The Santos Clause & an Addendum
29th December 2022
I detect Seth Lipsky’s characteristic prose and train of thought in the New York Sun editorial “Yes, Virginia–There Is a Santos Clause.” Seth’s hand in the editorial makes sense: he is the editor of the Sun.
The subject of the editorial is the post-election discovery that Rep.-elect George Santos is not who he said he was. The subhead summarizes the gist of the editorial: “All the falsehoods George Santos is accused of are small beer compared to the truth of his campaign — which is that the voters in his district decided to bring in a Republican to replace a Democrat.” Seth unveils the Santos clause toward the end of the editorial: “[Congress] can’t refuse to seat an elected candidate on the basis of lies he told — or even, for that matter, truths — or whether Brazil thinks he kited checks [as may be the case with Santos].”
It is interesting to see the hysteria whipped up by the media in response to the exposure of Santos’s fabrications. So far, he has only been exposed as a liar. As Seth argues, he will be in good company if and when he is able to take office, though I wouldn’t want to put much credence in his oath.
Santos made the mistake of compressing all of his fibbing into one election season. If he had stretched it out over 30 years, the way Joe Biden did, he might be on his way to the White House.