US Elections

I don't mean to brag, but...

By Jonathan Bradley in Sydney, Australia

31 January 2012

---

...we know our stuff here at the US Studies Centre.

This past Saturday, the Sydney Morning Herald asked four people whether politics has "finally moved beyond the personal." The evidence of this purported cultural shift? Newt Gingrich's victory in the South Carolina Republican primary, where he won over a socially conservative electorate despite his multiple marriages and reports that he'd asked an ex-wife for an open relationship.

"Politcians tax us too much, spend our money wastefully and regulate our lives," demagogued "The Libertarian," a.k.a. the Instittute of Public Affairs's James Paterson. "So why do we spend so much time worrying about their personal lives instead of the things that really matter?" Gingrich's success, he posited, was "one piece of evidence that American voters have moved beyond the personal." Voters have moved on, even if the media hasn't.

"The Feminist," Kate Gleeson pointed out, not unreasonably, that the public is more forgiving of the male and heterosexual Gingrich's indiscretions than they might be of a woman or gay man. "The Former Politician" Cheryl Kernot used the forum to urge legislators to restrict free speech by enhancing privacy laws, and and applauded one of Gingrich's self-serving attacks on the media.

Fortunately, "The Academic" — also known as the USSC's David Smith — was on hand to straighten things out:

The triumph of Newt Gingrich in South Carolina reminds us that the politics of the personal is as strategic as any other politics.

Moral outrage is not a natural phenomenon that occurs automatically in response to revelations about politicians' personal lives. It is a political weapon to be exploited or neutralised by those who best understand how to use it. No one understands better than Gingrich how outrage works in South Carolina.

America's "Red" states (conservative, Republican-voting) have higher average rates of divorce and birth out of wedlock than the supposedly more permissive "Blue" states. While conservatives insist on strict moral rules, they know they live in a morally complicated world. Everybody knows and loves people who have "fallen" at least once. Gingrich wants to appear as someone who has sinned and repented, and deserves the forgiveness everyone sometimes needs.

Moreover, he has successfully turned himself into a victim. When CNN's John King opened a debate with a question about Marianne Gingrich's claims that Newt had asked for an open marriage, he called the accusations "tawdry" and expressed outrage that the "elite media" would try to protect Barack Obama by attacking a leading Republican this way. This earned him a standing ovation; he had masterfully implied that an attack on him by his ex-wife was an attack on all conservatives by the vindictive liberal media. During the Obama presidency, Republicans have found no emotion more satisfying than victimhood.

Quite. Gingrich is a benefactor of circumstance and cultural affinity. Let us not forget that personal indiscretions recently claimed the careers of Demcoratic Congressmen Anthony Weiner and Mark Sanford, a Republican and the former governor of South Carolina. (Sanford, you may recall, went missing in the middle of 2009 when he was supposed to be hiking the Appalachian Trail. It turns out he had skipped off to Argentina to have an affair. Until then, he was expected to be competitive in this year's presidential primaries.)

After the jump, the rest of David's response.

Read More

---

Print This Post 0 Comments

What is a sex scandal?

By Jonathan Bradley in Sydney, Australia

30 July 2011

---

With Oregon House Democrat David Wu resigning after being accused of sexually assaulting a woman, Dave Weigel notes that this is the fourth of five resignations during this Congress that resulted from "a sex scandal":

In three cases, the trigger for the resignation was not a revelation of sex. Lee and Weiner were flirting; Wu was doing something else. The commonality between Wu and Weiner is that no scandal can be survived if the words "high school girl" appear in it.

I'm inclined, however, to agree with Ta-Nehisi Coates when he says "it's probably time to stop grouping rape under the rubrick of sex scandal." I don't know whether the accusations against Wu of "unwanted sexual activity" amount to the legal standard of rape, but they're definitely in a different class to your run-of-the-mill sex scandal. I expressed doubts about the consensual nature of Anthony Weiner's communiques, but if there is a common thread between him and Congressman Wu, it's not the words "high school girl." (High schooler or not, Wu's alleged victim was an adult.) The pertinent question in both cases was one of consent, and if Wu engaged in sexual activity without it, he has no place in Congress, no matter how many years beyond high school the woman in question was.

---

Print This Post 0 Comments