This story is upsetting to many Americans for many different reasons. For some Americans, it’s the sex thing. For others, it’s the lying. Personally, I am shocked that Congress could decide to divulge the Starr Report on the Internet. I was so indignant by the whole thing, that I had decided that there was no way that I would read it. A question of principle. Somebody else’s private affair is none of my business. I don’t care if he’s the president. I’d prefer to live out my own erotic fantasies than to participate in this collective vicarious voyeurism.
For those who have a problem with the moral issue of extramarital sex, I don’t know what to say except that I’m not sure that it is morally more condemnable to fondle a young woman’s breasts rather than to shake the hand of a known assassin like Li Peng. And to those who wave the Bible around, what about all of those evangelical leaders who have been caught up in their own sex scandals? Evidently, to err is human. Even if you’ve got God. Even if you preach God. And what about the Christian concept of forgiveness? And for those who site the Ten Commandments, doesn’t the Bible also say that it is not for us to judge one another?
For those who object to the issue of lying: I sincerely believe that if Bill Clinton broke the branch of a cherry tree, he would do the exact same thing that Washington did. But this story isn’t about cherry trees. It’s a human story about two people who had a relationship and would have preferred to keep it quiet. We are all adults. We don’t live in a world that is black and white. Notwithstanding the sacrosanct roll that Americans give to the Truth, there are some situations in which we can do much more harm than good with our unmeasured and totalizing sense of honesty. Sometimes it’s necessary to put it all on a scale, weigh the difference, and decide which is the least of two evils.
I was moved by the meeting last Friday with the community of Irish Americans on the South Lawn of the White House: the endless applause, the ability of both Hillary and Bill to allow themselves to absorb every minute of that incredible shower of support with gloriously radiant smiles, notwithstanding the fact that the Starr Report was about to be made available to anybody on the face of the earth who was interested in reading it. Even the infinitely boring Al Gore managed to be amazingly charming, affable, and smiling during his introductions.
Then, after the document had been released, I began listening to the reports of journalists and interviews with Congressman on CNN who were speaking only of the gravity of the accusations and the sordidness of the details. So the next morning, I downloaded the report. I’m not sure exactly why. I had sworn to refuse to read it. I don’t think it was any of my business to read it. But I wanted to understand exactly what all of the comments I was hearing were in reference to.
The voyeurs of the world who had been hanging out with their computers on waiting for the great collective moment must have been disappointed. You have to have had a pretty tame and tiresome sex life to consider this material salacious. It’s tender. It’s trite. It’s tedious. But what’s most important is: It’s anything but impeachable. What a price to pay, for both of them, for a few sexual encounters.
Several months ago, I wrote an article proposing a new amendment to the constitution which would prohibit the asking or answering of invasive questions about what two consenting adults do with each other behind closed doors. It was obviously tongue in cheek. But maybe it shouldn’t have been. Maybe we do need to amend the constitution and get it down in black on white that private and personal matters are not to be made public dominion.
And while I’m at it I’d like to suggest another amendment. If the first demonstration of what our Congressmen mean by their serious sense of responsibility is to release this report on the Internet for all of the eyes of the world to see, not to mention our children’s, maybe we should remove them as delegates to our will when it comes to the decision of impeaching our president. We voted him into office, evidently we’re the only ones fit to vote him out, or decide that we want him to stay. And since they thought it fit to distribute the whole affair to everybody’s office and living room over the Internet, then let us vote via e-mail from the comfort of our own homes.
Many Italians have been complaining about the instrumental use of the Italian judicial system of late. Instead of departing from a crime committed and seeking out the responsible party to indict, we have been witnessing a wave of witchhunts. The victim is designated and the crime is created to order. Kenneth Starr, the Great Inquisitor, seems to have done much of the same. Someone evidently said "Get Bill Clinton." So he tried with Whitewater. Then he tried with Travelgate. And then came Paula Jones.
That’s another farce. How many women have not been victim to a scene similar to the one that Paula Jones recounted? What does a woman do on such an occasion? There are plenty of options: If you like what you see, you can decide to take advantage of the opportunity and enjoy it. And if you’ve gone to his hotel room, one would presume that this would be the option of first choice. You can be offended, feign shock, slap him in the face, and walk out in indignation. Or you can use a little sense of humor and put him in his place (and make him think twice about pulling such a stunt again) with roaring laughter and an "Is that all there is?" What you don’t do is wait until years go by and he has become president to decide that your personal dignity has been offended. Unless, of course, someone puts you up to it.
The judge in that case decided that there was no case, but in the meantime Monica and Bill were called in to confess their private sins in a public court room. And they lied. And who wouldn’t have? Why don’t we put all of those Congressmen who thought it appropriate to make this reading available to the entire world before a grand jury and ask them a few poignant personal questions and see how many of them are willing to reveal all? Who will ever be willing to speak the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth in a court of law knowing that everything you say may be turned into sumptuous bytes for the world wide web? Who hasn’t got a skeleton in his closet? I’d rather have a president human enough to be attracted to the opposite sex and able "to feel young again" than one caught up with ayatollian-style fundamental Protestantism and obsessed with his own self-righteousness.
As for our obsession with knowing everything, if the walls of the Oval Office could talk, who knows what stories they would tell of past presidents? Easily ones with more lascivious trivialities than those contained in the Starr report. However, once upon a time the media had more decency and practiced self-censorship in name of the public good. They even took it upon themselves to keep Roosevelt’s wheelchair a secret to the American public. Now they seem to think that we can’t sleep at night if we don’t know the brand name and color of our president’s underwear.
Enough is enough. The world markets are in turmoil. While the Bosnians perform their second elections since the Dayton accords, the ethnic Albanians in the Kosovo are being exterminated. The Russians have a communist prime minister, and Iran and Afganistan are lined up for a confrontation. The world is looking for leadership that only America can provide. It’s time to stop giving the peeping Toms air-time and for everyone to get back to doing some serious work.
September 1998