Often winning a Pulitzer Prize in journalism starts with seizing an opportunity. And sometimes in those cases the chemistry between writer and subject seems almost preordained.
Maureen Dowd
That was certainly the case when Maureen Dowd, columnist of The New York Times, joined the commentators on the Bill Clinton-Monica Lewinsky story. Dowd was a veteran of journalism in Washington. Her no-nonsense prose style was crisp and pleasing. Her gender gave her more authority than any male columnist had. And as time went by, the story only got bigger.
Dowd won the 1999 Pulitzer Prize in Commentary for a portfolio of 10 columns, all of them about the scandal and its lively cast of characters.
This is the first of the columns, which ran on Jan. 25, 1998, as the story first took hold of the country.
Like all addicts, this one is surrounded by enablers
By MAUREEN DOWD
WASHINGTON — There have been so many people rushing to TV studios in this giddy and cataclysmic week to talk about sex that networks are bringing makeup artists out of retirement.
The palaver about whether a 21-year-old White House intern had a particular kind of sex with the President has gotten so graphic that CNN's "Inside Politics" Friday featured a warning that the segment might not be suitable for young viewers.
Let's review what we've learned so far.
The President a liar? Knew that.
The President a philanderer? Knew that.
The President reckless in the satisfaction of his appetites? Knew that.
The President would say anything and hurt anybody to get out of a mess? Knew that.
Married men cheat? Knew that.
Married men cheat with young women? Knew that.
Married men who cheat with young women lie about it? Knew that.
Hillary isn't throwing Bill's stuff out on the White House lawn because she is as committed to their repugnant arrangement as he is? Knew that.
The Clinton team — those great feminists — devising ways to discredit women who come forward with reports of Clinton peccadilloes? Knew that.
The President and his minions dissembling and splitting hairs and playing semantic games and taking forever to find the documents until our attention wanders? Knew that.
Bill Clinton's birthday note to Monica Lewinsky
The President has the moxie to pick out a dress for a woman? Didn't know that.
In the delirium of the scandal, something remarkable occurred. The President reportedly admitted, in a deposition to Paula Jones's lawyers, that, oh, yeah, by the way, he did have that affair with Gennifer Flowers, which he so adamantly denied during the '92 campaign.
I still remember James Carville ranting at reporters for being low enough to pay any mind to her, calling it cash for trash.
How can he go back on TV and defend Mr. Clinton in another sex scandal by once more trying to throw doubt on another damning tape?
At least Mr. Carville looked sheepish. Mr. Clinton's famous rapid-response team seems to have bimbo-battle fatigue.
The tapes of Monica Lewinsky, now 24, seem believable, not least because we heard it all before with Gennifer Flowers. Helping to get her a new job, telling her to say nothing went on if anyone asked.
Larry King interviews Gennifer Flowers on CNN in 1992.
"Deny it," Mr. Clinton told Ms. Flowers on tape. "That's all. I mean, I expect them to come look into it and interview you and everything. But I just think if everybody's on record denying it, you've got no problem." The whole modus operandi is right there.
Also, why did Vernon Jordan become a patron to a lowly Pentagon assistant if she was nothing special to the President?
The reality that looms before the American people is not the impeachment of this President. It is the annulment of this President.
He has finally determined his own place in history. He will be remembered as the priapic President. The Oval Office appears to be the bachelor pad of a married man who is the Commander in Chief.
Like all addicts, this one is surrounded by enablers.
Many Americans had accepted Mr. Clinton as a charming rogue. But the portrait that may be pieced together from the confessions of his willing and unwilling women now looks utterly uncharming. Ms. Lewinsky's nickname for him — "the big creep" — could stick.
The Clinton doctrine may turn out to be nothing more than a view of the relationship of oral sex — or Oval sex — to adultery. CNN's Judy Woodruff reported that religious scholars could find no biblical basis for Mr. Clinton's purported claim to an Arkansas trooper that the Bible says oral sex is not cheating.
Ted Koppel actually began "Nightline" Thursday with the following sentence: "It may ... ultimately come down to the question of whether oral sex does or does not constitute adultery."
Well, it sure isn't fidelity.
When Mr. Clinton says now that he can't answer questions about sex, lies and tapes because he must hurry back to governance, people will want him to hurry back to self-governance instead.