< PREVIOUS ] [ 1999 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >
Throughout the Lewinsky affair, certain right-thinking pundits kept finding fault with the American public. They seemed so sure that Bill Clinton's poll numbers would plunge as soon as the American people caught on.
But as more examples of presidential lust and stupidity came to light, culminating in the juicy Starr report, Clinton's approval ratings remained relatively constant.
For my part, I thought Clinton should resign. And if he were to be impeached and convicted, then his opponents should have been honest about their motives.
They told us that this is not about sex, this is
about the rule of law, about perjury and obstructing
justice.
Which was so much poppycock, of course. House Republicans weren't in any hurry to get rid of Newt Gingrich after he lied to an investigators -- but they did jettison him after the party lost seats in the 1998 mid-term elections.
Gingrich's putative successor, Bob Livingston, never took office as speaker of the house -- he resigned, and it wasn't about perjury or the rule of law, it was about sex.
And why not be honest and say it was about sex? It seemed sufficient grounds to me.
Back when I worked in various newspapers, office affairs were nothing but trouble. A reporter and an ad rep would closet themselves in the darkroom for purposes which had nothing to do with getting the paper out. They weren't doing their work. It also meant the production manager couldn't use the darkroom, which impeded the whole enterprise.
Further, the parties in these affairs always wanted
everyone else to abet their relationship, by lying when
spouses called or dropped by -- If my husband calls,
tell him I'm out on a story,
that sort of thing.
And if the affairs involved people at the opposite ends
of the hierarchy, there were always questions that reduced
office morale -- I work hard here, she flits and out
when she's not in bed with her boss, and look who gets the
pay raise and promotion.
From what I read, the White House wasn't immune to that sort of thing, either, with Clinton enlisting the Secret Service to mislead others about his activities, with his secretary arranging gift transfers, with the yeoman efforts to find a cushy job for Monica Lewinsky, etc.
So I don't know why the House Republicans didn't just stick to sex, without trying to dress it up with all their pious pronouncements about the rule of law.
That might explain why they never gathered much public support. It didn't take a sharp eye to see their duplicity and hypocrisy.
But there may have been more -- if I'm at all typical,
then the general public attitude may have shaped by the
lesser of evils
choice.
In other words, which of these represents a greater menace to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness?
A) A 50-something man lying about a sexual affair and attempting to cover it up?
B) A zealous prosecutor, accountable to no one with an unlimited budget and with no deadline, turning over every possible stone until he finally finds something, anything, that might justify his existence? And in this endeavor, he is supported by 13 stone-faced hypocrites, all chanting about the rule of law?
Given these two choices -- and last week, those were the only two choices -- most Americans rightly decided that B was the more serious threat, that we would be worse off if those guys won than if Clinton stayed in office, no matter how much he had demeaned and debased that office.
Is it over, now that the Senate has voted to acquit?
Of course not. It's no more over than the Vietnam War is over. It will be an issue in Republican primaries next year, and then in the general elections. The hard-core faithful will use the impeachment as their litmus test to determine who is pure enough to stand for the GOP.
And Starr's office is still in full operation, so it's entirely possible that he'll find something new to take to the House Judiciary Committee.
Some citizens might find this troubling, but note that while Washington was tied up with the Lewinsky affair, our economy thrived despite the Asian currency crisis, the Russian currency crisis, the Brazilian currency crisis, etc.
Further, they were busy on Lewinsky, so we were spared further developments in the War on Drugs. So much hate was aimed at Clinton that there wasn't any to spare for homosexuals, uppity women, welfare recipients, environmentalists and the usual threats to the American Way of Life.
Given that, the time and money spent on the special prosecutor's office starts to look like a bargain -- only $40 million, about 15 cents per person -- to keep the federal government focused on the sound and fury while leaving us alone.
< PREVIOUS ] [ 1999 Index ] [ Ed Quillen HOME ] [ SEARCH ] [ NEXT >