A Little Forgiveness

The recent hullabaloo over Eliot Spitzer's involvement in a prostitution ring underscores two significant characteristics of our contemporary American values, one positive and one negative. The good - as is often the case - is not nearly as complex and multifaceted as the bad, so it will not take as long to address.

Simply put, Americans are allergic to rank hypocrisy. It is my firm contention that had Eliot Spitzer not been personally involved in the crack down on prostitution rings during his tenure as Attorney General, this messy affair would not be nearly as radioactive as it is now. The issue to many people is not about whether or not paying for sex is right or wrong - it is about self-righteous morality covering up personal involvement in the alleged sin. This sanctimoniousness is not uncommon in recent politics, especially on the conservative end of the spectrum: Larry Craig solicited sex in a public restroom and denied any involvement (and his latent homosexuality); Ted Haggard hid drug use and sexual contact with men behind a facade of God-commanded bigotry. What is really at issue here, for many of us, is not whether Craig and Haggard are sexually confused. I could care less whether an Idaho senator sleeps with men or women, and many people (although not his core constituency) would agree with me. The real damage in these scandals - like the recent flap over Eliot Spitzer - lies in the hypocrisy that these men exhibit. When words and actions belie the truth in American politics, heads roll.

But only sometimes, and about some things. As I write, Spitzer is set to make an address offering his resignation, thus ending perhaps one of the most promising political careers of the last 8 years. And what is it that is powerful enough to ruin a successful man in American politics? While hypocrisy plays some role in the firestorm of media, political, and public criticism these last three days, he is not ultimately stepping down because he is a hypocrite. He is stepping down because he paid a consenting adult woman to have sex with him in the privacy of a hotel room.

As usual, Glenn Greenwald hits the nail on the head. Spitzer's involvement with prostitutes has nothing to do with his policies and his ability of govern. This is an entirely personal issue, and while some naysayers may object that it is illegal to hire a prostitute, making his crime real and not just moral, the fact of the matter is that what goes on behind that hotel bedroom door has zero bearing on Spitzer's ability to govern. And that's why he's in office - to govern, not to be a faithful husband.

The Monica Lewinsky scandal presented a similar set of issues. Like Spitzer's hypocrisy, the extenuating circumstances of the Clinton scandal had to do with his previous relationships with women and with his prevarications about them. However, the root fact that drove so many on the right into frothy-mouthed fury was his infidelity. Pure and simple. Like Eliot Spitzer, Clinton was brought low by a personal matter that bore little to no relationship to his capacity to effectively lead. In fact, Lewinskygate rendered the last couple years of his presidency impotent - the scandal ruined his ability to govern, not his involvement with a ditsy intern.

In many places in the world, sexual matters like these have no place in politics. Nicholas Sarkozy, for instance, left his wife last year to run off with a model, and while this provoked a whole lot of tabloid photographs, it never threated the man's political career. Indeed, the response from many regions of the world (read: Europe) to Clinton and Lewinsky was a resounding "So what?" We as Americans need to ask ourselves a fundamental question: are issues like this worth getting furious about? In a conversation with Zorro last month, she pointed out something very interesting about how many people around the world perceive America. Americans are full of political passion and are always making a lot of noise. Often, however, we fixate on trivial and ridiculous things at the expense of real problems. The Spitzers of the country go down in flames while we continue to consume over half of the world's resources, are engaged in an endless and costly war in the Middle East, have a shameful portion of our population living in poverty, etc. etc. Why aren't we furious about these things instead of about what goes on in the bedrooms of Messrs. Clinton, Craig, Haggard, Foley, Spitzer, et al?

Fundamentally, this comes down to a question of forgiveness. And distraction. Let me explain: our puritanical roots make us consider infidelity an evil, end of discussion, instead of a symptom of psychological anguish or extreme stress. We simply don't know what it's like to be under the sort of stress a president or a governor has to deal with everyday, especially when the world seems out the thwart our every move. Clinton and Spitzer both faced grueling opposition in the final days of their administrations: perhaps these silly flings were just a way for them to work off some tension so they wouldn't be driven to do something stupid, say like invading Iraq on false pretenses at the behest of a cabal of national security wackos and corporate powers. And this is where the powers of distraction come in. As puritanical as we are, sex scandals are a brilliant way to fill the airwaves with meaningless trifle in order to distract people from real, substantive issues. As Spitzer's face is all over the papers, the FISA extension is being debated. Few people know or care about this, however, despite its implications for constitutional rights.

I don't mean to justify infidelity. I just think we should try to exercise a little more empathy, understanding, and forgiveness, especially in matters that are entirely personal. Let's save the chest-beating rage for real problems.