>The impact of the "distinguished"(now debatable)Chairman of the Judiciary Committee(Mr. Hyde) pontificating on the evils of infidelity & lying would be much stronger from someone who had always lived his own life according to those ideals.<
If in his pontificating, Mr. Hyde either directly or indirectly publicly criticized another for doing the same thing he himself has done, this, without a public disclosure of and repentance for his own errors, then, of course, he was foolish, and suffers precisely as he should.
Still, this does not in any way mitigate the circumstances of Mr. Clinton's repeated lying before a civil court and Federal Grand Jury. It by no means mitigates Mr. Clinton's repeated and pathological infidelity. Mr. Hyde, did not abuse the public, and he has not broken the law-certainly not repeatedly so as far as we know. Even if he has, Clinton would logically be in the exact same circumstances in which he currently finds himself.
Were I Clinton (and I am so very glad I am not), I would be on the phone repeatedly to Hyde, and I would publicly excoriate Salon, even launching my own internal investigation to be sure no one in the White House had anything whatever to do with the story. I would also, in the strongest terms, make it known that anyone who has anything to do with the White House, had better not become involved with leaks concerning the sexual dalliances of anyone, and I would repeatedly and publicly denounce, with extraordinary harshness, any "news" organization that would do what Salon did. I would also renounce the statements released by anonymous White House operatives to the affect of creating a "Sexual Armageddon" in the event of a push toward impeachment proceedings.
The above actions will likely have three excellent effects:
1.) It would instantly place Clinton on the "high road", thereby increasing the White House's credibility.
2.) It would add to Clinton's attempts to demonstrate his repentance, in essence showing that he understands Hyde's "pain" and does not wish it upon even his enemies. This will have two subsidiary effects: a.) it will convince many Americans of the sincerity of Clinton's understanding of his circumstances, and here again will add to his credibility, b.) having accomplished "a." it will place a remarkable amount of public pressure on Congress to be fair, forgoing spitefulness.
3.) If he is successful in protecting Hyde and others who are to judge him, Clinton will likely enjoy the effects of human nature as it plays out in the members of Congress. The Congress will be perhaps a bit more willing to forgo some of the partisan bickering and scheming that is sure to occur with these unfettered attacks. With public pressure (created as a result of the above) as well as that provided by their own relief given them by the very man they judge, congressional members will likely be more fair-minded than they would otherwise.
To be sure, if Clinton does nothing here, even if he is not to blame, he will be blamed by those suffering the consequences of their own stupidity. People will use him as a scapegoat even if he had absolutely nothing to do with the attacks, and in light of his credibility problem, I think many people, in the backs of their minds, will believe the White House was involved somehow.
Clinton merely cuts his own throat with his simple denials. His word has no value now, even amongst his supporters. He must put action behind his words to give them value, and eventually people will begin to believe him again. |
