From The Editor |
And our great national agony continues.
It’s the prurience factor that bothers me, Dear Readers. And the abysmal inability of the general population to see beyond that factor.
What’s at stake here is not who did what to whom (a little riff for Bill and Nadine here, please!), but the fact that a lie and coverup occurred.
But everybody’s stuck on the sex part, like sniggering 12-year-olds.
I’ve listened to the talk radio stations, CNN, etc., and heard indignant voices (mostly women!) state that "he’s doing a great job and I don’t care what he did in private."
Well, I don’t care either.
But I do care that he lied about it. Not just to the TV cameras or his staff or his wife, but to a grand jury. And under oath. And he lied a whole lot.
We impeached that Godless Epitome of Evil Mr. Tricky Dick for the same thing – he lied about what he knew and when he knew it. The fact that I think he was an obnoxious sleaze with delusions of a Nixonian dynasty and a deep contempt for the American Public had nothing to do with the impeachable offenses.
The fact that one president lied about theft, threats, blackmail, and burglary, and the other lied about deep kissing, doesn’t eliminate the basics: a material lie under oath is perjury, whether it’s to cover up illegal shenanagans or messing around on the wife.
The fact that the American Public is willing to become apoplectic over the former and forgive the latter is a sad commentary on our situational ethics.
The fact is, we wuz wrong, like I said last month. There are ethical absolutes. And a lie told under oath by the President of the USA is an impeachable offense … no matter what it’s about.
The fact is, sadly, we probably won’t be shut of this whole prurient mess until he resigns and it ceases to be "news".
Because I don’t think we’re grown-up enough to ignore the naughty bits and focus on the real issue: dishonesty under oath.