Prickly City by Scott Stantis for July 15, 2009

I certainly agree that failure to live up to one’s own ideals does not invalidate those ideals. However, when one berates others for failing to live up to those ideals, and makes a name, or a living, or a political career based only on those ideals, and how they live up to them and others do not, and is then found to come up short, it’s not wrong to point out the irony and hypocrisy.

Ian:

True enough, if you concede that the speaker’s failures don’t invalidate the ideals.

I’d say well over 50% of the people who revel in the “hypocrisy” do so to denigrate the values.

In doing so, they demonstrate their own hypocrisy - who among them can truthfully say they live to their particular ideals 100% of the time?

The accusation of hypocrisy is ironic, given the person making it is always a hypocrite.

As far as a Mark Sanford is concerned (for example) - what’s happening to him now is an example of the consequences of abandoning the ideals, not evidence that they are false.

Ian Valenzuela said, ”…makes a name, or a living, or a political career based only on those ideals…”

Like, “hope” and “change”?

Winslow is a twit.

She actually said it in 136 characters. I counted, because I have too much time on my hands.