Scott Stein upbraids Glenn Reynolds (aka the Instapundit) for his sloppy and insulting comparison:
[P]rostitutes sell themselves for money — the most intimate part of themselves, even their souls, some opponents of legalized prostitution might say. So looked at this way, Congress is full of prostitutes. Members of Congress sell their souls (if any in Congress have such things). Principles, values, the interests of the nation, the Constitution — all of it — are up for sale to the highest bidder, and that bidder need not be offering money directly. Votes or influence in a political party will often do just fine. Of course, these lead to money and power, which is what the whores in Congress want.
But in many ways Congress is nothing like a prostitute. A prostitute only wants cash that customers actually have, and usually tells them the real price of the services being purchased. A prostitute doesn’t impose hidden fees through inflation (we don’t generally give prostitutes the power to print money, but somehow we let Congress approve stimulus packages and spend money that doesn’t exist). A prostitute doesn’t increase the national debt (in fact, it is government, by keeping prostitution illegal, that increases the deficit in yet another way, by making income from prostitution outside of the system and not taxable).
[. . .]
Yet I’ve never heard of a prostitute that had to convince constituents that they wanted to get laid. I don’t recall prostitutes having to give speeches to persuade their constituents that the sex would be good for them and worth the price. Prostitutes have willing and eager constituents. Prostitutes might proposition men, advertise their wares, but they don’t have to force themselves on johns. Prostitutes don’t have to rape anyone.
Can the same be said of Congress?
Glenn, comparing prostitutes to Congress is insulting — to the prostitutes. Perhaps you owe them an apology.
