Senate Whores: Let the Fiddling Begin

Paul E. Scates

Paul E. Scates

To almost nobody’s surprise, SenatorBen “Nighthorse” Nelson joined his fellow Democrats to ensure the most dramatic expansion of government power in our history. Oh, sure, he did so after a lot of posturing about “moral concerns” over the abortion language, etc., but all that was just haggling for a better price. Like Mary Landreau of Louisiana, who got upwards of $100 million in earmarks for her state, Joe Leiberman of Connecticut, who got…well, we don’t yet know what his price was, nor that of the other supposed “Blue Dog” (i.e., “conservative” Democrats…who can say that phrase without laughing aloud?) Democrats who supposedly were a threat to the passage of this bill. That was just cant facilitated by the mainstream media to keep the lazy and complacent electorate comfortable in their willful ignorance until it was too late. And it worked…again.

While we may not know the exact price of all those who voted for the bill, what we do know is that the U.S. Senate is populated by whores. To be sure, they’re high-priced ones, but whores nonetheless.

When I was in Vietnam, the single guys who took R&R in Bangkok would regale us upon their return with tales of the whores they encountered there – the girls you could buy for an hour or two, then in other bars a slightly higher class (and more expensive) prostitute who would offer their wares for the entire night. But the top of the line whores, those who cost the most, were the ones who would take the GIs into their apartment for the week, becoming a concubine of sorts. They’d buy groceries and cook, wash the GIs clothes and show them around the city (in addition to the usual services for which one goes to prostitutes).

Prostitute (Photo credit: Jose Pereira)

That’s the U.S. Senate. They preen and posture, bluster and blow about fairness and equality, about the poor and the need for justice, about “the people,” etc., but when it comes right down to it, all they want is a higher price for the screwing they’re giving the American people. Because those millions of our tax dollars, doled out in the form of state projects that employ their constituents, are the currency of power, of re-election to their positions of power, prestige and perquisites. And that, regardless of their rhetoric, is their one and only concern; everything else is simply a means to that end.

This so-called “Health Care Reform” is no more about health care than the Campaign Finance “Reform” bill was about stopping the influence of money. In fact, you can pretty much take this to the bank: when you see the word “reform” in the title of a piece of legislation, get prepared to lose more of your liberty, pony up more in taxes and endure more government encroachment into your lives. You see, career politicians’ idea of “reform” is to make it easier for them to stay in power and harder for you and I to unseat them (the true aim and impact of the Campaign Finance Reform legislation).

What we’re witnessing is the single greatest usurpation of power by the government in the history of this nation. The Founders could not have been clearer about where the greatest danger to our freedom lies, and it’s not foreign powers or alien philosophies. . .it’s the government itself! And we’re witnessing, and facilitating, the takeover of our democratic republic by elitist, career politicians who have no more character or integrity that a bitch dog in heat. How else do you explain our so-called representatives voting for legislation with which many of them do not agree, or even see as detrimental to the long-term health of our nation? They do so because they value their positions far more than they do this republic, and certainly more than the freedoms that make us nuisances, at best, and downright dangerous roadblocks to their political goals when we do pay attention and join together to oppose their betrayals (i.e., the Tea Party movement).

Yes, there will be dramatic impacts on our health insurance and health care, to be sure, but the major thrust of this legislation is to give the federal government more control over the lives and fortunes of its citizens. Think England’s socialism for starters, quickly followed by the tyranny of government experienced by Central and Eastern Europe under the Soviet Union’s totalitarian system.

Ironic, isn’t it, that while the Communists of the old Soviet empire thought their empire would never end, most Americans today lull themselves with the same “it could never happen here” falsehood. The Soviet Union, the second-most powerful nation in the history of mankind, no longer exists! But in our blithe apathy and willful political and historical ignorance, we keep whistling in the dark, refusing to believe the most powerful nation in history could ever fail.

China, along with the oil emirates, owns the U.S. economically. Far left elitist socialists who share none of the values or goals of the majority of Americans own us politically. And the Almighty Self owns us spiritually. G.K. Chesterton wrote that when men stop believing in God, they don’t believe in nothing. . . they believe in anything. Like global warming, or American “imperialism,” or widespread white racism, or religious exclusion (against Muslims), and on and on.

Well, all you mindless liberal hordes who feel guilty about our material prosperity and liberties, take heart. . .you’re witnessing the end of both. Like the man who killed the goose who laid the golden egg, you’re too blinded by Self to see that you, too, will be consumed in the maw of big government. So while you’re congratulating yourselves for your multicultural sensibilities and moral superiority over the crass American public, why not break out a fiddle, as Nero did, while your nation burns around you. Play it loud, and enjoy your brief celebration. . . you’ll have plenty of time to lament your foolishness.

