Slate's Bizbox
frame game: How you look at things.

Gore Dumps Clinton

By William Saletan
Posted Thursday, Aug. 10, 2000, at 3:00 AM ET
Illustration by Charlie Powell

The morning after Al Gore picked Sen. Joe Lieberman of Connecticut as his running mate, the New York Times published the reaction of the Rev. Jerry Falwell. Gore "has two great needs," said Falwell. "One is credibility, which Mr. Lieberman brings to anything he touches. The second is an everlasting divorce from Bill Clinton, and this is that." The Wall Street Journal editorial page agreed: "Lieberman is the closest thing Democrats have to an anti-Clinton."

Gore couldn't have bought better quotes than these. All the material concerns in the presidential election—peace, prosperity, safety—are on Gore's side. What's killing him are the moral concerns: his truth-stretching attacks, his weaseling defenses, and above all, his boss's adultery and deceit in office. To shift the election's focus to the material considerations, Gore needs to neutralize the moral considerations. That's where Lieberman comes in.

Gore aides say that Lieberman brings "a sense of moral rectitude to the ticket" and will "shield" Gore from Republican efforts "to make the president's character a campaign issue," according to the Times. "Gore's objective, his advisers and other Democrats say, is to replace his political partner of eight years with a fresh—and untainted—candidate." The head of Gore's vice-presidential search team, Warren Christopher, calls Lieberman "a symbol of rectitude." Gore deputy campaign manager Mark Fabiani argues that the pick "says a lot about [Gore's] judgment and his values." Gore spokesman Chris Lehane told the Times, "If you look at both men, Al Gore and Joe Lieberman, they're both people who throughout their lives made the right choices. Both led very responsible lives."

Lieberman insulates Gore against four moral problems. The first is Clinton's affair with Monica Lewinsky. Virtually every TV and newspaper story about the Lieberman pick has led with two themes: He's Jewish, and he's the first Democrat who had the guts to reproach Clinton openly for being a cad. "CRITIC OF CLINTON—Choice of Senator Seen as Offering Distance From Scandals," declared the Times. The Washington Post's lead sentence said the pick showed Gore was "charting an independent course from President Clinton."

Better yet, the pick is being read as Gore's way of delivering, through Lieberman, the ethical rebuke to Clinton that Gore felt he could not deliver himself. "The choice may tell the public something more not just about Mr. Gore, but about his relationship with his political partner for the past eight years," ventured the Times. Even conservatives, in their eagerness to see Clinton repudiated, bought this line. In its editorial, headlined "Gore's Clinton Fatigue," the Journal crowed, "Gore has picked someone as far away from his president as he could go and still stay within his own party."

Second, Lieberman bolsters Gore's association with religion. Lieberman differs from most Americans in that he's Jewish, but he pleasantly resembles them in that he's a believer. For a politician, he is conspicuously devout, ethical, and observant. "Vice President's Pick Has Air of Integrity," proclaimed the New York Times, boasting that "Lieberman has acquired a reputation for steady habits, family values and faithfulness to his beliefs." Profiles of Lieberman note that he reads the Bible daily and attends worship services regularly. Monday, Lieberman told reporters how he and Gore had prayed together after the selection. Debuting as Gore's running mate Tuesday, Lieberman recited a Bible passage and used the word "God" eight times. Having a religious Jew at his side helps Gore flaunt his own Christianity to conservatives without scaring liberals.

Third, Lieberman reminds people of the moral issues Clinton and Gore have tackled during their administration. Remember the V-chip? Remember Tipper Gore's campaign against sex and violence in rock music? Of course not. The Lewinsky saga ruined all that. But Lieberman can bring it back. Much of the coverage of his selection has pointed out his leadership against the marketing of sex and violence to children, as well as his efforts to stop the persecution of Christians abroad. Conservative Christian leaders have shown up to applaud Lieberman for his "moral substance" and his faith in the Bible and the Ten Commandments.

Fourth, Lieberman shores up the Democratic ticket's credibility on campaign-finance reform. Gore, after all, never dropped his pants for an intern. His principal moral problems are the Buddhist temple and "no controlling legal authority." Lieberman mitigates these problems. The Journal credits him with "sharply criticizing Democratic Party fund-raising excesses on behalf of Mr. Clinton." The Times calls him "a vigorous advocate of campaign finance reform," noting that during the Senate's 1997 investigation of campaign-finance sleaze, "Other Democrats lobbed softball questions at administration witnesses, but Mr. Lieberman asked tough questions."

