Monday, December 21, 1998

GOP puts principle over proportion

By Molly Ivins

AUSTIN — Much as I hate to talk about impeachment when we could be discussing something that matters, this entire brouhaha has reached such a brennschluss of idiocy that there is no ignoring it. In the hope of salvaging something useful from this unedifying mess, let us take note of the instructive moral here: This is what happens when one follows principle without proportion.

The principle to which the Republicans have been clinging with something approaching dementia is that the president lied, not only to the American people but under oath as well. And so he did, certainly in his Paula Jones deposition if not during the perjury trap to which Kenneth Starr summoned him before the grand jury.

But he lied about his affair with Monica Lewinsky. This is not a matter of state. This does not rise to the level of :We did not trade arms for hostages" or "Our ships were attacked in the Tonkin Gulf" or even "I am not a crook."

By insisting upon principle with no sense of proportion, the Republicans make themselves, and Congress and the political system, ridiculous. If President Clinton has brought disrepute upon American politics, his enemies have brought ridicule. Now comes the interesting question: What on Earth possesses them?

There are several explanations for the exponential growth of bonkers partisanship in Washington. Interestingly enough, the Wall Street Journal carried a front-page article last week naming the following suspect: "a combination of regional party realignment, increasing precision in drawing congressional districts and declines in voter turnout that have magnified the influence of voters with strong ideological views."

I find it interesting that the Journal did not include itself in the "combination." The Journal’s editorial page is extremely influential and is notable for the tone it introduced into political commentary — rabid and personal. It has been a major player in provoking and fueling hysteria about the Clintons.

David Corn, Washington correspondent of The Nation, recently noted the D.C. media have two speeds: frenzy and neglect. They have been in frenzy overdrive for months. Anyone who has visited Washington lately will tell you that "obsession" is the word for the city's fixation on the Lewinsky story.

The capital is famously a city where everybody says what everybody else says. The echo-chamber effect of the place, plus the tendency that any ideological group has to cut itself off from information that does not conform to its worldview, accounts for a Republican majority out of touch with reality.

The group-think mentality of the Washington media is wonderfully exemplified in their treatment of Rep. Henry Hyde, who for months has been advertised to us as a man of impeccable reputation, great ability, "universally respected," "how lucky we are that Henry Hyde will lead the Judiciary Committee," etc. Those of us who have reported (and there are mighty few of us) that Hyde's involvement with a failed savings and loan in Illinois was considerably more suspicious than Clinton's involvement with Madison Guaranty were not just ignored but treated like pariahs. In a low moment even for the media, far more attention was paid to the fact that Hyde had an affair himself 20 years ago. Then came the Judiciary Committee hearings, and Hyde was revealed to be neither wise nor competent but rather an easily discombobulated and entirely partisan chairman.

A Republican political consultant in Washington recently said, "We have to impeach, and if we lose the House over it, so be it." When even your political consultants are thinking like that, uh-oh. When we see a party led — indeed, driven — to impeach a president who lied about sex by none other than that great thinker Rep. Tom DeLay (former bug exterminator from Sugar Land and the man who wants to bring back DDT), we must conclude that the country is in trouble.

The good thing about impeachment is that it gives everyone a chance to polish his best lines. A few of my favorites:

Mary Lenz, freelance writer: "If losing Clinton 25 years later is the price we have to pay for getting rid of Richard Nixon when it really mattered — such a deal! It’s not like we’re losing a Democrat."

Katha Pollitt, The Nation: "It proves that sex drives smart people crazy."

Alan Simpson, former Republican senator from Wyoming: Republicans don’t have to worry about polls showing two-thirds of Americans oppose impeachment: "The attention span of Americans is, 'Which movie is coming out next month?' "

My own sense of this bizarre moment in history is that the revulsion of Americans over this process is not because they condone Clinton's conduct or even like Clinton — it is a visceral reaction to the hideous invasion of the man's privacy driven by the nastiest partisan motives.

Molly Ivins’ column regularly runs on Mondays and Thursdays.

Creators Syndicate, Inc.