Formerly a liberal and an atheist, Paul E. Scates served as a Marine in Vietnam and is a lifelong student of American history, politics and culture. A former contributor to national website TooGoodReports.com, he writes his staunchly independent Conservative and informed Christian commentary for his fellow ordinary, working Americans, the “we, the people” who are ultimately responsible for preserving our Constitutional liberties.

Reblog this post [with Zemanta]

Note: Reader comments are reviewed before publishing, and only salient comments that add to the topic will be published. Profanity is absolutely not allowed and will be summarily deleted. Spam, copied statements and other material not comprised of the reader’s own opinion will also be deleted.

  • Digg
  • Yahoo Buzz
  • Reddit
  • Yahoo Bookmarks
  • Delicious
  • StumbleUpon
  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Windows Live Favorites
  • Technorati Favorites
  • NewsVine
  • Share/Bookmark
  • Paul E. Scates
    First of all, many thanks to Bob Ellis for his repeated attempts (which I found clear and quite eloquent) to help Mr. Rutledge understand the point of my essay, and to Dr. Theo for his insight about Mr. Rutledge's views. I think Bob's comment that Mr. Rutledge "doesn't want to understand" is dead on-target, but just in case, let me provide my own response to Mr. Rutledge's comments --
    One of the many afflictions of the past several decades, often by well-intentioned people, is the moral equivalence evidenced in Mr. Rutledge's comments. It amounts to, "Yeah, the Senators acted badly, but you called them names, which is just as bad..." That kind of thinking, in effect, excuses the first bad behavior.

    But someone much wiser than all of us once wrote, "The beginning of wisdom is to call things by their right name." As Bob pointed out, the actions of our elected "representatives" are what's shameful here, and many of them did, indeed, behave as whores in swapping their vote (integrity, commitment to their constituents and the Constitution, etc.) for political gain. What gain, you may ask? By going along with legislation they had previously expressed opposition to (or at least serious concerns), they knew they'd get perks and programs for their states, which translate into votes that put them back in office. That's a tad more complex than a simple paper bag full of money in exchange for their vote...but not much. It's too bad that Mr. Rutledge, like the majority of Americans, isn't as upset about our representatives flagrantly violating their oath of office as he is about a photo of a prostitute. That hypothetical prostitute won't effect you, Mr. Rutledge, or any of us in this discussion unless we choose to enter into a business transaction with her.

    The whoring the Senate is doing, however, affects every one of us, including those children about whom Mr. Rutledge is so concerned. The ever increasing encroachment into our personal lives by government, and their rapidly growing erosion of our liberties, isn't a hypothetical, sterile exercise in political philosophy; it has a very real impact on how we live our lives, and how those children are going to have to live theirs.

    If Mr. Rutledge had read any of my previous essays, he'd recognize that I see career politicians of whatever party as whores by definition, for their main concern is their position and power instead of our rights and freedoms.

    No, Mr. Rutledge, I don't blanche at words, even strong words, when actions by arrogant elitists are destroying the freedoms that made this nation great. And to the degree that you let words distract you from their actions, to that same degree you are helping to keep those whores in office. I used the term "whore" deliberately, for that's what the U.S. Senate (the Congress in general, actually) has become. That's our fault, Mr. Rutledge, because we let other things distract us from what they're doing. Well, some of us do, anyway.
    Paul E. Scates
    Dec. 21, 2009
  • Brian Rutledge
    Mr. Scates We agree on the obsenity practiced by our elected officials. Where I take issue is this so called hypothetical whore you keep referring to and stating that she would only affect me if I entered into a business deal with her. Well, this is not a make believe or hypothetical person whoring herself out.She is real. Go to any town in the world and you will find her. I am much more concerned about her, wherever she is, than our whoring politicians in Washington.

    Maybe we can stike a compromise. You take on elected unpricipled officials and I'll concern myself with the person who has lost their life through prostitution.
  • Definition: whore

    A prostitute.

    A person considered sexually promiscuous.

    A person considered as having compromised principles for personal gain.

    intr.v. whored, whor·ing, whores

    To call these senators whores is precise and accurate. They have clearly sold-out for silver that which they have sworn to uphold,i.e., principles.

    Have politicians done similarly in the past? Absolutely,no argument from me. Does that make all present and future political prostitution acceptable, Brian? When do we say "Enough!" ? Our Republic cannot stand morally bereft leadership indefinitely. It may already be too late, but for the sake of my children and their children I do not intend to concede defeat without a fight to the bitter end.

