Bill Bennett: The Man of Virtues Has a Vice

Re: WillHenry and Bennett's future


BumbleBee<

How very astute of you. Bennett will probably turn out like the old saying,
"There's nothing worse than a reformed whore."

His fall from grace probably will result in a book, perhaps entitled, "Virtue Found." The blue-hairs at the church bingo games will be clucking around Bennett as if he were the Second Coming. That is, until he wins the church's entire budget for a year.

Out in Hollywood, Bennett will win a multi-million dollar contract for the movie rights to "Virtue Found." He will also insist on part of the movie's profits. He will also write the screenplay as the spicy Shakespearean tragedy that it is.

Veteran actor Carroll O'Connor might be a bit too old, but I think he would be the perfect man to play Bennett in the movie.

Should either you or anyone reading have another suggestion for the Bill Bennett role in his upcoming movie, please post away!



scrat<

Welcome to A2k; you'll not ruffle my feathers easily.

I think Carroll O'Connor died a while back, didn't he? A great loss. He would have been great. How about Rod Steiger.........wait, I think he's gone too. ok ok, who then? Dan Hedeya? He was great as Nixon in Dick

Let's see. Who can get a really self righteous look on their face? Big and over stuffed, representing what appears to be rampart gluttony, we'll need to add that to his list of vices. Who then? John Goodman is way too good natured. Some one who can play an overly intense, perfectionistic, narcissistic character..........glum and self satisfied, or seeming so. The need to show the character trait not easily seen or decerned, will require an actor who can subltey show the sense of self loathing that is usually present in those who suffer in this way. I just can't think of anyone with this ability, to play such a conflicted character, with as little sense of humor as will be required to pull it off.

Lola, broaden your actor pool
Lola, I fear you are limiting your actor options. With today's makeup and body padding, a skinny actor could play the rotund Bennett quite adequately.

BumbleBeeBoogie

I see two possibilities:

1) He considers it a vice and left it out in an attempt to avoid being hypocritical.

2) He does not consider it a vice.

I have not read his book of virtues, and wonder whether he singles out activities that he believes are always vices (when done to any degree) or also discusses what I would call vices of scale. (Drinking when done in moderation is not a vice, but is one when done to excess.)

If he considers these vices of scale in his book, then I would consider it likely that he left gambling out for reason #1 above.

Scrat wrote:





I would be interesting in the reasoning that causes you to suppose that by "leaving it out" Bennett would be attempting to avoid being hypocritical.

Why would leaving it out -- which seems to me to be blatantly hypocritical whether he thought it a vice of scale or a vice per se -- -- not be considered hypocritical in your opinion?

If he doesn't consider it a vice, why has he said he's giving it up now that he's been caught? Gambling is mentioned as a vice by his organization, of which I don't remember the name. I haven't read his book either, nor will I. I don't want to contribute one little cent to Bennett's riches.

Personally, I believe he should be free to enjoy which ever vice he prefers. I don't even mind that he's a hypocrite. What I do mind is his self righteous finger pointing at everyone else but himself. This is a vice he has every right to enjoy if he pleases (the finger pointing.) But it does seem he might have been more careful. Maybe he has more in common with Bill Clinton than he ever realized.

lola

I love you.

lola - I must admit to considerable ignorance of Bennett, both his history and present day actions. Can you give us some specific examples of his engaging in what you call "self righteous finger pointing"? I know he's authored a book (books?) that promote the value of virtues, but that's hardly "self righteous finger pointing" in my view. (I can promote the reasonable use of alcohol and point out the harm in abusing it without wagging my finger at those who do so, right?)

I look forward to being informed at your capable hands...

Scrat

You are at a disadvantage in this discussion then. One really ought to have some familiarity with the topic at hand to engage rewardingly in it. Perhaps if you do some reading (google news will get you a fair bit of commentary, including quotations, from Good William.

I agree, blatham.

Bennett has espoused his views in several books, television shows and excerpts and transcripts have been published far and wide online.

Linkage has been denigrated as verification of one's opinion in this forum (a position I happen to disagree with).

In any event, Scrat, do your own research.

Once again people suggest the absurd idea that I can search the Internet to find out why an individual here thinks as he or she thinks. My niceties about not knowing much about Bennett are simply a way to suggest that there may well be things he has said or done to which the other party was referring and of which I am unaware.

Why is is such a hardship for someone here to explain why he or she thinks as he or she does or to offer specific examples when they make sweeping general statements?

And why are several of you so prone to jumping to contentiousness, often when you were not even the party addressed by the question?


lola says she doesn't like Bennett for his "self righteous finger pointing". I would like to know what she means specifically when she writes this. Google can't tell me that. Nor can blatham or pdiddie. Only lola knows why lola writes what she writes, and I don't think I'm out of line asking her to kindly share that information with me.

A little civility, please.

Ah, but you didn't ask Lola for her opinion:



What's so uncivil about suggesting you find what you are looking for yourself?

A little less sensitivity, please.

Now if it's opinion you pine for, I'm sure Lola will be along shortly to give it to you.

I am not going to quibble with you about this, PD. Hopefully lola understands that I would like to know what facts she used to form her opinion, and is willing to share them with me.

Scrat

Your intention with that request may be benign or it may not be. It's entirely possible that you are simply setting Lola up for pot shots. For example, she could spend an hour or two searching out relevant quotes, and you could respond in the following manner, "Well, I don't see how advising people to stay away from drugs and sodomy is 'self-righteous'."

You use the term 'facts'. What sort of 'facts' would you be looking for on an indictment of self-righteousness? It is a bit like asking for 'facts' on pomposity or reticence.

If you are on the level here, if you aren't TW for example, then you really are going to have to cover a lot of ground which the rest of us know from years of exposure to the gentleman.

Good night, Scrat. Where do you live? If you haven't seen Bill Bennett self righteously pointing his finger dozens of times, then you must be livin in a cave somewhere. He's been on Larry King Live on CNN repeatedly. He's been all over the place. The very voice of virtue and purity. Why he's so f--kin pure he makes my stomach turn.

Blatham, I love you too. Kiss

Happy, Scrat?
There's Lola's opinion for you!



(Methinks the lady can stand up for herself quite well, blatham...
but it was quite gentlemanly of you, nonetheless. :wink: )

As I recall charity was one of Bennett's virtues... but to Donald Trump?

I guess this is where Scrat once again cries that people are not treating him/her courteously.

I'd suggest Scrat visit the food section and discuss baloney.

At least then the discussion will be about something he/she does know about.

All said with a big smile on my face in good, clean fun of course.