TIME TO SAY GOODBYE

9-14-98

Am I the only one who finds the timing of the Starr "Referral" curious? He hasn't completed his investigation. Even the prurient interest part of it is incomplete, as Kathleen Willey's name hardly appears. No indictments have been asked for or handed down for Fellatiogate. Of course, all the other sins and crimes of the Clintons which Starr has been investigating aren't even mentioned here. No, he rushed this epic into production as soon as the DNA was dry. More curious is that by introducing it this close to a Congressional election, he assures that the Congress that receives the report will not be the one which determines its eventual disposal. Indeed, he actually is affecting the makeup of said Congress. Which, of course, is the point.

This has been a partisan affair all along. Linda Tripp, the catalyst for this explosion, was a Republican appointee who allegedly resented the new order. The first Independent Counsel appointed for Whitewater found, rather quickly, what Ken Starr has spent four years finding, that there was no crime which could be attributed to the Clintons. When Congressional Republicans refused to take no for an answer, another IC was appointed, one more to their liking, chosen by a trio of conservative judges.

Now we have the result of this quest. The President is a philanderer and a somewhat kinky one, at that. He is also a liar, which goes with the territory, as adultery leads to lying as the night follows the day. The questions Congress must answer are simple: are these offenses impeachable and do they merit his removal from office.

Frankly, I find this a close call. I think Clinton could well survive this ordeal and perhaps even escape impeachment. But at what cost? Surely his reputation is in tatters, his marriage, we can assume, is hanging by a thread, his friendships are tried, his political allies uncertain. Is holding on to the office that important? From now to the election, the dominant, if not the only, issue will be impeachment, yes or no. Republicans will come off as sober and reflective, Democrats as evasive. I watched a debate for the California Senate seat held by Barbara Boxer two weeks ago. When asked about the President, she did a verbal dance, and asked to move on to "important issues." For most of the hour, she dominated the debate, yet the next day, the first ten minutes, the Clinton part, dominated the news reports. That was before the report, now it will be worse. All polls show that Democratic voters are discouraged and less likely to vote. This is unlikely to change between now and November, as the calendar for the issue involves the release of more documents at the end of September, with yet another round of "revelations". Then some kind of hearings will start for two weeks. Then Congress will go home to campaign. It will not go away or be resolved.

If Bill Clinton retains his office for the next two years, it will almost certainly be with a Congress more solidly Republican, with the possibility of a "veto-proof" Senate of 60 or more Republicans. The voices of moderate Democrats and Republicans will be ignored. Democrats in Congress will hold him responsible for the disaster and will be bitter. Al Gore will have a much harder time being his successor, as even the Democrats will debate the issues surrounding him in the 2000 election cycle. Is this what Clinton wants as his legacy to his party and the country? I hope not.

I hope he sees this. I hope he chooses to take the honorable route and leave his office. In order for him to leave with any dignity or honor, it must be done quickly. Before hearings, before votes are counted, even before the polls drop. He has less than a week, in my opinion.

The arguments against this are many. He is likely to be indicted once he leaves office, but no jury in the world will convict a man who gave up the Presidency for the good of the country. He will feel, rightly so, that resigning will mean that "they" have won; he will be right, unfortunately, they have already won. He can cut his party's losses and therefore keep the defeat personal, not political, denying them their ultimate prize. He might be resigning an office he would otherwise not have to leave. Yet that fact is what makes a quick resignation appealing.

Free of charge, here is the speech I would have him give:

"My fellow Americans, through my own actions, I am faced with a choice I would never have believed possible. I could stay and fight these charges which have been leveled against me. I believe they do not rise to the level of impeachable offenses. I believe that, ultimately, the House of Representatives will not find them to be so. Based on polls I have seen, I believe that you, the people, would support me in this fight, as you believe the agenda which I have fought for is the right agenda for the country and for yourselves and your families.

Yet through the timing of these charges, the coming election is turning into a referendum on my personal life, a referendum which my party cannot win. There are many fine Democrats across this country who wish to talk about issues which concern your lives. They want to talk about educating our children, preserving Social Security, and fighting for quality health coverage for all Americans. Yet they are forced repeatedly to discuss my personal behavior. This is intolerable.

I love this job. But I love my country more and I believe, for the good of my country, my party, and my family, I must resign my office. I believe Vice President Gore will carry on my policies, the policies which you have endorsed in two Presidential elections and every poll taken. I am proud of the job I have done. I am proud that I still have your support. I am proud of America. God bless you all."

I don't expect this to happen. Life rarely works that neatly.