No one is saying that people accused of sexual misconduct but not charged with the crime should be excluded from society or have their ability to get a job affected. But should they be the Secretary of Defense, overseeing a military that prides itself on character? Can you find someone else who shares the president’s views on how the Pentagon should be run and who wasn’t reported to the police because of his close relationship with someone? (President Trump-elect Pete Hegseth denies the sexual assault allegations made in a 2017 police report and was not charged.)
It seems that the coin of the MAGA right wing these days is “obtaining freedom.” So if the left or the mainstream media is expressing concern or anger about your actions, no matter how morally ethical they may be, then you are doing the right thing. It’s either wrong, or it used to be.
Questions about Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s personal conduct dogged him throughout his life, from his abuse of hard drugs to allegations of sexual misconduct. (This summer, President Kennedy responded to allegations of molestation by a former family babysitter by emailing her an apology, saying he had no recollection of the incident, and publicly calling himself “not a church boy.” (He pointed out that he had other “skeleton” in his closet).
Mr. Kennedy may not be the only person credited with such behavior over the years, but few people are rewarded for important government work that affects the health of the entire planet. This is a person who has struggled to set an example of a healthy lifestyle, let alone a moral one. Then again, couldn’t the next president find someone who shared Kennedy’s views on public health and who didn’t try to live a entitled life without the consequences of hurting the lives of others?
Perhaps you’re reading this and thinking I’m being too harsh (a bit naive). Or, perhaps, you’ll develop some kind of “what-if-ism” about the personal personalities of Bill Clinton, John F. Kennedy, etc. But two wrongs do not make a right.
“Personality” should have no political party or ideology. I believe that each political party has many supporters of high character, and I also believe that each political party has many supporters of low character. We are a country of more than 330 million people, and there are many reasons for that. But how can we become a “more perfect union” if we stop seeking and trying to find quality characters in our elected officials?
Yet does anyone believe that the current political world is attracting the best and brightest to public office?
Just because someone has great character doesn’t mean you should expect a leader to be flawless. But people with high character admit when they were wrong, try to do better next time, and treat fellow humans with respect. Please pee on my feet and stop lying and saying it rains every day.
The old movie “Broadcast News” has some great interactions that not only convey the culture of the 80’s but also today’s culture. “You’ve crossed the line,” Holly Hunter’s character shouts to William Hurt’s character, to which Hurt responds, “You’ve crossed the line.” They just keep their little suckers going, right? ”
That exchange was about changing ethics in the media industry at the time, but it can also be applied to the political culture that has been constantly changing over the past 30 years. What was once an indefensible moral flaw is now hardly a demerit. Perhaps we have gone from being too puritanical to being a little too tolerant.
But the moment you start making exceptions for your own character flaws outside the political fence, you’ll regret it. Because someday it will come from political opponents rather than political allies. And wouldn’t it be a shame if voters decided that today’s politics is for people of low character?
This is the moment I fear we are facing. Are we supposed to believe that politics is so transactional, so zero-sum, that only people with little or no moral fiber can withstand the scorn of the masses? This is how democracies become kleptocratic states.
Naturally, I believe that our political leaders and public servants should have higher than average moral standards. We suddenly decided that unless they were the worst person ever to hold that position, “that’s good enough.” Perhaps there is a part of us that likes some political leaders to be on the moral low ground. Because it makes you feel better about yourself and your position.
From dirty tricks to negative campaigning to foreign policy, there’s always been an element of “the ends justify the means” in our politics, where buying a country and making it into an ally is seen as just “diplomacy.” I am. The other day, a friend of mine claimed that he was nostalgic for the “good old days” standards of political corruption. At the time, political corruption was about members of Congress trying to funnel more federal funds and resources to their districts and states. At least as he claimed, political corruption in the 20th century may have actually helped voters. Sure, the politician may have gotten a kickback, but a factory was built in the area and a number of jobs were also created. In this way, the idea that “the ends justify the means” is easily rationalized.
But what happens when corrupt politicians are no longer trying to help their constituents who are lining their own pockets, but are simply trying to game the system to their own benefit? Sadly, a significant number of members of Congress who have come of age in this day and age take for granted the idea of using their office for personal fame and fortune. It is far from a motive that actually appears to be contributing to the public good. Ask yourself which of the loudest-mouthed members of Congress seem to be trying to make a living as social media influencers rather than as influencers of U.S. law? Think about what they have done for their constituents or what they have done for themselves. ?
Look, I’m a Polyan guy when it comes to public service. I think this should be a higher calling that all citizens should participate in for at least a year or two of their adult lives. I don’t think that should be the career path to celebrity. That doesn’t mean good public servants can’t eventually become famous. On the contrary, I wish all the most famous politicians to gain fame for the right reasons. Rather than using their time in Congress to build successful careers with cameo appearances, they spent their time in public office trying to make the country better.
As with anything in life, it’s easy to rationalize a little bit, but going all in with a “whatever it takes” mindset will ultimately be detrimental to you. It may not be today, it may not be tomorrow, but when it happens, it will be enriched with karma.
As a nation, we have adopted this concept of “the ends justify the means” and essentially do whatever it takes for our own success, rather than “doing whatever it takes” just for our own survival. has set the country’s north star of “doing whatever it takes.”
One of the most influential books on a generation of political reporters was Richard Ben Kramer’s 1988 epic What It Takes. Ostensibly, this book examines the 1988 candidates and shows us all the traits that the most ambitious Americans need, or should, to succeed in the turbulent world of American politics.
The book spent as much time focusing on the positive traits as the negative traits of people who succeeded in the presidential political arena. But they all seemed to believe there was a moral code that all candidates had and should follow. After all, that was the American way.
A similar book on the rise of today’s new political leaders should be called “Whatever It Takes.” Because our algorithmically-enhanced culture rewards that behavior more than anything else…for now.
Culturally, I think historians will one day label the Trump era as the culmination, or punctuation mark, of the steroid era of the ’80s and ’90s, when perception became as important, if not more important, than reality. think. It’s no coincidence that professional wrestling, a sport based on perception that ignores reality, also became mainstream in the 80s and 90s. The most powerful pro wrestling founder has been chosen to be President Trump’s next Secretary of Education.
I intentionally saved this column for a holiday week. As we look at ourselves at family gatherings, the ultimate test of American exceptionalism is whether we can continue to be a shining city on the hills of the earth, and whether we can do so while demonstrating high moral character. Let’s remember that.
Politics is a very cruel game, and the more we succumb to the idea that only immoral or immoral needs apply, the more we abandon our high ground and become part of the reactionary forces that develop around us. You will no longer like the world of Happy Turkey Day!
