runs?

As the article says, "Bennett's betting .. did not violate his (and my) church's official teaching concerning "games of chance or wagers" as "morally unacceptable" .. UNLESS (and here is the only caveat that *limits* the amount) .. "they deprive someone of what is necessary to provide for his needs and those of others."

Bennett is no hypocrite in this matter. He actually believed and practiced what his church taught him.

The ones that "came down on Bennett so hard" in this matter are the real hypocrites.

And that's a fact.

[Congressman Billybob]

In any organization, for a superior officer to have sexual relations in the office with a subordinate IS illegal. With some irony, the federal law making that illegal was signed with great fanfare, by nonetheless than Billyjeff Clinton.

Since the facts of the sexual relationship with the subordinate in the office are well known, it is irrelevant that Clinton was never either prosecuted or sued for this particular act. It WAS illegal, contrary to your assumption.

Congressman Billybob

[Ken H]

According to the initial story, Bennett had to draw on a $1.4 million line of credit at one point to cover losses.

I'm not an expert on gambling, but from what I understand about slot machines, it would be pretty difficult to recover from a $1.4 million deficit.

Bennett claimed that he came out pretty close to even overall.

[danelectro]

In citing the "$8 million" figure, you are buying into a factual lie that is easily exposed. See my post #32 on this thread. As the saying goes, "Do not believe everything that you read," which is the new motto of the New York Times.

from the original article.

Bennett likes to be discreet. "He'll usually call a host and let us know when he's coming," says one source. "We can limo him in. He prefers the high-limit room, where he's less likely to be seen and where he can play the $500-a-pull slots. He usually plays very late at night or early in the morning--usually between midnight and 6 a.m." The documents show that in one two-month period, Bennett wired more than $1.4 million to cover losses. His desire for privacy is evident in his customer profile at one casino, which lists as his residence the address for Empower.org (the Web site of Empower America, the non-profit group Bennett co-chairs). Typed across the form are the words: "NO CONTACT AT RES OR BIZ!!!"

the article clearly talks about losses, not money put into play. and the game he plays is slots, which, over any significant duration of time will leave a gambler much poorer than when he started.

[danelectro]

hah. beat me to it on while i was previewing.