To: Daniel Schuh who wrote (23241 ) 12/20/1998 5:46:00 PM From: Daniel Schuh Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 67261
Ship of Fools nytimes.com Nobody got out of that one alive, did they? This is Maureen Dowd weighing in on yesterday's spectacle.It has gotten to the point where drastic action may be necessary. You know those movies about Ebola virus outbreaks, where the guys in sterile suits come in, seal off the area and completely irradiate it? They may have to do that to Washington. Just eradicate us and start from scratch. In a few, short days we have managed to make the terms "surreal," "bizarre," "split-screen America," "shocking," "runaway train" and "politics of personal destruction" useless clichés. Moving on, we get a point of view that might strike very closed to home here. Then again, it might not. Partisan hatred seems to be one of these things that can be recognized only on the other side of the aisle. I'll repeat my personal view on Livingston, he shouldn't have resigned. But in the government by lobbyists currently in force, I'm sure he'll do fine monetarily outside of (the elected) government. How his little act of political hygiene is supposed to clean anything up is beyond me, though. Why are the Republicans so obsessed, when everyone in his right mind agrees that impeachment is an outlandishly over-the-top punishment for Mr. Clinton and a self-destructive course for the country? Because they genuinely hate the President. They think he's a dishonest, immoral, issue-stealing, selfish child of the 60's. They don't think they're going to pay a political price for this, and if they do, they don't care. It might be a great time to see a lot of combovers, but it's not a great time to see a lot of stature. The House debate was not history. It was just a more hideous version of "The McLaughlin Group." While Republicans tried to draw the distinction that Mr. Clinton had perjured himself, they ignored that the President had been lured by the Starr-Jones attorney team into testifying on Monica Lewinsky. Ordinarily one would feel sorry for Mr. Livingston. But the Republicans have brought this sexual doomsday machine on themselves by focusing sosingle-mindedly on Mr. Clinton's sex life. The Republicans were so determined to do their high-tech lynching that they engaged in wacky role reversals. Many Republican hawks argued that Bill Clinton should not be bombing Saddam, claiming the timing was suspicious, even though they had hammered him for not bombing five weeks ago. In an incredibly unseemly display, Trent Lott, the majority leader, and former Bush national security adviser Brent Scowcroft and Bush Secretary of State Lawrence Eagleburger chimed in on the attack. There's too much hate here. And I hate it. I've gotten sort of acclimated myself. "Christian clarity", versus the obsolete values of Christian charity, and all that. 'Tis the season. HoHoHo.