Opinion> Molly Ivins> Molly Ivins January 25 1998 01 25

	28 Jan 2009 What Would Molly Think? JANUARY 31, 2009, IS THE TWO-YEAR ANNIVERSARY OF MOLLY IVINS' DEATH. THE FOLLOWING COLUMN WAS WRITTEN BY … Read More.
	31 Jan 2007 Molly Ivins Tribute MOLLY IVINS BEGAN WRITING HER SYNDICATED COLUMN FOR CREATORS SYNDICATE IN 1992. ANTHONY ZURCHER IS A CREATORS … Read More.
	11 Jan 2007 Stand Up Against the Surge The purpose of this old-fashioned newspaper crusade to stop the war is not to make George W. Bush look like … Read More.

Molly Ivins January 25

AUSTIN — Well, the poor ol' pope was certainly out of luck, wasn't he? Our beloved media dropped him like a hot rock.

Great green gobs of greasy grimy gopher guts. What. A. Horror. Show. As all about us are losing their heads, this is a swell time to sit back and take notes on how they do it for the edifying purpose of reminding ourselves how not to behave next time we're involved in a major life crisis. With an array of bad behavior this vast, there is much to study.

The history of hypocrisy is indebted to Susan Carpenter-McMillan — Paula Jones' spokeswoman, adviser and Svengali-ess. McMillan has said several times that when she first heard of the Jones case, she said: "OK, good. We're gonna get that little slime ball." She has boasted of working ceaselessly to bring down President Clinton for more than a year. However, interviewed Jan. 19 on "Crossfire," McMillan gravely announced that the new allegations concerning Monica Lewinsky made it "a sad day for the country," a tragic day for the republic, and that she really, really meant that.

Also contributing to the national hypocrisy level is Rep. Bob Barr, a Georgia Republican who considers the president morally unfit and who has already introduced an impeachment resolution. Barr has been married three times and has been sued by one of his ex-wives on grounds that he failed to pay her medical bills and back child support, according to media reports.

"A bit nutty and a bit slutty" was the memorably inaccurate tag that right-wing journalist David Brock put on Anita Hill, who is demonstrably neither. But no woman, no matter how sane and dignified, is safe from being accused of vindictive hysteria should she accuse a prominent man of sexual misconduct. Among the adjectives applied to Lewinsky by sources of assorted reliability in recent days are "attention-seeker," "flirtatious," "emotional," "immature," "has fantasies," "prone to sensationalize, dramatize or exaggerate," etc., etc.

As independent counsel Kenneth Starr's shop leaks like a sieve and as we happily scarf up information from sealed depositions and illegal tape recordings that are now evidence in a prosecution, I am reminded of the contrast provided by Leon Jaworski's slow building of his case against figures in the Nixon administration. I find no record of any leak ever coming from Jaworski's office.

Of all the sad things so far reported on the tapes made by Linda Tripp of her friend (?) Lewinsky, the most chilling is a mention of suicide.

That should give pause to several people, perhaps including Tripp, who not only illegally taped her friend's confidences but also allowed her to give what may have been a false deposition before then taking the tapes to Starr.

According to The New York Times, copies of some of the tapes are now circulating in New York publishing circles.

The media have truly outdone themselves in characterizing the content of the Tripp-Lewinsky tapes. Ted Koppel called them "explicit" and "graphic." Pat Buchanan says they are "lascivious" and "salacious." Also reported were "dirty details," "lewd details" and "erotic details." All this secondhand. Prurient interest, anyone?

One peculiar lurch taken by the media is the astounding reportage that now we know that Clinton really did have an affair with Gennifer Flowers. (We learned it from yet another leak from his sealed deposition.) Excuse me, but who thought that was in doubt before now?

As this amazing saga of People Behaving Badly continues to spread its unedifying ramifications before the public, I find a certain consolation in the vox pop.

Lady on a radio call-in show reports her distress at the new allegations. Host inquires, "Do you believe the stories?"

Lady replies, "I can't believe he would be that stupid."

That's more sense than most of the professional pundits have managed to make in recent days.

Credit to Jim Lehrer of PBS for using irony to make a profound point about the death-of-Diana-like nonstop media frenzy: "It's as though we have to know everything right away or we won't be able to have our Sunday chat shows."

Well, fellow citizens, it is distinctly dispiriting to watch our national life become a giant Jenny Jones show. And as McMillan would say, I really, really mean that. It has never seemed to me that the president's sex life is any of our business: Just how it came to be the business of Starr, who is supposed to be investigating a 20-year-old land deal in Arkansas, is a curious matter that should probably be investigated its own self.

Still, here we are with allegations that the president suborned perjury, and they cannot be ignored. As we keep lamely saying, if the allegations are true ... if the allegations are true, we are looking at a degree of recklessness and stupidity that can and probably should finish the man. Not that anyone is rushing to judgment — because, as another president in deep doo-doo once said, that would be wrong.

***

Molly Ivins is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.