Al Franken...You let me down.
I'd previously praised Al Franken highly on this blog--here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here and here.
I will, unfortunately, never be able to praise him again without caveats.
I've been mulling over this ceaselessly cresting tsunami of "revelations" and I'm not at all sure what to make of any of it, particularly the stuff coming out of the entertainment industry. Franken's behavior strikes me as lamentably stupid, crass, unfunny and unsolicited, but the damning photo clearly shows he is not touching her flak-jacket and thus not, technically, "groping" her. This reversion to adolescent behavior is hardly beyond-the-pale in a traveling troupe of comic performers, or performers of any stripe. Performer boundaries are notoriously porous and flexible. What we're finally talking about is a kiss that went too far -- she says, and he recalls differently. This isn't Bill and Hillary Clinton territory.
OTOH, a guy who frequently calls on people to behave reasonably and with civility towards all ought to hold himself to the same standard -- so, yes, a disappointing moment. But the current "Listen to my horrible story" environment is producing a cascade of drama, the outcome of which is sure to be lamentable on many, many levels.
It's an issue that is beginning to get complicated, isn't it?
In the past I've argued that we should vote for politicians based on the issues only, and not on their personal morality. (As a young Democrat in a Republican school, I defended Bill Clinton along these lines back in 1998).
But in more recent years, I admit to using Trump's sexual history against him. So I suppose I'd be a hypocrite not to now hold Democrats to the same standard.
My personal bias is to agree with you--Franken's case is not as bad as Trump's or Roy Moore's. But then, I'm a Democrat, so of course I'd be biased. I've been trying the past couple days to try to separate my bias from the issues, and come to some sort of consistent moral standard. I haven't yet succeeded.
It shames me now to admit, but back in '98 I defended Clinton with the "consenting adults" argument. I was 33 and working with 22-year-oldish women who thought the White House hijinx skeevy, but not overly so. My POV on the matter began to shift as we watched husband and wife throw the girl under the bus. That they both to this day consider the affair (which we now know to be one of countless) to be a "private matter" between the two of them alone is surely an element that contributed to public distaste and distrust as they approached the polls. It causes me to hesitate before defending anything about Franken's behavior, which I find contemptible -- just maybe perhaps not cause for resignation(?). Feel free to discuss, I say.
A "consistent moral standard" is indeed what we are all collectively casting about for. "Consent" is offered as today's Holy Grail, so if we set the bar that low the only cause for shame in the Clinton indulgence is in the aftermath of how they treated his paramour. But I don't buy that, and neither does the public. So where next?
Whisky, Sorry for the late response on this. (If you're still checking this thread). I've been trying to figure out what I want to say, and I still haven't figured it out yet. I'm conflicted between my desire to separate the political issues from the private lives of politicians on the one hand, but on the other hand fed up with the way these guys think they're untouchable and can do whatever they want. Where to next indeed? If you were to press me on it right now, I'd be leaning to agree with you and say that Franken shouldn't resign. Thanks for the Andrew Sullivan article,by the way. I agree, it's a good point.
By now you've probably seen footage of the USO show these guys were doing, including the sketch that left Ms. Tweeden feeling so violated -- typical USO material, as old as Bob Hope and Dorothy Lamour. One can't help getting the impression Ms. Tweeden has been painstakingly groomed for this story.
I hadn't, actually, but I youtubbed them just now. I agree, the material itself is harmless. But if what Ms Tweeden alleged happened behind the scenes was true, it would put things in a slightly different light. Admittedly, the kiss isn't as bad as Trump or Roy Moore. At it's worst, it would be an awkward pass at a woman who didn't want to have a pass made at her.
But then.... http://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/20/politics/al-franken-inappropriate-touch-2010/ ...the second allegation, if true, is more troubling. It means that not only is this becoming a pattern, but he was doing this while he was a Senator. It would indicate a serious lack of control to still be doing this behavior while you are in office.
...But then again (I say as I talk myself round and round in circles), if Al Franken is indeed a man who can't control himself, then we should be seeing a lot more than just 2 stories.
