Situational Morality

Moralist David Vitter then:

Some current polls may suggest that people are turned off by the whole Clinton mess and don't care -- because the stock market is good, the Clinton spin machine is even better or other reasons. But that doesn't answer the question of whether President Clinton should be impeached and removed from office because he is morally unfit to govern.

The writings of the Founding Fathers are very instructive on this issue. They are not cast in terms of political effectiveness at all but in terms of right and wrong -- moral fitness. Hamilton writes in the Federalists Papers
(No. 65) that impeachable offenses are those that "proceed from the misconduct of public men, or, in other words, from the abuse or violation of some public trust."

In considering impeachment, Vitter asserted, Congress had to judge Clinton on moral terms. Decrying the law professors' failure to see this, Vitter observed, "Is that the level of moral relatively [sic] and vacuousness we have come to?" If no "meaningful action" were to be taken against Clinton, Vitter wrote, "his leadership will only further drain any sense of values left to our political culture."

Moralist David Vitter now:

"This was a very serious sin in my past for which I am, of course, completely responsible," Vitter said Monday in a printed statement. "Several years ago, I asked for and received forgiveness from God and my wife in confession and marriage counseling. Out of respect for my family, I will keep my discussion of the matter there — with God and them. But I certainly offer my deep and sincere apologies to all I have disappointed and let down in any way."

Aww, gee Dave, you can stuff your sorries in a sack, all right? Particularly obnoxious was the way Vitter's wife, on the campaign trail back in '99, cracked wise about going Lorena Bobbitt on her husband if he ever did what that awful Clenis had done. This was an especially crude way to use Hillary Clinton's public behavior to capitalize politically on the need of moralistic voters to use the electoral process as therapy.

The hypocrisy is bad enough, but it's hardly surprising. What it should be a reminder of is how creatures like Vitter get in in the first place -- by stroking sanctimonious rubes with their happy horseshit about fambly values and the sanctity of marriage and all that. The sacred institution, endlessly debauched by call girls and/or trophy wives, while their practitioners lecture all of us on personal behavior, and use gays as scapegoats.

Personal behavior does have some importance, inasmuch as it reflects to a certain degree how serious a person is in setting about the business of life and being responsible. A guy who skulks around behind his wife's back with $300/hr. call girls, and has the nerve to use someone else's indiscretions as campaign fodder, deserves whatever he gets.

Failing that, I'm sure we'd all settle for these would-be pulpit-pounders to just shut their cakeholes about the subject altogether, and concentrate on running the business.