Clinton's troubles tell us more about ourselves than they do about him

For months, CNN, MSNBC, The New York Times, The Washington Post and every other news media outlet in the world has been awash with stories of the embattled Clinton presidency. And oh, what a thrill it was when said news sources would stumble upon the latest minutia with which to obsess. I can still clearly remember the excitement in Lynne Russell's voice as she announced Lewinsky's new haircut on "CNN Headline News."

I won't delve into the up-to-the-minute yet not-surprisingly redundant reports about the ying-yang battle between Ken Starr and Lewinsky over immunity for her testimony. Nor the monotonous latest legal briefings on what some federal judge somewhere said about executive or attorney-client privilege. Nor the not-quite-tear-jerking pleas of Tripp as she complained about the cheap shots members of the media made at her. Nor the he-said-she-said accusations between White House spokespeople and the independent prosecutor.

It was almost as if there was nothing else happening in this country.

Jack Schillaci Slam It to the Left

Finally, after months of dodging the subject, Clinton expressed his mea culpa and acknowledged that he had had "inappropriate relations" with the former intern. None to be satisfied with anything, his critics harped on the subject to the point that he stated last Friday that he was "... sorry about it" and that it was a "bad mistake."

But what exactly did he do? He had an extra-marital affair, an all-too-common occurrence in this country. He is not the first commander in chief to commit such an offense, but he is the first to have his fling outed to the American public during his term in office.

Did he lie to the American people? Probably - at the very least, he took an all-too-literal usage of the phrase "sexual relations" too seriously. Like the presidents before him who had kept secrets like this from the public, he figured that his privacy would be respected rather than violated. And while that doesn't excuse his actions, it does go a long way toward explaining them.

The charges of obstruction of justice and perjury are vague and mired in legalese. Clinton's actions are open to a million different interpretations - only a few of which imply criminal intent.

So what of these indiscretions? Many of Clinton's critics have said that his actions seriously challenge his character and the respect with which the president's office should be held. But the president, by definition, is a political leader, not a religious one like, say, the pope. His job is to shape and enforce policy and guide the development of the nation, not to set the moral status quo. While his behavior may call into question the stability of his marriage and other issues affecting only his private life, it does not mean he is incapable of discharging the duties of his office. It should be noted that despite the mounting pressures on all sides, Clinton has managed to keep doing his job throughout the controversy. The respect that a public official deserves should be based on how he or she does his job, not where he or she spends his nights.

Though it is devastating to a family, extra-marital affairs are all too common today. As noted feminist Gloria Steinem wrote in an op-ed piece for The New York Times, Clinton is really guilty of little more than "frat-boyishness." Maybe he should rush Beta.

But what the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal means for our society's intrusive tendencies is significantly worse. When news media icons like Peter Jennings and Tom Brokaw are covering the same topics with the same zeal as the hosts of "Hard Copy," something has gone seriously wrong. When a tabloid-esque investigation leads to an invasion of an individual's privacy, it's a shame. But when that investigation is brought about by a public body and sanctioned by drooling American television viewers, it's disgusting.

Label me too liberal if you want, but I don't care who the president is shtupping. Public voyeurism and partisan politicking has led to likely irreparable damage to the president for something that society publicly decrees but privately tolerates among many of its members. And it is a sign of our society's tendency to expect perfection from political leaders even though, like all of us, they are flawed.

It's sad that in the end, this scandal will actually end up revealing more about our society than it will about our president.

- Jack Schillaci can be reached over e-mail at jschilla@umich.edu.

09-08-98