|
Pi, whether or not your list is exhaustive, it is amusing, and it is certainly true to say that Clinton is the closest thing to trash we have had in the White House for a long time. The questions are, is that an inconsequential fact (i.e., just a matter of taste), and does the fact that trash thinks nothing of looking the other way if it is to his advantage mean that he is not to be held to account? You characterzize the apology business as a "matter of style", but the style reflects the sincerity of the remorse, and thus the character of the man. Even were it hypocritical, at least it would uphold the underlying values involved. Instead, we have let it slide, to some degree, only to have him characterize it, in the aftermath, as something about which he feels little shame, and as a persecution. By doing so, he has trashed our values and institutions, which can never be trivial. On the other, a man who abets a bank robbery with the rationalization that he was only paid to be the lookout is still part of the gang.... |
