Commentary
Certitude
- by Bob DeSena , June 14, 2011
As you read this, the disposition of one more squirming, sobbing, lying public "servant" may have already occurred. If not, it will shortly. That is political calculus.
But what have we learned from the latest betrayal of trust, from the sordid travails of Anthony Weiner? Sadly that the bar has not been lowered, the bar is gone. This story is not about him, it's about us and what we have come to tolerate. It's also about how, in a very real way, our media culture of be noticed at any cost, it's OK if the ratings say it is, has altered the very nature of what some consider acceptable behavior.
Rule XXIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives, our House, states the Code of Official Conduct. It has 1894 words. There are twenty references to compensation, financial interest and funds. There are zero references to ethics. Zero.
Famously, paragraph 1 refers to conduct "that shall reflect creditably on the House."
advertisement
advertisement
The definition of creditable is, "deserving of often limited praise." The example used to further explain the definition is as follows: "the student's effort on the essay -- though not outstanding -- was creditable."
Last week NY Congressman Charles Rangel defended NY Congressman Anthony Weiner with this: "He wasn't going out with prostitutes; he wasn't going out with little boys."
This is not about Democrats or Republicans. This is about a loss of our bearings, about moral fatigue. About allowing people who say such things the pretense of position. This is about standards that no longer exist because we have chosen expediency.
Little boys? When the already censured Congressman defended the (soon to be) former Congressman with that "standard," where was the outrage? Who heard the outcry?
To review: on May 27 The Photo appears on Twitter. Congressman Weiner immediately tweets a lie that he has been hacked. The next day the Congressman's office says it was all a "distraction from the important work representing his constituents."
May 30, the Congressman's office says they are "seeking legal action" to investigate who hacked the account. Another lie.
May 31, the office announces the Congressman has retained an attorney to advise him on what actions should be taken over the "hacking."
June 1, interview day. When asked if The Photo was of him, the Congressman responds with the now infamous, "I cannot say with certitude." As they say in direct-response commercials: but wait, there's more.
From June 2 to June 5, the new tactic is silence as the Congressman avoids public appearances.
June 6, after additional photos and transcripts surface, the Congressman holds a press conference in which he admits he lied, sobs his apology and takes full responsibility. After which he says he will not resign. Apparently the responsibility is not quite "full."
And on it goes, more and more pathetic each day. And, finally, as the embarrassment outweighs the political risk, and the calls for resignation are heard, what does the honorable Congressman do as a last resort? He goes Hollywood and says he will enter an unidentified rehabilitation facility, at an undisclosed location, with a request for a (paid) leave of absence.
June 12 brings more photos. June 13 the President of the United States offers, "If it was me, I'd resign."
As Congress reconvenes today, why chronicle the details of this train wreck? Because this has gone on for 19 days, which is 18 days too long. Enough is enough. Because "creditable" is not sufficient for elected officials, too many of whom have consistently shown us an overdeveloped sense of political survival and a distinct lack of honor. This while our most honorable young men and women risk their lives defending us in two and a half wars.
Full responsibility means accountability -- and we need to affirm our own responsibility to speak up and end this. We should know that with certitude.
I cannot account for the speed of the RNC in all similar matters, but the DNC cannot be proud of the weeks-long dithering with regard to asking him to resign.
Well said.....the moral fatigue that you mention set in many years ago....unfortunately, it continues to be tolerated.
100% on your side with this one.
He got caught doing something teenagers do, and then behaved like a teenager. This guy is supposed to represent his constituents like an adult?
Wow, I really didn't think this kind of honesty was allowed any more. I hope you're wearing a bulletproof vest!
I agree 100% and appreciate the opportunity to see someone tell it like it is.
I do think, though, that we have little reason to be shocked any more. Too many people -- by their behaviors, their choices, and their votes -- have kicked moral absolutes well into the past. Almost anything these days can be justified as "personal choice." We can't be too surprised at what we've allowed and accepted, and at which the loudest statement of disapproval many people are willing to make is simply to look the other way.
I'm sure my age is showing by my conviction that this kind of truth needs to be spoken a lot more loudly and a lot more often.
You ask where the outrage is? The outrage is frequently on Fox News and conservative talk radio. You won't here the outrage from the L.A. Times or NY Times or Katie Couric.
I'm not a member, but I believe that is what the Tea Party is all about. It's not about extremeist conservative whack jobs like Matt Lauer will have us all believe. It's about bringing accountability back to Washington.
Very well said.
What should also be noted is the media's attempt to hedge in, or narrow, the perimeter of public focus on the story.
Without overtly pronouncing Weiner innocent (other than the nut cases at MSNBC) the talking heads told us the rules of debate on Weiner's deeds had to center around whether he lied to the media. Then, when his lies were beyond question, we've been told it depends on whether or not he is a distraction from his party's efforts.
That, of course, is pure crap. It genuinely matters if a member of Congress is a creep. On that count, Weiner is resoundingly guilty and the American public deserves a media that respects and analyzes that perspective.
Dave,
It's rather odd that today, the "bar" is set not at whether someone is engaging questionable or unlawful behavior - but whether they are lying to the media.
