|Dilbert’s author’s thoughts on ZipperGate = Monica affair|
October 12th, 2007 by panu
|« the difference between Friday and Monday||Family planning »|
For those who remember this hilarious Clinton era drama, here is what an American intellectual (are there any?) commented on the topic:
Lately I have been subjected to many Induhvidual opinions about Zippergate. Rather than respond to them as they happen, which would require me to yell at my television set, thereby scaring all of my other appliances, I will address these curious viewpoints here.
Note: I have no strong opinion of what should happen to the President. I’m just amused by it all.
Induhvidual Opinion #1 — It’s about lies, not sex
Some Induhviduals say it’s not the sex, it’s the lying that’s the real problem. But it’s not a general kind of lying that’s the problem, it’s specifically the President’s unwillingness to share details of his sex life with every human being in the world. By that standard, only Geraldo Rivera and Dennis Rodman could qualify to be President.
If lying is so damnable, let’s say we decide to impeach every politician who lies to the American people. They’d be dropping like flies. I forget how the chain of command works, but I think that after the President and the Vice President, you have the Speaker of The House, and then members of the cabinet, and on from there. It would take about two months before a near-sighted postal clerk has the nuclear launch codes.
When the politicians who vote on impeachment tell us they will be non-political, asking us to believe they will ignore the fact that Al Gore could become president, do you think they are telling the truth? And if they aren’t, shouldn’t we impeach them too?
Induhvidual Opinion #2 — How Can Clinton Govern Now?
I have this image in my head of Yasser Arafat visiting the White House. Clinton offers him a Presidential cigar and Arafat says, “If you don’t mind, could I have one that is still in the original wrapper?” This ugly incident turns into a towel fight and triggers World War Three.
That’s the best scenario I could come up with in which the President’s ability to govern is affected by Zippergate.
I guess there’s one other possibility. Suppose Congress passes some legislation and it comes to Clinton’s desk for signature, but Hillary has broken both of his arms. That might slow him down. But he could still grip a pen in his teeth and sign the bill into law. And if Hillary punched out his teeth too, all you really needs is a bottle of dipping ink and a cute intern to improvise a solution. It wouldn’t be the photo opportunity we’re used to, but at this point, nothing seems too shocking.
Let’s say the President is less able to push his agenda in Congress now, because no one wants to be his friend . I keep asking myself how my life will be different, compared to the dynamic leadership we expect from a second term minority party president. So far, I’m stumped.
Induhvidual Opinion #3 — Any CEO would be fired
The pundits keep saying that any CEO who has an affair with an employee would be fired. But on my planet, Earth, CEOs routinely boff the staff, literally and figuratively, and I know of no example where any CEO ever got fired for anything except falling stock prices or accounting irregularities. Who started the rumor that CEOs get fired for bedding their underlings? Didn’t Bill Gates marry one of his employees?
Induhvidual Opinion #4 — You Can’t Do That In The Military
Pundits point out that the President would be kicked out of the military for his behavior, if in fact he were in the military. We can extend this brilliant analysis to see how he would be treated by other organizations to which he does not belong.
For example, I also believe he would be kicked out of the Girl Scouts for his behavior. That sort of activity is very disruptive to the meetings. And I don’t think you can participate in the Big Sister program with that on your record either. I also believe he would be fired as editor of Cigar Aficionado magazine if he worked there, which he doesn’t.
Induhvidual Opinion #5 — We can’t help thinking about it
Some people say Clinton can’t be effective because every time we look at him we’ll be grossed out thinking of his sex life. Personally, I already have that problem with most politicians, not to mention many of my friends, and my entire extended family. In fact, the only politician I can imagine having sex, without wincing, is Al Gore, and that’s only because I assume he does it fully clothed.
Induhvidual Opinion # 6 — Not In The Oval Office!
Some people are incensed because the dirty deeds happened in the White House. This implies that some other location wouldn’t have been so bad. So I’m wondering, where **is** the best place for the President to do that sort of thing? Would a State Park be okay, or is that still government land? How about the French Embassy? That’s technically foreign soil, and they probably have a cot in the back for just that kind of situation.
Induhvidual Opinion #7 — We Wasted 40 Million Dollars!
Sure, it was expensive, but I feel I got my money’s worth. I figure my share was about eighty cents, and I’ve been entertained for months. Compare that to the seven bucks I paid to see the Godzilla movie and I think you€ll agree it’s a bargain.
And consider the positive impact on the media. It was a slow news year. If the media had gone one more week without an interesting story, they would have had to kill another member of the British royal family just to fill airtime. No one wants that.
Induhvidual Opinion #8 — It’s Sexual Harassment
Some say that because Monica was a White House employee, and Clinton had power to influence her career, it is sexual harassment by definition.
I suppose it’s possible that Monica thought she would get a cabinet job after her internship was over, or possibly become ambassador to Great Britain. And I suppose it’s possible that Monica was afraid of being demoted from her lucrative intern job. So I guess that’s the best point I’ve heard so far.