I've been mulling over this ceaselessly cresting tsunami of "revelations" and I'm not at all sure what to make of any of it, particularly the stuff coming out of the entertainment industry. Franken's behavior strikes me as lamentably stupid, crass, unfunny and unsolicited, but the damning photo clearly shows he is not touching her flak-jacket and thus not, technically, "groping" her. This reversion to adolescent behavior is hardly beyond-the-pale in a traveling troupe of comic performers, or performers of any stripe. Performer boundaries are notoriously porous and flexible. What we're finally talking about is a kiss that went too far -- she says, and he recalls differently. This isn't Bill and Hillary Clinton territory.
ReplyDeleteOTOH, a guy who frequently calls on people to behave reasonably and with civility towards all ought to hold himself to the same standard -- so, yes, a disappointing moment. But the current "Listen to my horrible story" environment is producing a cascade of drama, the outcome of which is sure to be lamentable on many, many levels.
Also: Rene Girard: now more than ever.
ReplyDeleteIt's an issue that is beginning to get complicated, isn't it?
ReplyDeleteIn the past I've argued that we should vote for politicians based on the issues only, and not on their personal morality. (As a young Democrat in a Republican school, I defended Bill Clinton along these lines back in 1998).
But in more recent years, I admit to using Trump's sexual history against him. So I suppose I'd be a hypocrite not to now hold Democrats to the same standard.
My personal bias is to agree with you--Franken's case is not as bad as Trump's or Roy Moore's. But then, I'm a Democrat, so of course I'd be biased. I've been trying the past couple days to try to separate my bias from the issues, and come to some sort of consistent moral standard. I haven't yet succeeded.
It shames me now to admit, but back in '98 I defended Clinton with the "consenting adults" argument. I was 33 and working with 22-year-oldish women who thought the White House hijinx skeevy, but not overly so. My POV on the matter began to shift as we watched husband and wife throw the girl under the bus. That they both to this day consider the affair (which we now know to be one of countless) to be a "private matter" between the two of them alone is surely an element that contributed to public distaste and distrust as they approached the polls. It causes me to hesitate before defending anything about Franken's behavior, which I find contemptible -- just maybe perhaps not cause for resignation(?). Feel free to discuss, I say.
ReplyDeleteA "consistent moral standard" is indeed what we are all collectively casting about for. "Consent" is offered as today's Holy Grail, so if we set the bar that low the only cause for shame in the Clinton indulgence is in the aftermath of how they treated his paramour. But I don't buy that, and neither does the public. So where next?
Huh. I posted, then wandered over here to read Andrew Sullivan. Timely, and to the point.
ReplyDeleteWhisky,
ReplyDeleteSorry for the late response on this. (If you're still checking this thread). I've been trying to figure out what I want to say, and I still haven't figured it out yet.
I'm conflicted between my desire to separate the political issues from the private lives of politicians on the one hand, but on the other hand fed up with the way these guys think they're untouchable and can do whatever they want.
Where to next indeed?
If you were to press me on it right now, I'd be leaning to agree with you and say that Franken shouldn't resign.
Thanks for the Andrew Sullivan article,by the way. I agree, it's a good point.
By now you've probably seen footage of the USO show these guys were doing, including the sketch that left Ms. Tweeden feeling so violated -- typical USO material, as old as Bob Hope and Dorothy Lamour. One can't help getting the impression Ms. Tweeden has been painstakingly groomed for this story.
ReplyDeleteI hadn't, actually, but I youtubbed them just now. I agree, the material itself is harmless. But if what Ms Tweeden alleged happened behind the scenes was true, it would put things in a slightly different light.
ReplyDeleteAdmittedly, the kiss isn't as bad as Trump or Roy Moore. At it's worst, it would be an awkward pass at a woman who didn't want to have a pass made at her.
But then....
http://edition.cnn.com/2017/11/20/politics/al-franken-inappropriate-touch-2010/
...the second allegation, if true, is more troubling. It means that not only is this becoming a pattern, but he was doing this while he was a Senator. It would indicate a serious lack of control to still be doing this behavior while you are in office.
...But then again (I say as I talk myself round and round in circles), if Al Franken is indeed a man who can't control himself, then we should be seeing a lot more than just 2 stories.