Because You Never Asked

 

     (This essay was written during the pre-Lewinsky days of the Clinton administration, where the neo-con attempts to bring him down can already be seen to be in fifth gear. A 2008 postscript will follow this essay.)

     Richard Nixon’s legacy to American politics (see essay “Milhouse”) is being felt quite strongly these days in the form of the so called “Whitewater Hearings”. Since the days “Tricky” and his cronies got into the burglary business, it has become obligatory for the party not in the White House to befoul the president with some kind of scandal. This edition of “Dial-A-Scandal” has not been easy for the opposition. Having failed with a varying array of sex, drugs and rock and roll gambits, the Republicans have finally managed to arm a spectacle with a cheap buffet of accusations and innuendo which might prove the president used his influence to lose a little money in a shady business deal so long ago, nobody even knew what a Hillary Rodham was at the time. Not only that! The president then tried to make sure nobody found out about it, whatever “it” is supposed to be. Quite coincidentally, this is supposed to have something to do with governing this country.

     The Republican witch hunters, seemingly incapable of proving any criminal or ethical wrongdoing, have decided that “character” is the issue here. I’d like to remind these people that the president is the most visible man in this country. Hardly a day goes by where we don’t see his image and hear his voice in a variety of settings and circumstances. His character is being tested and scrutinized every day. Don’t you have something better to do, like play golf or give a patriotic speech before the Retired Philanderers of Savings and Loan Corruption?

     As far as typical “Dial-A-Scandal” scandals are concerned, this one is scandalously lacking in scandal. Let’s explain it in the following manner: let’s say during the previous baseball season the Dodgers accused the Giants of paying off umpires and opposing players to fix games, an extremely serious charge, something like Watergate or Iran-Contra. The Dodgers raise hell and prove their accusations, leaving the Giants besmirched and degraded for years to come. The next season, the Giants, eager to exact some kind of revenge, will do anything to bloody the good name of their eternal foes. Desperately pursuing this goal, they claim to have evidence which might prove a Dodger pitcher threw a spitball. Can you believe it? A spitball!

     The taxpayers are being made to spend millions of dollars on investigations and hearings just to see if Bill Clinton threw a spitball.

     This is not to say these hearings have been totally in vane. I’ve learned a number of things while watching (cue the CNN musical lead in) the Whitewater Hearings. First and foremost, I’ve learned that no reasonably adjusted human being going about their business in an orderly, socially redeeming way, with a rational, positive outlook, harmoniously accepting and being accepted by their fellow man, could possibly understand one word of this sludge. People are being “recused”, documents “redacted”, and it is all played out to the famous chords of the “I-Can’t-Remember-I-Can’t-Recall-I-Have-No-Recollection” chorus. These hearings should come complete with English translations. What the hoo are they talking about?

     I’ve also learned there are a bevy of good looking young women hanging around at these hearings. They generally sit right behind the senators and congressmen, who are busy re-enacting the Spanish Inquisition amidst the dignified, wood varnished, softly upholstered elegance of the hearing room. These women never seem to be paying attention, which could be construed as a sign of intelligence. Quite frequently, they can be seen conspiratorially whispering and giggling, as if they’ve just found the cutest guy in the room.

     This raises some cogent questions, especially if we might be adept at the Nixonian art of politics. What are all these menopausal senators and representatives doing with all these tempting young women? Are we to believe such feminine splendor also coincides with the best legal minds coming out of our universities (I don’t mean to imply this is not possible, I’m just implying the numbers don’t add up here)? Are all the ugly girls now working as Dallas Cowboy cheerleaders? I’ll leave these queries to the wisdom of the American people.

     I’ve also learned it is OK for a United States Senator to wear a particularly bad hair piece. The senator in question is far too old to be called menopausal and his toupee does nothing to change that impression. He is, however, the only person in the room who seems to have been caught in a sudden rain storm. If an unexpected gust of air conditioning were to come up, the “piece” would surely fly right off his leathery scalp. Listen up ’ol fella --- if Henry Gonzalez has no problem looking like he does, you can get rid of your raggedy hair piece too. At your stage in life, any amorous activities will depend more on your wallet than your hair. Be a man! Grow up. (If I’m not mentioning any names it’s because these hearings have me so confused, I don’t know who can say what about who anymore. The last thing I need is to be sued for “Making Fun Of A Senator”).

     Perhaps the reader might think I’m being a wise guy, that I am being disrespectful to important elected officials. My reply is to say “yes“! It’s true. What other attitude do these hearings deserve? Is there one ounce of sincerity being shown by the participants? Would any of the current witch hunters be doing this if the president was from their party? These hearings don’t deserve my respect --- nor yours either.

     Bullshit!

     (Post Script 2008 - With the hindsight of future events now having moved into the past, we all know that President Clinton was painfully subjected, along with the whole country, to impeachment proceedings for telling a little white lie about a sexual encounter. Many of the same people who mounted that burlesque have refused to sanction in any way whatsoever the many serious transgressions of law (not spitballs) “their” president, George W. Bush, could, at the very least, be accused of. It is interesting to note that Clinton’s own Attorney General, Janet Reno, appointed a hostile Special Prosecutor to investigate her own president. Can anyone imagine John Ashcroft or Alberto Gonzalez doing anything like that? Yeah, sure.