All Too HumanHad I but served my God with half the zeal THE RESPONSE OF THE Clinton Administration to George Stephanopoulos' new book All Too Human is all too familiar and all too revealing. The reaction is not to dispute the White House aide's memories of his White House years, not to quarrel with his judgments, and not to dispute the portrayals of White House sycophants. The response is to question Stephanopoulos' loyalty. It is a subtle version of the Clinton machine's self-defining strategy of attacking the accuser. [alltoohuman.jpg] If the Clinton Administration possesses the facts to debunk a frivolous accusation, no group is more adept at getting the exonerating facts out effectively. The tenacity with which the spin machine impugns the character of its critics, the weaker the arguments on the merits. Despite the White House plea to end the "politics of personal destruction," no group is more gifted in its ruthless application. When Stephanopoulos accepted a book deal, he expected the book would be a success story; the Clinton Administration's comeback from devastating 1994 Congressional elections to re-election in 1996. He wanted to tell the heroic tale of the rise of a small-state governor to a two-term Presidency. Events overtook the story. The last year saw the explosion of the Monica Lewinsky story with its seven-month cover-up of Presidential impropriety and charges of perjury and obstruction of justice. Stephanopoulos had a unique perspective. As a battle-hardened politico, he appreciated the inner workings of the White House under stress. As a news commentator, he was required to view the events with a detached perspective. Rather than being immersed and isolated in the effort to hide the facts, Stephanopoulos now viewed the mendacity from a detached and safe distance. All Too Human describes the mental somersaults required for otherwise discerning and perceptive people to sustain the suspension of disbelief required to protect the President. Stephanopoulos' key insight is that the ferocity and devotion required to support the political fight consumes so much intellectual and emotional energy, there is little strength left for doubt. During the Gennifer Flowers scandal, Stephanopoulos first appreciated Clinton's character, but, as he wrote: A dynamic had already started that would repeat itself many times in the years ahead   - one explained well by Reinhold Niebuhr: "Frantic orthodoxy," he wrote, "is never rooted in faith but in doubt. It is when we are not sure that we are doubly sure." I now had doubts about Clinton, had seen his flaws up close, which caused me to focus even more intently on his strengths and believe even more fervently in his ideas. His enemies would stop at nothing to defeat him, so nothing would stop me from defending him. Now I was a true believer. |