Jobs and morals
by Matt Worley

I love movies. They are reflective of human nature and I love watching human nature at work. The Discovery Channel usually satisfies my need to see the "lesser" animals at work, but when I'm not watching humans in the wild, I like to check them out on the big screen. Better special effects. I should, however, caution readers that a few plot lines of recent movies may be revealed throughout the rest of this column. I understand some people are actually surprised about the way movies come out at the end.

But first, I must remind everyone that President Clinton is in quite a situation at the moment. Just in case anyone has been sleeping for the last week, the President has another sex scandal on his hands. But what, exactly, does this have to do with his job? While being President has quite the stature in the world (Clinton gets to have his job name capitalized, not just his name), I'm pretty sure the Prez is entitled to a little bit of downtime. And if he was dumb enough to have a little tryst with one or many of the young women working in the White House, it seems as though this is something his wife should be most pissed about. Hillary is vociferously supporting her husband in this latest test of American morals, even as much of the Prez's staff seems to be unsure about where to tread.

I will ask a few questions and then leave them hanging for a while: 1. Is the President of the United States a job that requires higher morals than say working at McDonalds? 2. Should someone be fired for something they do on their own time? Does consensual actually mean O.K.? 3. When human cloning becomes the designer gift toy of 2015, will all of us be raising our favorite dead relatives as our own children?

Quentin Tarantino's "Jackie Brown" is not a violent movie, but it is located in the ugly underworld of L.A. A place where car alarms are turned on even if the trip into the grocery store will take two minutes tops. It's a place most of us never think about visiting. The film asks the question "Is it more moral to give half a million dollars to an underpaid stewardess or a part-time gun runner?" The gun runner, who has girlfriends in safe houses across L.A., kills his associates if he thinks they might squeal on him, and is quite drunk on his own power, doesn't win. The gun runner is too damaged to win. The stewardess is not clean to say the least, but her damage is, presumably, the fault of unequal opportunity and bad luck. In Tarantino movies, the least damaged wins.

"Alien: Resurrection" is a violent movie. It is set in a far off future, located on a far off spaceship, and features a far off premise: What is a mother to do if her son is a serial killer? An ancient heroine is cloned so her unborn offspring can be studied and taught. The offspring, of course, is the deadly Alien of the title. The heroine/mother is Ripley--or a creature who looks a lot like Ripley. There is a lot of running and shooting involved. But the pervading theme of the movie is this: once a life form has been created (no matter what process is used to create) and is self-aware, is that creature any less important than we humans think we are? Is human morality the only definition of morality in the universe? Guess who loses this battle.

Undoubtedly, President Clinton hasn't had time to see either of these movies. Not that it would really help him out of his current situation. No matter what the truth is about ex-intern Monica Lewinsky's claims of hummers in the White House closets might be, there is a serious problem here. Either a large number of women have had affairs with a guy who looks an awful lot like President Clinton (something the Secret Service really should have taken care of long ago), or the Prez is having trouble keeping his, uh, power in check.

Power is quite an aphrodisiac. I've been in bands (garage bands, but we played in living rooms, too) and the rumor is true. There is something quite exciting to girls about a guy trying to make music--even if he sucks at it. Now, if I can get hummers for singing "Smells Like Teen Spirit" badly, just think of the propositions a man like President Clinton might be subject to--since he is actually the President (big P).

This doesn't excuse his behavior. We all can say no to the glazed grins of groupies if we really try. But if this is merely a perk of the job, should the President be blamed for dropping his guard every once in a while? Once again, is the morality of the President supposed to be higher than the rest of us? I don't have the answer to this.

I've said this before, but I think it applies to this situation. We're all in the business of selling ourselves. We're all whores to a certain extent. We sell ourselves to get jobs. We sell ourselves to fall in love (and, somewhere along the line, to get laid). The question is intent. Maybe Monica Lewinsky thought she was more important than an open mouth in a White House closet. Maybe the Prez really cared about Miss Lewinsky. Maybe when President Clinton is cloned we can teach him the difference between love and power.

Then again, maybe we can't because none of us know the difference.

Matt Worley knows there is less of a power quotient in being a columnist than being in a rock band. Or being the President of the United States.

return to the Shut up, I'm talking page
return to the LIES home page
return to the A&A home page