Jindal: Only Senators Get to Cheat

Bobby Jindal apparently thinks that cheating on one’s wife and staying in office is a privilege extended only to senators, not representatives. In the wake of Rep. Vance McAllister getting caught making out with one of his staffers, Jindal thinks he should resign:

Jindal released a statement on Thursday, calling McAllister’s behavior “an embarrassment” and suggesting that “the best way to get privacy and work on putting his family back together is to resign from Congress.”

But a few years ago, when Sen. David Vitter was caught not only cheating on his wife but doing it for years while breaking the law with prostitutes, he had a very different take:

VITTER: While we are disappointed by Senator Vitter’s actions, Supriya and I continue to keep David and his family in our prayers. This is a matter for the Senator to address, and it is our hope that this is not used by others for their own political gain.

With prestige comes privilege, apparently. I wonder how he feels about, oh, let’s say governors cheating on their wives.

Follow Us!
POPULAR AT PATHEOS Nonreligious
What Are Your Thoughts?leave a comment
  • D. C. Sessions

    I wonder how he feels about, oh, let’s say governors cheating on their wives.

    Republican governors or Democrat (sic) governors?

  • John Pieret

    I suspect the metric isn’t the privileges of of senators vs. congressmen, it is the power of a long-term senator to aid Jindal’s larger ambitions vs. the power of a schlub first-term congressman stupid enough to get caught on security cameras.

  • dogmeat

    What about governors who cheat on their wives and then become representatives?

  • Synfandel

    Should “VITTER: While we are disappointed by Senator Vitter’s actions…” be “JINDAL: While we are disappointed by Senator Vitter’s actions…”?

  • Alverant

    Who’s allowed to do what is determined by the benefit to him. McAllister was an embarrassment to the cause so he gets to resign. Vitter’s vote was needed so he gets to stay.

  • http://en.uncyclopedia.co/wiki/User:Modusoperandi Modusoperandi

    McAllister should resign. He’s worthless compared to Vitter, who was so committed to work that he wore a diaper. Even when he wasn’t at work. And was also with a prostitute. As a part of his Voter Outreach Program.

  • neuroguy

    In a little more enlightened environment we’d be having a completely different discussion.

    With regard to acceptance of polyamory we are about where we were 40 years ago regarding acceptance of homosexuality. There are monogamist hidden assumptions here (including the pejorative “cheating” in the OP and in the comments).

    What is the real likelihood in today’s climate an openly polyamorous person could be elected to office? They today have to remain in the closet, just like gays used to. And the exact same bad arguments are used against polyamory formerly used against homosexuality.

    And please spare me the talk about the “poor, long suffering” wife. As likely as not, his political potential motivated her to marry him in the first place; but even if that were not so, if one doesn’t accept his/her partner’s polyamory then break up. Problem solved.

  • caseloweraz

    Neuroguy: And please spare me the talk about the “poor, long suffering” wife. As likely as not, his political potential motivated her to marry him in the first place; but even if that were not so, if one doesn’t accept his/her partner’s polyamory then break up. Problem solved. (Emphasis in original.)

    That’s a rather cynical viewpoint for someone who touts “a more enlightened environment.” I doubt the man’s political potential is that common a factor in motivating politicians’ wives to marry them.

    Also, divorce is not as simple as you make it sound — even if no children are involved. I believe Mark Sanford’s former wife is a case in point.

  • dugglebogey

    Elected officials who voted for the ACA vs. those who aren’t traitors to all those who know right from wrong and know it’s wrong to get healthcare for the poors..

  • busterggi

    Clearly Jindal knows that his own sex scandal will come out sooner or later and he’s making sure his fellow Rethug cheaters will support his weepy insincere apology.

  • acroyear

    As always, the script is the same: if you are in the party of the congressional transgressor, and so is the governor, the transgressor needs to step down “for the sake of the family”. if you are in the party of the transgressor but the governor is not, then the transgressor shouldn’t step down from his professional responsibilities over a personal matter.

    been like that for the last 15 years, and probably a lot longer.

  • neuroguy

    @8:

    That’s a rather cynical viewpoint…

    Yeah, I plead guilty, I’m really rather cynical when it comes to most anything regarding politics. Perhaps I spend too much time reading Ed’s blog. However, I must say, I do not notice significantly less cynicism among the other commentators.

    You just know there’s going to be yet another big dog-and-pony show, with the man weeping crocodile tears of contrition while the wife makes a big show of standing by her man.

    You know where this doesn’t happen? France. The public not only even tolerates, but actually expects their politicians to have multiple partners. And on that, d’accord. What matters is the policies politicians promote.

    I doubt the man’s political potential is that common a factor in motivating politicians’ wives to marry them.

    ROFLMAO!!!!! Their wives marry them because they are just such good, morally upstanding men and solid citizens with nothing but the best interests of the nation at heart….

    Also, divorce is not as simple as you make it sound…

    No, thank our puritanical background for that.

  • felidae

    Davey the Diaper Boy got a free pass because the governor of Lousyana at the time was a Democrat and would have appointed his successor had he been ejected–McAllister also is not well liked in the Party, so this has nothing to do with immorality, just naked politics

  • https://www.facebook.com/swan.geese Swan Geese

    McAllister beat Jindal’s favored candidate in the house race and is FOR the Medicaid expansion. So I agree it’s political.

    Jindal is Louisiana’s very own wannabe tin pot dictator. For a recap of the shenanigans going on down here: http://louisianavoice.com/2014/04/03/jindal-health-plan-shows-he-wants-to-be-potus-in-worst-way-apparently-the-same-way-he-has-been-la-governor/

  • http://polrant@blogspot.com democommie

    Well, I am as cynical as the next guy (or maybe the next 10 guys) but this:

    ” As likely as not, his political potential motivated her to marry him in the first place; but even if that were not so, if one doesn’t accept his/her partner’s polyamory then break up. Problem solved.”

    seems pretty broadly brushed.

    This:

    “Spouse(s) Kelly Duncan McAllister (m. 1997); 5 children”

    seems to belie that comment. Plus, with five kids, divorce can NEVER be easy.

  • Vicki, duly vaccinated tool of the feminist conspiracy

    I’m polyamorous; that doesn’t mean I think everyone is, let alone that the right way to negotiate a relationship is to tell someone “guess what, I’m poly, if you don’t like it get a divorce.” If they are poly (is there any evidence for that?), a statement like “My wife and I are going to resolve this between ourselves, and appreciate your respect for our privacy at this difficult time” would be true even if the difficulty is the press prying into their personal lives, rather than one of them having discovered that the other has another lover.

    It’s equally reasonable to say “if someone doesn’t accept his/her partner’s desire for a monogamous relationship, then break up.” If people can’t agree on something like that, breaking up is the most likely outcome. But if anyone is “responsible” for the break-up, it’s the person who is asking for a major relationship change.

    If you know you’re polyamorous, or that you want a non-monogamous relationship, you should be up front about that from pretty early on. If you haven’t already, “do you want to be my boyfriend/girlfriend/partner?” is the time to ask “what does being partners mean to you?” (That’s good advice even if you’re both monogamous, or if you each know the other is also poly.)

  • Holms

    I wonder if Jindal had a public stance on Clinton’s affair (if he was in politics back then)… and I wonder if a pattern can be discerned in the acceptance or disapproval of the cheater based on their party membership…