The Corner

Re: Poor Andrew

Andrew, I did not say a “rigorous attachment to monogamy” is the only voting factor, so we would pick Carter over Churchill. That’s a straw man argument.

But “who cares about sex?” (I’d start with “God.”) That’s a complete cultural surrender of a sentence. In reference to other posts today (as in: Jonah’s on Sullivan), objections to Clinton were not based on “sex panic,” but on the notion that Clinton always treated public office like a Howard Stern would: as a goldmine of sexual opportunity more than a public trust. From the first national scandal (Gennifer Flowers), objections to Clinton’s sexual recklessness focused on how he used the power of the state for his pleasurable ends, giving Flowers a state job to keep her happy, playing peek-a-boo with state employee Paula Jones, using state troopers and then Secret Service personnel as pawns in his sex games. If Clinton was a conventional adulterer — with a single, tight-lipped mistress without any connection to government — none of the “sex panic” would have ever made a second on the evening news.

Tim GrahamTim Graham is Director of Media Analysis at the Media Research Center, where he began in 1989, and has served there with the exception of 2001 and 2002, when served ...

Recommended

The Latest