    You have tried to make this a discussion about Chritianity, Brian, always eager to ridicule and condemn, but you have told us many times about your own strong moral convictions. Now I have to wonder whether your morality sees justice in amoral men and women usurping power and fortunes illegally, i.e., unconstitutionally.

    War with Britain was fought over tyranny much less egregious than what we are facing today under Obama, et al.

    I am with Patrick Henry who said in his famous "Liberty of Death" speech:
    "This is no time for ceremony....I consider it as nothing less than a question of freedom or slavery; and in proportion to the magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of the debate. It is only in this way that we can hope to arrive at truth, and fulfill the great responsibility which we hold to God and our country. Should I keep back my opinions at such a time, through fear of giving offense, I should consider myself as guilty of treason towards my country, and of an act of disloyalty toward the Majesty of Heaven, which I revere above all earthly kings."


















  • Brian Rutledge
    dr theo Thank you for your comments and I always examine myself after reading them. I too am appalled about the behavior of our elected officials, conservatives and liberals alike. Both sides actively engage in this activity of 'trading' and going against their so called stated principles to get what they want. I think they are almost all hypocrites. My representatives are conservative republicans and have fought for and won a 600 million dollar federal funding for so a called flood prevention project that is really a develpoement scheme in my district. It is shameful . Let developement come from the private sector.

    And yes they have sold out for silver and given up their prinicples in doing so.But, I simply think showing a picture of a young girl whoring her body for sex as crude, vulger and repulsive and degrading in the worst way. If you believe that a girl stooping to such depravity is analogous to our congressman's actions, then I can not change your mind, but I do think there are areas where lines should be drawn and such comparisons unnecessary.The misery and depravity these girls have sunk to can in no way be even remotely compared to our elected officials. Both are wrong, but to speak of their actions in the same breath is repulsive to me. Surely civilized men can do better

    And I am sorry but it makes me angry when so called loving, compassionate Christians stoop to use such comparisons.Like I said,I agree with the concept of our elected officals 'whoring' out their principles, but personally refuse to show pictures of young depraved girls whoring out their bodies. That is where this atheist draws the line
  • So it wasn't so much the word or the comparison to these "representatives," but the photo I used of the prostitute to provide a visual cue of exactly what we're talking about.

    Well, that helps me understand your discomfort at least a little bit better.

    Actually, as shameful as actual prostitution is, I think an argument could be made that what our elected "representatives" are doing is even worse, morally. After all, unless the prostitute is married, she is not betraying a sacred oath in peddling her virtue. She also isn't wasting someone else's property in the process, either, as are these dirtbags who waste our tax dollars bribing each other and bribing the people for their votes with their own money.
  • Brian Rutledge
    Property and tax dollars are important but can be salvaged in the long run. The young girl prostituting her body has prostituted her 'soul'- her essence that almost can never be redeemed.I am truly sorry if you don't see the difference between the loss of someones essence or 'soul' and the loss of principles when someone abuses the Constitution.I will fight for our property and government and tax dollars, but will fight to the death to salvage a young girl from slipping into prostitution. The difference to me is staggering. I think the photo and you are trivializing the plight of the young girl prostitute by comparing her to a bunch of greedy, unethical congressmen.My heart goes out to her, not them
  • A girl prostituting her body is indeed very sad, and you are right that the long-term impact on her are terrible.

    We should indeed try to help girls avoid that life and those that are caught up in it to get out of it.

    But at the same time, the prostitution of one's oath is reprehensible on a national scale. And the damage done by that prostitution of public virtue (the loss of freedom, the damage to our republic, the state-sanctioned theft) multiply the evil and the damage to a national scale.

    On one thing we can agree: my heart does not go out to the prostitutes of public trust in Washington. There is every reason they should no better, and have infinitely more choices than the women who get caught up in prostitution...yet they choose graft and misuse of the public trust.
  • Brian Rutledge
    Some comparisons and analogies are valid and some are not. I wonder if Jesus would consider the tragedy of a young girl losing her 'soul' to prostitution equal in any way what-so-ever to some men and women who violated some countries man made Constitution. Abandoning a countries laws on something as trivial as whether or not some governments constitution was violated by unpricipled people was of no interest to Jesus.A young girl abandoning her 'soul' was of utmost importance to Him.The two concepts are lightyears apart
  • Brian Rutledge
    Wow. What a great Christian this man is, calling Americans 'whores' if they disagree with his views. I wonder if during his morning prayer with his children if if tells them to call other people 'whores' if they disagree with them. Maybe even give his kids a copy of the picture so they can show it as well. Can't you hear his kids on Christmas morning asking " Daddy. Tell us about those whores again"
  • You still seem to be suffering from that misperception of Christians and Christianity that is common in our Biblically-illiterate society, that Christian=mealy-mouthed pushover.

