New York Daily News, Feb 10, 2001

Worms Turning on Clintons

by John Leo

Mass defections from a religious faith are rare in history. Rome abandoned its emperor-worship under Constantine. Sweden abandoned Christianity for the welfare state. Now another great defection is under way. Reporters, talking heads and fashionable folk are beginning to lose their faith in Clintonism.

This is a momentous event, unpredicted as recently as two months ago when most followers thought the founder could stay as head of their religion for life. Spiritual crisis and doubt are all around us now. Sharing his dark night of the soul, one columnist wrote of the founder, "I am silent. I can say nothing in your defense."

Some believers were shocked by charges that the founder was selling indulgences to exiled sinners at a price of one million dollars plus a coffee table or two. Others felt that the founder's wife shouldn't have registered for gifts from the faithful or made off with pricey church furniture. The whole thing "just smells bad," wrote one fervent apostle. The founder and wife, she said, "capped their career in the White House by walking out the door with practically a pillowcase stuffed with sterling."

In New York City, where the founder has entered the difficult years of his Babylonian captivity, the first signs of outright impiety were visible. One prominent Democrat told The New York Observer that the general anger "is really quite extraordinary. I've never seen a reaction this unanimous."

This was a big change from two years ago, when Manhattan's faithful glitterati were still genuflecting compulsively. The Observer complained editorially at the time: "Never has a President who brazenly lied to the American people been paid back by such an eloquent stack of affidavits to his good character."

Now that faith is fading. This newspaper, which endorsed him twice, is beating him regularly upside the head. The New York Times went even further, calling the founder "insensitive."

Daily News columnist and editor Michael Kramer offered criticism so strong that one million readers flipped back to the first page to see whether they had purchased the New York Post by mistake. The founder and his wife, Kramer wrote, "stripped the White House, pardoned their law-breaking campaign contributors and generally proved anew that eight years at the tippy top in no way caused them to develop anything remotely resembling a moral compass."

Novelist Dominick Dunne, a longtime believer, made an earthier remark: "Here's this brilliant man, but there's always [something unpleasant] on the heel of his shoe."

Even feminist leaders began to hint at something unpleasant. Patricia Ireland used the phrase "the arrogance of it" to describe the founder's need for a $800,000-a-year office.

Cynics believe that the loss of faith may have something to do with the fact that the founder no longer occupies his throne. Nonbelievers tend to welcome the new skepticism, even if it is years late in developing.

"It's worth noting that once upon a time such uninhibited resentment [toward Clinton] on the part of the media elite might actually have meant something," said the Washington Times. But look at the good side: some separation at last between the Clintonite church and the fourth estate.

-- (Paracelsus@Pb.Au), February 10, 2001

Answers

Leo is definately the best on slammer of what the hell we're doing wrong. Always enjoy his stuff but wish he'd find a bright spot or two. He reminds me too much of me.

-- Carlos (riffraff@cybertime.net), February 10, 2001.

John Leo is full of crap. All that is happening is that Bush is in the White House and Clinton is out of it. Power will be served and the Republicans are in power.

A year ago, the way to ingratiate yourself with power was to write about Clinton's genius. Today the way to ingratiate yourself with power is to spit on Clinton. The lackeys of the press are only too happy to oblige power. It is so ingrained in them to crouch at the feet of the powerful that they don't even know that's what they are doing.

Leo's fooling himself that this massive turning of coats is somehow earth-shaking and unexpected is lame enough. Our swallowing it would be worse. Look up "sycophancy" in the dictionary. That's all we are seeing here.

-- Miserable SOB (misery@misery.com), February 12, 2001.