A notion has been circulating, especially on the Net, for a few weeks, popularized by TV/film producer and left celeb Michael Moore, to cast a protest vote this election of a straight Democratic ticket. The logic is somewhat appealing: to create a clear backlash to the Republican jihad (led by Kenneth Starr, Henry "youthful indiscretion" Hyde, and colleagues) against Bill Clinton. Moore notes--as we have many times--Clinton's (and his party's) many crimes against humanity, but urges this as a single-issue vote on the basis that no democracy can survive the sort of vengeful, privacy-invading witch hunt being mounted by the Republicans.

ETS! has generally avoided covering and commenting upon Monicagate. It's been done to death by the mainstream media, and there are simply too many critical issues not being covered while we get aural sex instead. How many hurried joyless fucks Clinton snuck past the security apparati has nothing, repeat, nothing to do with his lack of fitness as a leader. His abuse of power and abuse of women in snagging them does--but that's not an issue anybody's raising. It's painful to defend the guy, or to urge that he be allowed to perpetrate his job. But the release of grand jury testimony of both Clinton and Lewinsky leads to one, and only one, conclusion: that they are human beings who should be well enough left alone at this point.

They won't be, of course, but that's because Bill Clinton has political enemies. The drive to unseat him has nothing to do with moral, or legal, outrage at his conduct, and everything to do with power grabbing. In its wake, it sets a standard for personal conduct that would effectively prevent anyone I'd want to see elected from ever holding office in this country, and sets a standard for deliberative bodies that says any aspect of one's personal life is fair game for bringing public business to a halt.

There is already some evidence Republicans are suffering for their party's zealotry. Clinton's poll ratings remain high, and several Republican leaders have been roasted in their own personal hypocrisy. But electoral failure would be the real sanction, and Moore's logic here is compelling, especially when (as in Washington state) there are no alternative parties to support in most races. If there is no fundamental difference between the two major parties, at minimum we can punish the one waving a flashlight between our bedsheets. In an election, swing votes are vital--and that includes the votes that, through alienation, would normally not go to either ruling party.

I did not base my electoral picks this issue on Moore's suggestion, because I wanted to put information out on individual candidates--and many Democrats, like Ms. Murray, have their own crimes to answer for. But here it is, for people so moved.