You are ABSOLUTELY correct in this matter. A politician could engage in an ethically questionable manner, but if he doesn't lie to the media (that is, provides "honest enough" answers), he is allowed to get off scot free. Charles Rangel, who without question engaged in behavior that should have had him ousted, remains in Congress while Weiner is forced out. Mainly because Rangel didn't attempt to hide anything. But what he did is much more damning, from the standpoint of representation of constituents.
I don't view this as a "left wing" or "right wing" issue, either. Democrats and Republicans BOTH engage ethically obtuse behaviors, and both seek to position the other party as somehow "morally reprehensible". Sadly, there are many on both sides that fall in line with these thoughts.
I also agree with Chris that at its core, this is what the Tea Party is about. It has many flaws, for sure, but there is (or was) a basic call for honesty and straightforwardness that began the Tea Party process back in the summer of 2008. Certainly, it has morphed into something else....and the media has done its share of misrepresentation of the Tea Party's goals to assist that.
But I can appreciate the original intent, though not its current state.
Well, let's see. Rep. Weiner broke no laws and did nothing unethical. Tasteless, perhaps, but nothing more than what millions of people do on any given day. Not a single woman with whom Rep. Weiner had his special email relationships complained. None. It was totally consensual.
He did lie to the American public. I would feel that Mr. DeSena's column wasn't leaning to one political direction if he had mentioned so many of the actual unethical breaches by members of Congress, the Supreme Court and the Executive branch. Especially considering that the majority of sex scandals seem to include Republicans in varying levels of actual illegal activities. Please see Senators Vitter, Ensign or Larry Craig.
And as to certitude, nearly all Republicans supported their 3 friends and generally said that the voters should decide the senators' fates. The Democrats have been much quicker to push Rep. Weiner under the bus than those on the other side of the aisle.
I would rather see the media spend some time investigating unethical and illegal behavior. Clarence Thomas would be a good place to start with his fraudulent financial filings concerning his wife and his lack of recusal on cases or perhaps the previous president and vp for lying to the public on WMD, torture, and outing of an active undercover CIA agent. Cheney lied repeatedly on that one. That crime happens to be treason, by the way. And Bush 2 commuted the sentence of the fall guy.
Seems to me those are much bigger issues while our soldiers are dying overseas. Even if some of these crimes are a few years past it is worth finding the truth and ensuring the public knows and understands it.
TY - nothing unethical?
Usually, we frown on the use of company software or property when people utilize them for lurid personal purposes. Had Weiner done what he did (from The Hill's gym) from an office at a firm he was working for - he'd be fired.
I agree, there are many other important issues that can take up this space. But to blithely brush this off as "nothing unethical" is wrong.
He acted like a teenager and you seek to absolve him why? Shouldn't our politicians (Republican and Democrat alike) be held to a high standard? I disagree that what he did was unethical. But even if you do - wouldn't you say what he did showed HORRIBLE (yes, caps) judgement? And, as Theodore Roosevelt said, "No man can lead a public career really worth leading, no man can act with rugged independence in serious crises, nor strike at great abuses, nor afford to make powerful and unscrupulous foes, if he is himself vulnerable in his private character."
Go after Clarence Thomas. Go after Rangel. Go after Vitter. Go after any and all who engage questionable behavior. But be consistent.....Rangel and Vitter, like Weiner, should be ousted. One cannot rely on the electorate to decide in situations like this.
RM: Appreciate the great response and I agree with most of it. I hoped that I was calling for relative attention from the media for various offenses either social or criminal. Weiner did have a reputation for fighting for the voiceless and underrepresented including 9/11 First Responders. I think that is commendable.
If he should be fired for such photos which (correct me if I am wrong) did not include on-camera nudity in the gym, then the firing should come from his electorate. No? The peers in congress all have political agendas. The infamous underwear photo really was not much different than a Calvin Klein ad on the side of a bus. Yes, Weiner showed HORRIBLE judgement and also stupidity in his ability to use Twitter. Definitely worthy of a Republican challenger in the next election. Now that House seat will just vanish with the next redistricting.
Rangel, the entire "C-Street" gang and many others have no business in public office. I am still much more bothered by votes exchanged for campaign contributions which is the way the system works. Duke Cunnigham, Ted Stevens, ... no wait this list will never end.
My gripe is with the one-sided nature of the original post's outrage. The media follows any shiny thing if there are photos, or better yet, video. If lying is a disqualifying attribute for people in the public eye, shouldn't Limbaugh, Palin and a boatload of others be excluded? Obama a socialist?! Wanting to raise top-bracket taxes from 35% to 39% does not make this president equivalent to Stalin. This awkward healthcare plan does not either. The whole birther movement!
But, is it a form of socialism for farmers to receive billions of dollars in subsidies from taxpayers? Oil company incentives for drilling? Not much outrage for those subsidies from Fox News, Republicans, nor Tea Party.
I would really like to read a column with ideas to remove money from the political and judicial processes. Or perhaps how to get a better class of politicians. Or better news media. Or better informed voters.