Opinion: Condit's creepy non-answers

What were U.S. Rep. Gary Condit's lawyers, media advisers, political consultants and other spin doctors thinking? Couldn't they have anticipated that their client would come across as a creepy, programmed, granite-faced prevaricator during his interview last week with ABC's Connie Chung? The California Democrat's repetitive non-answers to questions about the nature of his relationship with missing intern Chandra Levy were merely annoying. His attempts to cast himself as a victim of media overkill were predictable. But his insidious criticism of Levy's grieving family was truly repellent.

The national reaction to Condit's interview was almost univerally negative. Even worse for Condit, he also fared badly with the audiences that matter most. Constituents in Condit's Northern California district had shown extraordinary patience with their longtime congressman as he remained mute during the first months of Levy's disappearance. But having waited so long to give Condit a chance to explain himself, they didn't like what they finally saw and heard.

The scathing reaction of House Democratic leader Richard Gephardt was welcome, if overdue. "I didn't hear candor, I didn't hear an apology," Gephardt said after Condit's televised interview. "What he said . . . was disturbing and wrong."

Gephardt's criticism broke an uncomfortable silence among Condit's Democratic colleagues. With control of both houses of Congress so tenuous, even many Democrats disgusted with Condit were hesitant to criticize him, for fear of forcing him to give up his seat in a competitive district. Such are the skewed priorities of Washington. For their part, only a handful of congressional Republicans had castigated Condit before Gephardt came forward. After several Washington politicians were exposed as hypocrites during the Clinton-Lewinsky scandal, many have become gun-shy about casting themselves as moralists.

Partisanship and self-preservation routinely trump morality in Washington, but when an elected official stands up and criticizes a member of his own party, the effect can be decisive. President Richard Nixon might have survived the crimes of Watergate if influential Republicans in Congress had not ultimately turned against him. President Clinton did survive, barely, because congressional Democrats decided that his misdeeds did not warrant his removal from office.

Condit's recklessness and dishonesty are reminiscent of Clinton's, but the context is far more serious. Monica Lewinsky is alive and well. Levy has been missing for months and is presumed dead. Police say Condit's early lack of candor impeded their investigation into Levy's disappearance. Yet Condit has shown no remorse about that, or anything else. He is an embarrassment to our political system. If he doesn't have the grace to resign, the voters of California's 18th Congressional District will deal with him soon enough.

Contact the Times | Privacy Policy
Standard of Accuracy | Terms, Conditions & Copyright