    That is simply not the case.

    You will notice from the Bible that people who know the truth are called to speak it clearly, including when it involves behavior that is like prostitution (i.e. selling affection and favors for material gain).

    Examples: http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=har... and http://www.biblegateway.com/keyword/?search=pro...

    It is not a simple matter of "disagreement." These so-called "representatives" have sold their virtue, their first allegiance (to the people they represent), to get material gain. They are at least as shameless and reprehensible as the woman who sells her sexual virtue for cash.

    And these whores have not only sold out their own virtue, they have sold out the freedom and property of the American people, and have sold out the Constitution they swore to uphold.

    They make street-walkers look pretty virtuous in comparison.
  • Brian Rutledge
    I am fully aware that Christians are not commanded to be mealy-mouthed and can be as aggressive and vindictive as the next guy. But again, it is merely your view that these Senators have sold out the Constitution and have no virtue. Every Congressperson in the last 100 years or possibly since its inception have made 'deals'. Thus they are all whores for not standing by their convictions and refusing to NEVER 'trade'.

    Again it is your right to this personal opinion about them being whores. Others in your camp may hold a similiar personal view. But your views that they are whores is not written in stone. You just disagree with them and I have always taught my kids that people will always disagree with their views. I refuse to teach my kids to call those to whom feel differently about something 'whores'. It is childish name calling and adds nothing to the conversation. Surely the author could present his side without such eight year old behavior .

    If he( and you) do feel calling someone a whore is a Christian thing to do , then I guess you wouldn't mind teaching this Christian virtue to your kids
  • No, it is not merely my view that these senators have sold out the Constitution. It is abundantly, crystal clear that they have sold out the Constitution in support of this socialist monstrosity.

    I have pointed out ad nauseam (http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/12/govt-health-...) that this contemptible legislation is a gross and egregious violation of the Constitution. It is only up for debate with those who are astonishingly ignorant of the Constitution, or simply do not care.

    There are times when a person commits an immoral act so willfully, so egregiously, that their acts deserve to be denounced in blunt, clear language. That is exactly what these senators have done. They have done so not merely on ideological grounds (which would be bad enough), but that have ripped off the American taxpayer for their own material gain in the process. Short of profanity, this denunciation of their shameful behavior is as close as one can get and still do justice to the offense done.

    If one is a thief, they need to be called a thief. If one is a blackmailer, one needs to be called a blackmailer. If one is a liar, one needs to be called a liar. If one is a whore, one needs to be called a whore. One of the reasons our culture has sunk to such depths is that shame is no longer employed; everyone is too mealy-mouthed to employ a little shame to motivate people to correct errant behavior.

    As to whether calling a whore a "whore" is "a Christian thing to do," I believe I supplied several references which point out that if the shoe fits, then it needs to be worn.
  • Brian Rutledge
    I guess your answer means that it is okay, from a Christian worldview, to teach children that someone who violates the Constitution by voting for a 'socialist agenda' is a whore. Gosh, even Jesus in Luke didn't start calling the woman prostitute who washed his feet with oil a whore, but waited to see if she would redeem herself and she did and he forgave her without the name calling. He held his tongue on such rhetoric and you would think todays Christians would want to follow suit.
  • I don't think you want to understand, here, Brian. I have tried to make it abundantly clear that (1) these senators have violated the Constitution (which you now seem to accept), and (2) that the manner in which they did it is akin to the whore who sells her virtue for material gain. I even tried to point out that if they had done so for purely ideological reasons, while they still would have been betraying the Constitution, at least their behavior would not have been whorish without the involvement of the bartering.

    It is interesting to note that the prostitute you mentioned in the Bible was repentant for her behavior (she was not engaged in it when she came to Jesus), while whores like Mary Landrieu are even proud (http://www.dakotavoice.com/2009/11/selling-out-...) of the haul they made in selling their virtue.

    If you want to know what kind of meal-mouthed words Jesus had for those who were arrogantly unrepentant for their immoral behavior (mine and Paul's pales in comparison), you might try Matthew chapter 12 and Matthew chapter 23 for a start. Many of those "names" (like hypocrites, bind guides, sons of Hell, etc) would fit these senators as well.
  • Brian Rutledge
    " whores like Mary Landrieu " I have to admit I exploded into laughter over that casual depiction. Not sure I agree, but will concede on all points
  • Thank you, Brian. I'm at least glad I could provide you with a laugh; a good laugh is worth more than money can buy!

    And just to be clear, it had nothing to do with her sex; the same could be said of Ben "Bribed" Nelson or any of the other whores making out in this deal.

    Have a great day!
blog comments powered by Disqus