Here

Linked from James Lileks, who comments here:

This sums up with exquisite precision the people we elect to guide our institutions:

Fix on something small and symbolic, and demonize it;

Propose a response that does little to address the fundamental problem;

Forbid the thing to others;

Reserve its use for yourself;

Adopt a penitent tone when caught which underscores the hypocrisy and makes you look like a dweeb for apologizing for something which, while petty, you have infused with moral failings.

I'm not big on shouting HYPOCRITE, for the most part, because failing to do a thing you endorse does not mean the thing you're endorsing isn't a good idea. But that equation changes when it's something they want to take away from you, but reserve for themselves. In any case, it's just laughable to see a weightless fool who, for the sake of public image and sending the right messages, has to apologize for having the wrong kind of water container -- and has an aide describe it as an indulgence.

Sir. Six oysters for breakfast with a rasher of bacon is an indulgence. Three showgirls in your lap is an indulgence. Racing a car at high speed on weekends is an indulgence. Having a moral tuning fork that twinges when someone drinks water from a plastic bottle is an affectation.

This behavior has been seen with more serious things, like personal handguns and paying taxes. Rules are for the ruled, not the rulers.