Commentary

JOHN BRUMMETT: Hypocrisy and the pols

Donald Trump's bragging about predatory sexual behavior and the ensuing furor managed to pour gasoline on the flame of a destructive American political divide.

The essence of Trump's support is widespread resentment of career politicians who, Trump supporters believe, habitually lie, behave hypocritically, solve nothing, use public service to enrich themselves and get away with all of that through media protection and knee-jerk voting patterns born of special-interest partisan politics.

The Clintons, that is.

So when the Washington Post reports on a video from 11 years ago that has Trump saying that he moved "heavily" in a sexual way against a married woman, and likes to grab women down there because they'll let you do it if you're a star, the Trump base sees something beyond the acknowledged outrage of their man's abhorrent behavior.

It sees a second outrage, which is that the fix is in again.

The base sees Trump brought down by a Clinton-protecting media. It sees Trump crucified for daring to say, in what he stupidly thought was a private boy-to-boy conversation, the very things that Bill Clinton has not said, but allegedly actually done--things that, in Bill's case, got minimized, overlooked and enabled by Hillary Clinton acting in concert with supportive Democrats and pliable media.

The Trump base sees utter hypocrites who profess to be champions of women until one woman alleges that an overheated Bill backed her against the wall of an Oval Office anteroom when she went to him in deference to his power to ask for a favor.

It sees shame in Hillary Clinton's saying that a woman who alleges rape deserves to be heard, but pre-emptively labeling as a liar a woman who charges that Bill forced himself on her decades ago.

And this Trump base sees a conspiracy in the release of the video on the very afternoon when its news would dwarf conveniently the leak of supposed transcripts of high-dollar private speeches Hillary gave to Goldman Sachs. This base believes the leaked information offers prima facie proof of Hillary's utter and cynical phoniness.

That's because the leaked documents show Hillary explaining cozily to investment bankers that, to succeed in politics, you must say one thing in public and another in private.

Let's face it: Modern political partisanship on both sides requires hypocrisy, or at least shameless rationalization. Resentment of the other side fuels both sides, including Democrats who so despised the unctuous prosecutorial excesses of Kenneth Starr that they never would have let Bill get brought down by Starr no matter what he did.

But here's the thing: Bill's sex romps and Trump's sexually predatory braggadocio differ in three pivotal respects.

The first is that Bill stood credibly accused as a first-time candidate in 1992 only of extramarital affairs, not predatory acts. Even then, the American people gave the character-flawed Clinton only 43 percent.

That was enough with Ross Perot in the race. It probably is a ceiling on what Trump will get in four weeks. But it won't be enough, because Gary Johnson is not as strong as Perot.

When allegations of predatory sexual behavior and official misconduct arose against Bill, the media obsessed approximately as they obsess now regarding Trump.

The second difference is that Bill's predatory behavior remains to this date a matter of unsubstantiated allegation and his denial. Bill has used microphones to deny things, not brag of creepiness.

The third difference is that Bill's alleged misconduct was not accompanied by a pattern including the kinds of things Trump has said openly about Megyn Kelly and a weight-challenged Miss Universe, or even to Howard Stern about his own daughter.

Beyond that, Hillary cannot fairly be blamed for Bill's tomcatting any more than any other betrayed but loyal wife--Melania Trump, for example--can fairly be blamed.

Yes, Hillary tried to clean up Bill's political messes. That does not begin to make her a personal accomplice in the making of the messes. It makes her beleaguered and the adult in her marriage.

Here's what it comes down to: At least 80 percent of voters will cast partisan ballots out of special interest, personal philosophy, resentment of the hypocrisy of the other side and an overriding concern about the U.S. Supreme Court. Those in the 80 percent will disregard the failings and frailties, even outrages, of the persons for whom they are voting.

And what of that other 20 percent, which actually may be less than that? It goes back and forth between the candidates according to a campaign's ebb and flow. It makes the polls interesting. And it picks the president.

For that 20 percent, telling Goldman Sachs one thing and the rest of us another--while symptomatic of our dishonest, cynical, resented and wealth-wed politics--is less egregious than bragging about grabbing women's private parts without invitation, particularly to women.

You would think.

John Brummett, whose column appears regularly in the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette, was inducted into the Arkansas Writers' Hall of Fame in 2014. Email him at jbrummett@arkansasonline.com. Read his @johnbrummett Twitter feed.

Editorial on 10/12/2016

Upcoming Events