(The American Conservative)
Mudslinging has existed in one form or another for as long as politics has. Recent years, though, have seen it devolve from the exaggerated “new lows” of 2012 to something even worse. Although embarrassing gossip about public figures is no doubt entertaining, it’s time to ask whether we’re ready to accept the excavation of ancient Twitter posts, informal writings, and—for crying out loud—high school yearbooks as legitimate sources of criticism of political figures and celebrities.
If so, we must accept an uncomfortable fact: the only people who will survive such thorough opposition research are either ill-socialized Boy Scouts or the utterly shameless. It’s an insane way to pick our leaders, and instead of becoming comfortable with it, we should focus on what actually matters: relevant qualifications.
All too often now, we witness someone’s career being ruined because of inane mudslinging. Opponents of Texas Senate challenger Beto O’Rourke dragged him through the mud in early October for comments he’d made about actresses in a 1991 review of a Broadway musical. On the Left, meanwhile, there was endless speculation about Brett Kavanaugh’s high school drinking habits, when the real concern should have been whether or not he committed sexual assault. This phenomenon isn’t limited to politics either—not by a long shot.
O’Rourke’s allegedly disqualifying activities had nothing to do with the position he was trying out for. What he thought about the skill and breasts of an actress when he was 19 years old cannot possibly be relevant to his duties as a United States senator. And the drinking habits of a high schooler, no matter how scandalous, mean nothing with respect to a judge’s qualifications. Read more