where are the standards?

In Sunday's News-Tribune Daniel Robison takes a few more pokes at Glenn Murphy and the "Family Values" Republicans. There's not much original in the essay, but it's as good as any piece that has pointed out the hypocrisy of some politically active Republicans.

Robison titles the essay "Where's the loyalty?", professing to be shocked and dismayed that the Republicans have backed away from Murphy so quickly. But what else would Robison want, given the circumstances? It'd be a much deeper level of hypocrisy to allow Murphy to stay!

Robison's effort also got me thinking about why we don't hear charge of hypocrisy about Democrats.

Maybe it's because Democrats don't have as many standards to violate. If "liberals" are more permissive then when they violate the norms of others, it would not be hypocrisy.

But Democrats have some standards. So, perhaps they don't engage in hypocrisy. But that's not true. Remember Al and Tipper's massive contributions to charity from a decade ago-- $353 in 1997 (on an income of nearly $200,000). Since the Democrats are the champions of the poor-- in word if not very often in deed-- where was the outrage from Democrats at this gross violation of their norms?

So, an interesting question arises: what would it take for the Democrats to censure one of their own? A pro-life governor wanting to speak at a Democratic National Convention? A population control advocate who fathered six children? An environmentalist who consumes a staggering amount of energy?

I'm not a member of either major political party, so I don't have a particularly partisan ax to grind here. Hypocrisy of any type should be condemned. And failure to have proper standards is not something about which someone should brag.