Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Hello, Pot

Hillary Clinton today showed why President-elect Obama tapped her to be the next secretary of state. She rhetorically walked around the world, pointing out problems, commenting on hot spots and making a commitment to restore the United States as a moral and focused force on the global stage. "Smart power," Clinton eloquently dubbed it.

And then came the persistent questions about the fundraising activities of former President Bill Clinton on behalf of his foundation. Understandably, senators pressed for more and more frequent disclosure of donors. The potential for conflicts, or the appearance of conflicts, is high, and there should be assurances that such conflicts can be avoided.

But the sanctimony of one David Vitter, the Louisiana senator who copped to enjoying the company of prostitutes after he was ensnared in the DC madam case in July 2007, was a bit much to take. He asked whether Clinton would commit to disclosing more details. She pointed out that what her husband already had done was unprecedented. Clinton went on to describe the good works of the Clinton Foundation, when Vitter peevishly turned to Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman John Kerry (D-Mass.) and said, "I have no objection listening to this but I don't want this to come out of my time."

If I could put a thought bubble over Clinton's head when the camera showed her surprised reaction, it would say: "Oh no he didn't!" Considering that Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.) made the same demands but with grace, Vitter really shouldn't have.

UPDATE (Jan. 15, 10 a.m.): The Senate Foreign Relations Committee voted almost unanimously for Hillary Clinton to be the next secretary of state. The lone vote against her was cast by Vitter.

By Jonathan Capehart  | January 13, 2009; 5:55 PM ET
Categories:  Capehart  | Tags:  Jonathan Capehart  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: Oh, Sarah
Next: Paterson's Pick


Vitter's diaper was obviously bunched up his arse thus rendering him even more of an a-hole than usual. A man who rolls around a hotel room floor in a diper cring to be changed may be what the people of Louisiana expect in a Senator, but he has no place questioning anyone's credentials for anything, including diswashing staff at McDonals.

Posted by: pgiaquinto | January 14, 2009 9:28 AM | Report abuse

Vitter? Sanctimonious joke!

Like to have a glimpse of his speed-dial list.

Posted by: willandjansdad1 | January 14, 2009 10:13 AM | Report abuse

I am from Illinois and understand the embarrassment of having a sleze ball politican.

Vitter and Blagojveitch, different political offices, different situations, both sleze balls with no creditability to their states.

Posted by: 1ken | January 14, 2009 11:40 AM | Report abuse

I knew I wasn't the only one picturing Vitter sitting in a soiled diaper as he was throwing his tantrum. That guy will never live down that image, which his whorish predilictions have exposed to the world.

Posted by: Pupster | January 14, 2009 11:44 AM | Report abuse

Vitter's personal sexual preferences/fantasies/desires has nothing to do with his ability to govern.

Thomas Jefferson parading his concubine through the white house didn't make him a bad President.

Hate Vitter for his voting record, not his sexual daliances:

Voted NO on repealing tax subsidy for companies which move US jobs offshore.

Voted NO on shifting $11B from corporate tax loopholes to education. (Mar 2005)

Voted NO on tax incentives for energy production and conservation. (Jun 2008)

Voted NO on $3.1B for emergency oil assistance for hurricane-hit areas. (Oct 2005) [It was his own state that was hit]

VITTER AND KATRINA: Vitter, a native of New Orleans, grossly misrepresented the seriousness of the flood disaster in the wake of Hurricane Katrina. Vitter quote: “In the huge majority of areas, it [the water] is not rising at all. […] I don’t want to alarm everybody that, you know, New Orleans is filling up like a bowl. That’s just not happening.”

Posted by: ProfessorWrightBSU | January 14, 2009 12:43 PM | Report abuse

Vitter's question was pertinent so why does it matter who asked it? Vitter hired prostitutes and that makes him a criminal, but he's far from the only criminal in the senate. But until he retires or is replaced by the voters of his state, he has an obligation to represent them and part of that responsibility is confirming or withholding confirmation from those who would officiate in the executive branch's cabinet.

Posted by: bend1 | January 14, 2009 4:38 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company