I've been thinking of writing a political novel. It will be a bad novel
because there won't be any nuance: the villains won't just espouse an
ideology I disagree with - they'll be hypocrites, cranks and scoundrels.
In my bad novel, a famous moralist who demanded national outrage over an
affair and writes best-selling books about virtue will turn out to be
hiding an expensive gambling habit. A talk radio host who advocates
harsh penalties for drug violators will turn out to be hiding his own
drug addiction.
In my bad novel, crusaders for moral values will be driven by strange
obsessions. One senator's diatribe against gay marriage will link it to
"man on dog" sex. Another will rant about the dangers of lesbians in
high school bathrooms.
In my bad novel, the president will choose as head of homeland security
a "good man" who turns out to have been the subject of an arrest
warrant, who turned an apartment set aside for rescue workers into his
personal love nest and who stalked at least one of his ex-lovers.
In my bad novel, a TV personality who claims to stand up for regular
Americans against the elite will pay a large settlement in a sexual
harassment case, in which he used his position of power to - on second
thought, that story is too embarrassing even for a bad novel.
In my bad novel, apologists for the administration will charge foreign
policy critics with anti-Semitism. But they will be silent when a
prominent conservative declares that "Hollywood is controlled by secular
Jews who hate Christianity in general and Catholicism in particular."
In my bad novel the administration will use the slogan "support the
troops" to suppress criticism of its war policy. But it will ignore
repeated complaints that the troops lack armor.
The secretary of defense - another "good man," according to the
president - won't even bother signing letters to the families of
soldiers killed in action.
Last but not least, in my bad novel the president, who portrays himself
as the defender of good against evil, will preside over the widespread
use of torture.
How did we find ourselves living in a bad novel? It was not ever thus.
Hypocrites, cranks and scoundrels have always been with us, on both
sides of the aisle. But 9/11 created an environment some liberals
summarize with the acronym Iokiyar: it's O.K. if you're a Republican.
The public became unwilling to believe bad things about those who claim
to be defending the nation against terrorism. And the hypocrites, cranks
and scoundrels of the right, empowered by the public's credulity, have
come out in unprecedented force.
Apologists for the administration would like us to forget all about the
Kerik affair, but Bernard Kerik perfectly symbolizes the times we live
in. Like Rudolph Giuliani and, yes, President Bush, he wasn't a hero of
9/11, but he played one on TV. And like Mr. Giuliani, he was quick to
cash in, literally, on his undeserved reputation.
Once the New York newspapers began digging, it became clear that Mr.
Kerik is, professionally and personally, a real piece of work. But
that's not unusual these days among people who successfully pass
themselves off as patriots and defenders of moral values. Mr. Kerik must
still be wondering why he, unlike so many others, didn't get away with it.
And Alberto Gonzales must be hoping that senators don't bring up the
subject.
The principal objection to making Mr. Gonzales attorney general is that
doing so will tell the world that America thinks it's acceptable to
torture people. But his confirmation will also be a statement about ethics.
As White House counsel, Mr. Gonzales was charged with vetting Mr. Kerik.
He must have realized what kind of man he was dealing with - yet he
declared Mr. Kerik fit to oversee homeland security.
Did Mr. Gonzales defer to the wishes of a president who wanted Mr. Kerik
anyway, or did he decide that his boss wouldn't want to know? (The
Nelson Report, a respected newsletter, reports that Mr. Bush has made it
clear to his subordinates that he doesn't want to hear bad news about
Iraq.)
Either way, when the Senate confirms Mr. Gonzales, it will mean that
Iokiyar remains in effect, that the basic rules of ethics don't apply to
people aligned with the ruling party. And reality will continue to be
worse than any fiction I could write.