Jeremy Lott - In Defense of Hypocrisy: Picking Sides in the War on Virtue

In Defense of
HYPOCRISY

In Defense of
HYPOCRISY

Picking Sides in the War on Virtue

JEREMY LOTT

Copyright 2006 by Jeremy Aaron Lott

All rights reserved. No portion of this book may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form or by any meanselectronic, mechanical, photocopy, recording, scanning, or otherexcept for brief quotations in critical reviews or articles, without the prior written permission of the publisher.

Published in Nashville, Tennessee, by Nelson Current, a division of a wholly-owned subsidiary (Nelson Communications, Inc.) of Thomas Nelson, Inc.

Nelson Current books may be purchased in bulk for educational, business, fundraising, or sales promotional use. For information, please e-mail SpecialMarkets@ThomasNelson.com.

Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication data on file
with the Library of Congress.

ISBN 1-59555-052-6

Printed in the United States of America

06 07 08 09 10 QW 5 4 3 2 1

To Reverend Robert Lott,
whose hypocrisies are microscopic

You call yourself a Christian
I think that youre a hypocrite.

MICK JAGGER

We are not hypocrites in our sleep.

WILLIAM HAZLITT

BILL BENNETTS RAP SHEET

Sounds to me like youre an opportunistic hypocritical little pudnocker.

COLONEL FLAGG

I was tipped off by an excited Washington Monthly hand that his low-circulation magazine was about to break a major story, jointly, with Newsweek. It was the spring of 2003. The subject of the expos was former education secretary, drug czar, and New York Times best-selling author William J. Bennett.

The scoop was this: the author of The Book of Virtues had bet millions of dollars in book royalties and speaking fees at casinos in Las Vegas and Atlantic City. His preferred games of chance were video poker and high-stakes slot machines. Bennett was such a high roller that most casinos would send a limo, put him up for a few nights on the house, and turn him loose in the high-limit rooms.

By most accounts, the casinos got a good return on their investment. Bennett would hope for digital straight f lushes or wrestle with one-armed bandits into the wee hours of the morning, at a cost of $100 to $500 a pull. Several casinos extended lines of credit in excess of $200,000, and those often failed to contain the damage. Internal documents reveal that, in one two-month period, Bennett was forced to wire more than $1.4 million to cover his losses.

When he was informed that the magazines were taking the story public, Bennett agreed to talk with Newsweeks Jonathan Alter. He claimed his luck was not nearly so bad as the Dorian Gray-like portrait that a nongambler might sketch after peeking at casino documents. Bennett elaborated, You can roll up and down a lot in one day, as we have on many occasions. You may cycle several hundred thousand dollars in an evening and net out only a few thousand. In fact, he puffed up his chest and claimed that over the last decade hed come out fairly close to even.

That fairly close to even line was soon to be much mocked in the press, but Bennett soldiered on. He worked the high-limit rooms and preferred automated games of chance because he found the alternative annoying. When I go to the tables, he explained, people talkand they want to talk about politics. I dont want that. I do this for three hours to relax. Message: who could begrudge the guy a little relaxation?

Bennett argued that his behavior was not wrong for three reasons. One, he could afford it. He didnt play the milk money, as he put it. He obeyed the laws, paid his taxes, reported any winnings, and flossed twice a day. Two, he didnt lie about it, except in a genial, size-of-that-fish sort of way. The Washington Times had reported on his gambling in two separate stories, one about a jackpot that hed hit while playing slots at the Bellagio in Las Vegas. Three, gambling is not a sin, so long as it does not harm others.

Ive gambled all my life and its never been a moral issue with me. I liked church bingo when I was growing up. Ive been a poker player, Bennett told Newsweek. When it was put to him that gambling is a pathological addiction for some people, he denied being a problem gambler. Bennett fit gaming into the same moral category as alcohol: If you cant handle it, dont do it.

As damage control strategies go, Bennetts approach was sound and, for all we know, heartfelt. He came across as a regular guy who wanted to unwind for a few hours, avoid tedious arguments about politics, and maybe nurse a bourbon on the rocks while he put a bit of his own money on the line.

At the same time, the magazine writers were coming off as scolds and worse. They had relied on leaked documents from casinos to take a shot at a man because of his political beliefs. The Washington Monthly framed the story as payback: Bennett had criticized President Clinton during the impeachment fracas of the late 90sin fact, he even gambled throughout Clintons impeachmentso he was now fair game. He had spoken out against gay marriage, abortion, and crack cocaine so it made good sense to expose his private casino receipts to the light of day.

Whats more, the journalists didnt have the goods, and they knew it. Joshua Green, principal author of the Monthly story, closed it out with this feather of a punch: By furtively indulging in a costly vice that destroys millions of lives and families across the nation, Bennett has profoundly undermined the credibility of his word on this moral issue. My loose translation: Bill Bennett is not as outraged as we are about gambling. He even plays the slots himself. How dare he.

So they tried to bait Bennett into responding. Newsweek editor Mark Whitaker closed his editors note for the issue by opining, It appears... the conservative former Education secretary who makes a living writing about virtuenote the scare quoteshas a little vice. He called the story a reminder that moralists always seem to have an easier time lecturing others about behavior than controlling their own.

Green assured readers of the Las Vegas Business Press that other high rollers could relax because this was a onetime thing. Their target had been a national scold who threw stones while he was living in a glass house. It was the journalists job to expose the former drug czar, but there the scorched-roulette campaign would end. As long as gamblers stayed at the tables and didnt hold forth on moral issues on CNN, they had little to fear from the muckrakers.

That was an astounding concession. Green was endorsing the omert-like code of the numbers industry, with one important modification. He was saying that what happens in Vegas stays in Vegas, unless it happens to Bill Bennett.

IM NOT A HYPOCRITE

Once the story broke, talking heads couldnt stop talking about Bennetts alleged hypocrisy. Bennett maintained that his gambling did not fall under the modern use of the term. For him, games of chance were never a moral issue, and he had never spoken out against gambling