Forgiving and forgetting: White House strategy

Christian Century, Feb 4, 1998 by James M. Wall

If the Clinton presidency survives the Monica Lewinsky sex scandal, give the credit to Hillary Rodham Clinton. Once again she has stood by her husband with a masterful television performance. In an interview given before her husband delivered his State of the Union address, she was calm, determined and convincing. She presented the stance the White House intends to take: protect the president against charges of suborning perjury, the only legal charge the special prosecutor could bring against him. Hillary Clinton told the nation what it wanted to hear from the wife of a man under suspicion: that she believes him and that all is well in their marriage. One could sense the national reaction--or at least what Clinton supporters hope will be the national reaction: If she is for him, who could be against him, except maybe those "right, wing" politicians and media folk she deplored?

The White House legal strategy is clear. It will maintain that there were no "sexual relations" between Clinton and Lewinsky--and that when Clinton and Vernon Jordan advised Lewinsky to say just that, they were telling her the truth; hence, there's no issue of perjury.

Was there more to the president's relationship with Lewinsky than a few innocent meetings between the effusive, "generous" (Hillary Clinton's term) president--a man known for spontaneously giving people gifts--and a starstruck young woman? (The telephone tapes of Lewinsky talking to former White House staffer Linda Tripp and no doubt her testimony to the special prosecutor speak of more intimate activities between the two, but apparently not sexual intercourse.) Skillfully, Hillary Clinton deferred any answer to that question until after the president responds to special prosecutor Kenneth Starr's inquiry.

When this flap finally subsides, Bill Clinton will still be president. And in the opinion of the majority of the American people, this is as it should be. The public will be angry with him for dragging us through this spectacle, but most people will forgive him.

The Clintons are assuming--and I believe they will be proved right in this assumption--that most people want to believe in Clinton. In any event, in that part of the American South where Bill Clinton was born and raised, charming rogues are forgiven for behavior which would destroy anyone else.

And in the South the concept of forgiveness is widely invoked. Check your country music station and you will hear songs that repeatedly ask things like, "If God can forgive me, why can't you?" Many people will think: If the president's Yankee wife can forgive him, why shouldn't the rest of us? That way of thinking is strong in this country. As Hillary Clinton knows, public opinion is shaped by more than grand jury testimonies.

I recall that during my southern childhood a young bachelor who was doted on by all the women, including my mother, suddenly left town. I was seven or eight at the time, and I was aware that his departure had something to do with an inappropriate relationship he had with a young woman. I never learned if he had been unfairly accused or not; all I knew was that it was generally deemed best that he leave.

My mother, about as pious and straight-laced a Methodist as you would ever find in the pew, told me: "I don't know what happened, but whatever it was, you have to remember he was living all alone in that boarding house and there was a bed in his room when he entertained that girl there." There was a bed in his room. That explained whatever fault there may have been. I learned then that if you really want to believe in someone, you will take the best outlook possible.

The public apparently will have to choose between the claims of a former White House intern and the claims of the president. Hillary Rodham Clinton is counting that the public will rally to a wife who is standing by her husband because she believes in him. My guess is that most of the American public will agree with her--assuming, of course, no more damaging information emerges.

Meanwhile, the nation must go back to addressing serious problems, one of which is presented by Iraq. An attack by the U.S. on Iraq--designed to force Saddam Hussein to comply with United Nations resolutions--could be imminent. The president is under some pressure to change the subject. (The plot of the movie Wag the Dog, a political satire, could become a real-life nightmare.)

Why don't we follow Hillary Rodham Clinton's advice to the nation regarding her husband: "Be patient, take a deep breath, and the truth will come out." And why don't we also take a deep breath with regard to Iraq? Let's give Saddam Hussein time to come to his senses about those UN-mandated arms inspections. Rushing to judgment could be damaging to the White House and extremely destructive to the people of Iraq.