The most important effect Lieberman might have on the campaign is to vent, at least symbolically, the public's disgust with the Lewinsky mess. In February 1999, after Clinton's impeachment trial was over, Lieberman admitted that part of his rationale for rebuking Clinton in September 1998 was to furnish a statement to which other Democrats could attach themselves, thereby releasing their anger and separating the party's political accomplishments from Clinton's personal sins. Lieberman recognized that Clinton had to be punished somehow and that a verbal reprimand would remove some of the pressure for impeachment.

Gore now faces the same challenge. Clinton escaped both removal from office and censure. Many voters remain angry at him. A lot of them are inclined to express their disgust with him and their desire for a more ethical presidency by voting against Gore. What Gore needs more than anything else is to vent this disgust and gratify this desire within the next three months, so that it is neutralized before Election Day. He needs to convince the electorate that in terms of adultery and lying, the Clinton era is over, the Lieberman era has begun, and Gore will be a lot more like Lieberman than like Clinton. Picking the man who denounced Clinton on the Senate floor is a beautifully ironic touch. Gore, through Lieberman, is triangulating off Clinton. Clinton would understand.

Print This ArticlePRINTDiscuss this in The FrayDISCUSSEmail to a FriendE-MAIL
Share on FacebookPost to MySpace!Share with MixxDigg ThisShare with RedditShare with del.icio.usShare with FurlShare with Ma.gnolia.comShare with SphereShare with Stumble Upon
William Saletan is Slate's national correspondent and author of Bearing Right: How Conservatives Won the Abortion War.
Join the Fray: our reader discussion forum
What did you think of this article?
POST A MESSAGE | READ MESSAGES

Reader Response from The Fray:


If I remember correctly, during the Lewinsky fiasco, while our politicians desperately tried to make sure everyone knew that they were against blowjobs, an overwhelming number of polls and man-on-the-street interviews on the news showed that most Americans didn't really care one way or the other. Much to the befuddlement of conservative radio talk show hosts, people didn't care about Clinton's personal life, they didn't care for the line of questioning, they didn't care about this, the most loudly touted non-issue to come out of DC for the last century at least.

Now I keep reading articles that talk about how the scandal 'tore our nation apart' or how it 'shocked and horrified the public'. Yeah right. One of the most powerful men in the world has a chippie on the side. What a mind-blowing surprise. The fact that the central issue for both parties in this election is whether they're pro or con on blowjobs is utterly sickening. There are crucial issues surrounding globalization and the increasing momentum of the movement against it, the gap between rich and poor is as bad or worse than it's ever been, yet all the parties want to talk about is how they're going to convince us to swallow their version of 'family values'. It's a joke.

--Walter Kovacks

(To reply, click here.)


To Walter Kovacks:

While how much the American public was concerned about Clinton's behavior can be debated, what was clear was that the public did not condone the Presidents actions. Most Americans believed that having a liaison with an intern in the Oval office was not proper. It's clearly possible to tell someone they did something wrong but still support their ideas. Lieberman, who did so, is a good man and the rest of the Democratic Senators were spineless in not at least echoing his sentiments. They didn't have to vote for impeachment but they darn well should have said something! Now I hope we can get past the Clinton Intern Scandal and focus on the issues. If Gore plans on getting plenty of mileage out of Lieberman doing the right thing in castigating the President then it's going to be a long fall for him.

Interesting how Lieberman isn't withdrawing from the Connecticut Senate race. Is this an indication of his feelings on the chances of the Gore/Lieberman ticket winning the White House? Seems to indicate a lack of confidence to me.

--JF

(To reply, click here.)


My problem with the idea that Lieberman somehow insulates Gore from association with Clinton is the fact that for nearly eight years now, Gore was okay with Clinton. Nowhere did he express any opinion or judgement on his boss's staggering lack of integrity and willingness to use his office for personal gratification (except for his weaselly and vague passive defenses). Loyalty to your boss is admirable, but Clinton is not Gore's only boss--as an elected official he's answerable to the citizenry (in theory--in reality both appear to be answerable to campaign contributors regardless of their citizenship). Surely he could have found some manner to act as an ethical guidepost without betraying Clinton. Like most Democratic Party officials, however, he closed ranks around Clinton and cast the entire ethical mess as a partisan jihad. Which makes Gore, for all the talk about his own integrity and moral strength, as much an unprincipled opportunist as Bill Clinton is.

--Stephen Skubinna

(To reply, click here.)

(8/10)

Washington Post
The Washington Post
OPINIONS
Assessing Sarah Palin
Topic A | Political experts weigh in on McCain's running mate.
Meyerson: Pure Identity PoliticsCapehart: A Hail Mary Pass
PLUS » Froomkin: The Anti-Bush