Everybody else
has on looks of outrage, sadness, and all the other praiseworthy
emotions about the present presidential situation.
True to my absolutely
classless tradition, I am having an absolute ball.
I have admitted
fearlessly unto you that I have known Lake High for well
over forty years. If that does not show a lack of class,
I challenge anyone to tell me what does. But a joke Lake
told sums up the present Clinton situation beautifully.
There was a professional
con man who had taught his son all the tricks. One day,
the little fellow asked his father, "Dad, is there
ever a time when you should just tell the TRUTH?"
The father looked
a bit taken aback, then he looked thoughtful. Finally
he said, "Son, in a real pinch, ANY gimmick will
do."
Thus spake William
Jefferson Clinton.
Another classless
remark: I LIKE Clinton. He is very much a Southerner.
He is real trash, but he is the kind of trash I am used
to. When he flew in the face of all the rules of politics
and selected Al Gore for his Vice President, he gained
a lot of loyalty from me.
They are both
Southerners. They are Southern turncoats, but so is every
other Southerner who is now a public figure. Clinton feels
comfortable working with another Southerner, and I like
that. When Al Gore went to Yale, he was a roommate of
Tommy Lee Jones.
In these days,
when the so-called conservative Southerners are every
bit as anti-white as liberal ones, I fail to see the difference.
In the midst of
the present flood of commentary, let me interrupt the
chorus of conservative "DUHHs" to make a couple
of simple points:
First, no practicing
addict to anything, be it alcohol or sex, should be president.
Secondly, the
sexual harassment that occurred in the Oval Office had
nothing to do with the consensual relationship between
Bill and Monica. When any executive provides access in
return for sex, it creates a hostile work environment
for the OTHER, repeat OTHER, young women in the office.
That is the harassment. It has nothing to do with the
consensual relationship.
Now back to conservatives
trying to contradict liberals who say it was a consensual
relationship.
In Washington,
I would always make points like that, which utterly destroyed
the other side when they were made. But the conservatives
always went right back to their "DUHHs." Their
attitude toward me was once expressed beautifully, accurately,
and I am not kidding here, in MAD Magazine: "Him
smart. Me throw rocks."
I like Clinton's
Southernness, but I DO hate liberals, and I am deeply
and truly enjoying watching the total destruction Clinton's
situation is causing liberalism. Even the press is talking
about the libs' wild hypocrisy. The most amazing people
are noticing that you simply cannot pry the truth out
of these people with a corkscrew.
I said one thing
to my brother Jon some months ago that is very important
today. This Clinton thing has driven the first critical
wedge between the American left and the national media
The national media
is hard left, but if you understand it, you can do a lot
with it. Back in 1982, Paul Weyrich discussed his astonishing
success with the press in his article in The New Right
Papers. He made the point that the media is made up of
people, and the first thing you do in dealing with people
is to figure out what they want from you.
Nobody gets along
in the media if he is not a good liberal or one of the
few thoroughly vetted and acceptable respectable conservatives.
It is true that each person in the press is, ideologically,
your dedicated enemy. He couldn't get there if he were
anything else. But there is a huge mass of people there,
and every single one of them is in front of you for a
reason. They need news. They need a well-written press
release that is highly quotable. If you write it well
enough, they'll use your words entirely!
I was a new appointee
in the Reagan Administration, for heaven's sake, and I
got my picture and favorable coverage in the New York
Times because I wrote a major part of the reporter's story
for him! Paul Weyrich was born and bred up North, but
he gave David Beasley his Orwell Award for demanding the
removal of the Confederate flag.
I choose my friends
well, gang! My smart remark to Jon came directly from
listening carefully to Paul Weyrich's wisdom about the
press. When the Administration struck out, it struck at
Starr, but it also hit the media.
Everybody blames
the press, but I noticed that this time the press took
it personally. Maybe I noticed because I have dealt with
them a long time. At the Voice of America, I was one of
them briefly. It surprised me how badly they took it this
time. I think that they were caught in a uniquely bad
situation.
It is true that
criticism of the press happens a lot, but it is always
from only one predictable direction. They criticize the
right, and are attacked from the right. They report something
bad about a liberal politician, and he attacks them. If
they criticize one group, that group says they're awful.
This time, when the President jumped them for talking
about the scandal, everybody either agreed with him or
hid under the bed.
The press had
to report the situation because that was what readers
wanted to read about. Competition today is fiercer than
ever, and they simply could not do the boring stuff and
ignore the interesting story.
There was a time
when the press could ignore anything it wanted to. Us
older folks can remember when the network news ignored
the burning down of major parts of cities all over America.
People literally watched the news while they saw the smoke
going up in their cities, and the press never said a word
about it.
All good conservatives
have forgotten that, but I haven't. Ask anyone over 55,
and they'll remember it. I will never forget when one
of the all powerful network anchors felt that the hundreds
of thousands of letters of complaint required some kind
of response. He complained that he had gotten all these
demands, and in a clipped, angry voice, he read off the
list of riots and burnings that had occurred THAT DAY.
When you hear
the media commentators talking about the 1960's today,
you can see that they are almost crying. Boy, those were
the days! The three network bureaucracies had eliminated
ALL opposition. They were absolute. They can't do that
today. Even if they had wanted to, they couldn't have
ignored the Clinton scandal. The fact that liberals refused
to understand that hit home. NOBODY took the media's side
in this.
Public opinion
was four or five to one against them, saying that the
people wanted to forget about sex and talk about social
security, educational testing standards and other fascinating
stuff. For once, the junk that people tell the pollsters,
the same stuff that the press usually uses for their side,
was used against the press.
The same people
who would click the remote instantly the second the talk
went from Paula Jones to national educational testing
were saying they had had enough of scandal. And while
they talked about Clinton, none of Clinton's opponents
said a word. Good old conservative cowardice usually makes
them smile weakly and say the press is fair. Usually conservative
cowardice works for the press. Now it made conservatives
tacitly back Clinton.
Everybody, on
every side, was against the press, and the press could
not do a damned thing about it. They can dish out abuse,
but they are FAMOUS for not being able to take it. This
time they had to take it month after month after month.
The press got its butt kicked, and liberals are spending
the last bit of moral capital they have left.
Ain't we got fun? Let me add, that right now Clinton
is having the most exciting illicit relationship of his
life. That is how addicts behave, gang.
|