9801240123
DETROIT FREE PRESS
980125
Sunday, January 25, 1998
METRO FINAL
1E
MITCH ALBOM
Copyright (c) 1998, Detroit Free Press
FLAP SAYS AS MUCH ABOUT US AS CLINTON
Ionce had a summer job as a janitor. I worked alongside an older man who had
been doing it a long time. Since I was young and energetic, I would finish my
tasks quickly, then ask the boss what else he wanted me to do.
After a few days of observing this, the older janitor yanked me aside.
"Listen," he said, "if you keep showing 'em you can do that much, they'll just
expect it every time."
I believe he was right. I also believe it works in reverse. Show people how
little can be expected and, pretty soon, they expect very little.
Which brings us to the scandal of the week, President Clinton and his alleged
affair with an intern, Monica Lewinsky.
It was fascinating to watch this story develop. When the charges first
surfaced, there was a yawning reaction from the American public. Only after
every newspaper, radio talk show and TV morning program devoted itself to the
subject did people seem to be bothered -- mostly because they were being told
how much they should be bothered.
"These are the most serious charges yet," said former Clinton aide George
Stephanopolous on "Good Morning America."
"Serious trouble,' said political pundit Tim Russert on the "Today Show."
"Impeachment might very well be an option," said Rep. Henry Hyde, chairman of
the House Judiciary Committee, who just happens to be a Republican.
Of course, these experts also said that that impeachment would come as a
result of public pressure. Yet one survey taken in the heat of these charges
still showed less than half of the American public thought an affair with
Lewinsky was grounds for impeachment, and barely half thought that lying about
it was.
Diminishing expectations, remember?
With a shrug
Now, you might ask why a 51-year-old president putting the moves on a
21-year-old intern doesn't bother us as much the fact that he might be
covering it up. After all, we're talking adultery. Not to mention the
troubling idea that any attractive young woman who comes to the White House
for exposure to politics might get exposure she didn't count on.
Can you see the parents of future interns, waving their daughter good-bye as
she gets on the bus? "Take care sweetheart! ...Dress warmly! ...Don't let the
president gets his hands on you!"
And yet, most Americans took this Lewinsky story with a shrug. Why? Because
we've already endured two years of charges about the president pulling down
his pants for Paula Jones. We've already heard accusations of cheating sex
from Gennifer Flowers. We've listened to countless wails about improper
fund-raising, draft-dodging, marijuana smoking.
It's not that these are small charges. But Americans tire of pointed fingers
that never touch the mark. And another thing, something the self-absorbed
Washington pundits can't seem to comprehend.
We have become so used to fame equaling bad behavior, we almost expect it.
Lowest common denominator
Consider this: In the same week that Clinton faced his
sleeping-with-the-intern charge, basketball star Chris Webber was arrested
outside Washington on charges of assaulting a police officer, and possession
of and driving under the influence of marijuana.
He was playing for his team the very next night. No shame. No interruption. A
few people booed. Then he slam-dunked and they all cheered. This is how much
people cared that Webber -- who sold himself as a good, smart, principled
person -- was now in trouble with the law.
Again, it's not because these charges don't matter. It's just hard to think of
famous people anymore who don't flaunt an embarrassing blemish. Movie stars
cheat on each other and get into drugs. Athletes beat their wives. Rap stars
are charged with murder. And still we buy their movies, tickets and records.
So what does celebrity behavior have to do with the president? Plenty. Because
as a country ruled by celebrity, we can barely tell the difference. In many
ways, America is divided into the famous people, and the not-famous people.
And to paraphrase F. Scott Fitzgerald, it seems the famous are different than
you and me.
So instead of seeing Clinton as the man we elected to uphold the austere
tradition of the presidency, highest office in the land, we absorb him as
another famous person we see on TV, behaving badly. Hey, John F. Kennedy did
it? And we liked him.
This is pretty sad. It seems to me, that if we elect a man to represent the
best in us, he shouldn't be displaying the worst. But it's the same lowering
of standards that made cheating on your taxes or lying to your neighbor almost
expected behavior.
Maybe, if it proves true, this will be the scandal that breaks Clinton. Or
maybe it will dissolve into a he said-she said.
Either, way, when they call Clinton the Teflon president, I'm not sure they
mean the bad stuff doesn't stick to him. It may be that it doesn't stick with
us.
THIS ELECTRONIC VERSION MAY DIFFER SLIGHTLY FROM THE PRINTED ARTICLE.
COLUMN;BILL CLINTON;CONTROVERSY