Seems like we have a bit of a pattern here. First, it was Bob Packwood, sexually harassing a slew of women but then trying to escape condemnation on the grounds that he was a consistent champion of women's rights.
Then Bill Clinton took advantage of his office, both as governor or Arkansas and then president of the United States, to have a series of sleazy affairs. He too tried to cover these up and then excuse them on the grounds that they were minor private offenses, small distractions from his noble dedication to the causes of equality and global uplift.
Eliot Spitzer took time out from his crusade against Wall Street malefactors to indulge himself in high-priced prostitutes. He too saw himself as excused from the normal canons of morality because of his commitment to the cause of common man.
And now Edwards. By all accounts here is your typical legal sleazebag, who got rich through ambulance chasing tactics and had a sordid affair while his wife was battling cancer, possibly producing a little bambino in the process. Even the term "love affair" is inappropriate here: Edwards himself says he didn't care about the woman, so he was apparently just using her for the same reason that Clinton said he used Monica Lewinsky: because he could!
Secret meetings, financial payoffs: is there any limit to how low this gets? Yet John Edwards has, at least until now, been considered a wonderful, upright, admirable guy. How is this possible? To put the question in its broadest form: How does the liberal sleazebag come to be viewed so favorably?
The short answer is that the liberal tries to cover up his despicable character by appealing to his virtuous political stances. Shameless and reprehensible behavior is dubbed "private," as if it were nobody else's business, and contrasted with public social stances. "Yes, I cheated on my wife and abandoned my kids, but this is of little significance compared to my environmental work and my donations to the United Way!"
There are many problems with this, but perhaps the most obvious is that there are certain jobs, like governor and president, where being an example and representing a dignified office are part of the job description. Unlike a carpenter or a broker, a president doesn't just do things but he also stands for things. Pastors and presidents cannot afford to be moral reprobates because then they dishonor their position and the people they lead and represent.
Still, the liberal morality-evasion scheme does on, and it has been going on for a while. In fact, the inventor of this liberal scheme was Rousseau, whose autobiography presents himself as a wonderful and sincere guy even though the man fathered five children out of wedlock and abandoned them all to an orphanage. Lacking personal moral decency, what Rousseau appealed to was moral opinions and moral posturing.
The good news is that the American people, who fell for it during the Clinton era, aren't falling for it any more. We shouldn't feel sorry for people like Spitzer and Edwards, nor should we fear that their causes will suffer. Poor people in America could use a more decent champion than the lecher with the $500 haircut.
Reader Comments ( Page 1 of 24)
1. You forgot the first person to list as an adulterous scumbag: John McCain.
Iscariott at 1:53PM on Aug 9th 2008
2. Great piece --- well stated.
Steve at 1:57PM on Aug 9th 2008
3. Yeah, Edwards is a sleazebag, as is Spitzer. But please keep in mind Edwards is not in public office and Spitzer resigned. Meanwhile, two GOP sleazebags, Larry Craig (we know his story) and David Vitter (you know the married sleazeball who was on the D.C. madam's list who was banging hookers) serve in the Senate with the full approval of the Republican party. But like my grandad used to say, give me $5 for every hypocrite in Washington, I could retire rich.
David S. at 1:56PM on Aug 9th 2008
4. Yes and what about the conservative virtue of people like Sen. Craig and Congressman Foley?
Tim Walton at 2:14PM on Aug 9th 2008
5. Mr. D'Souza,
Are you, in any way, attempting to make an argument that people who label themselves "conservatives" are any more moral, better, virtuous, or honest than people who label themselves "liberals"? You cannot be serious if you are for as you know there are tit-for-tat sleazebags in the "conservative" world as well. Don't be so painfully obvious and convenient in ignoring the ample examples of this.
Tom DeLay, Newt Gingrich, Dave Vetter, Ted Haggard, Strom Thurmond, as well as many other "conservative" politicians have all committed adultery or tried to keep secret their "illegitimate" children.
And this behavior from the holier-than-thou conservative Christian crowd who point their sanctimonious, judgemental fingers in the face of everyone else.
Conservative, democrat, liberal, republican (stupid, meaningless labels), it doesn't matter - and you know it. We'll continue, unfortunately, to see this behavior regardless of whatever stupid political brand the perpetrator wants to be called.
It has become apparent to me that it is in the genuine interest of all so-called pundits to do their best to use their media platforms to keep this nation divided. A divided nation keeps getting pundits on "news" show appearances and programs, radio talk shows, book sales, and blogs - and they are getting paid handsomely for it. A united American public would relegate pundits to the anonymous world of irrelevance - a pundits worst nightmare.
I know that using your platform and writing ability to attempt to UNITE the public (at least your particular readers) is not in your financial interest but should not a true American and true patriot put the interests of the nation as a whole before your own? Because, what your attempting to do here is obvious.
Frank at 2:19PM on Aug 9th 2008
6. Mr. D'Souza,
Are you, in any way, attempting to make an argument that people who label themselves "conservatives" are any more moral, better, virtuous, or honest than people who label themselves "liberals"? You cannot be serious if you are for as you know there are tit-for-tat sleazebags in the "conservative" world as well. Don't be so painfully obvious and convenient in ignoring the ample examples of this.
Tom DeLay, Newt Gingrich, Dave Vetter, Ted Haggard, Strom Thurmond, as well as many other "conservative" politicians have all committed adultery or tried to keep secret their "illegitimate" children.
And this behavior from the holier-than-thou conservative Christian crowd who point their sanctimonious, judgemental fingers in the face of everyone else.
Conservative, democrat, liberal, republican (stupid, meaningless labels), it doesn't matter - and you know it. We'll continue, unfortunately, to see this behavior regardless of whatever stupid political brand the perpetrator wants to be called.
It has become apparent to me that it is in the genuine interest of all so-called pundits to do their best to use their media platforms to keep this nation divided. A divided nation keeps getting pundits on "news" show appearances and programs, radio talk shows, book sales, and blogs - and they are getting paid handsomely for it. A united American public would relegate pundits to the anonymous world of irrelevance - a pundits worst nightmare.
I know that using your platform and writing ability to attempt to UNITE the public (at least your particular readers) is not in your financial interest but should not a true American and true patriot put the interests of the nation as a whole before your own? Because, what your attempting to do here is obvious.
Frank at 2:22PM on Aug 9th 2008
7. This is a poorly chosen topic. But then, we have been poorly served on this blog by DD.
His redemption is the other contributors.
Please, respondents, don't inundate us with pieces about sleezebags and tell us how we are all sinners. Please.
naturalpuppy at 2:29PM on Aug 9th 2008
8.
It will be interesting to see if Edwards can survive politically as well as McCain has survived.
JefFlyingV at 2:30PM on Aug 9th 2008
9. "There are many problems with this, but perhaps the most obvious is that there are certain jobs, like governor and president, where being an example and representing a dignified office are part of the job description. Unlike a carpenter or a broker, a president doesn't just do things but he also stands for things. Pastors and presidents cannot afford to be moral reprobates because then they dishonor their position and the people they lead and represent."
-----------------------------------
You could have left out this paragraph Dinesh, given the current war and many church scandals !
Bush lied to us all about the war in Iraq. Rememeber WMDs?
Priests and ministers are discovered daily to be child rapers. An aduterous affair is nowhere near the terribleness of these actions
mac at 2:49PM on Aug 9th 2008
10. I googled "Liberal Morality-Evasion Scheme" and came up with nothing.I conclude that D'Souza and not Rousseau invented it.This spew says nothing intelligent.For every Liberal moral reprobate there is a Conservative moral reprobate.
JLD at 3:01PM on Aug 9th 2008
11. Distort D'Newsa, you sicken me. You're attacking Dems while a Republican was just indicted for the RAPE of the 14-year-old daughter of his mistress.
Ever heard of Margie Schroedinger?
Tatiana at 3:24PM on Aug 9th 2008
12. Poor Denise, his whole weird political world is tumbling down around him. How dare he question the morality of a few horny Democrats? Whereas, the republican leadership should be charged as war profiteers and for crimes against humanity.
gshort3011 at 4:13PM on Aug 9th 2008
13. Poor Denise, his whole weird political world is tumbling down around him. How dare he question the morality of a few horny Democrats? Whereas, the republican leadership should be charged as war profiteers and for crimes against humanity.
gshort3011 at 4:16PM on Aug 9th 2008
14. Oh, man. I'm leaving this blog until DD comes up with a thread that requires some thought.
Lord Acton: "All power tends to corrupt..."
naturalpuppy at 4:53PM on Aug 9th 2008
15. Ah...another controversial article by Dinesh.I could hear the knives sharpening from miles away.
Anyways,my comment on this piece is not going to be on whether liberals are more immoral than conservatives(neither has a monopoly on morality or immorality),whether the press is biased or not,or the privacy line.
My premise is this.John Edwards cheated.He was wrong.And his sin represents one that is common in this world of ours..the powerful man getting addicted to power.Adlai Stevenson was right...it is all right if you do not inhale.Ladies and gentlemen,adultery is just plain wrong.It is wrong because it hurts others,and it is a sin.
I hope that people will not blame Mrs Edwards(a woman i greatly admire)for her husband's indiscretion.She is not to blame.Her husband is to blame and must show remorse for what he did.
Finally,let us all here pause and examine ourselves.Next time you look at that babe,who is hotter than your wife(or that guy who is better than her husband)and you want to call it quits,think about Elizabeth Edwards.And her pain.
p.s.FOR DINESH
When are you going to do a piece about Barack and McCain?Please do it soon.
mad african Christian at 5:02PM on Aug 9th 2008