That bit of res ipsa loquitur was vomited up by the disgusting George Santos after a Democrat won this week’s special election in New York’s 3rd Congressional District to replace him. Santos, you recall, had been elected to represent the district in 2022 despite having no qualifications whatsoever, because he lied about, almost literally, everything. It was a genuinely fraudulent victory, far beyond the typical campaign false promises, fake positions and embellishments the American public is used to. Republicans were as accountable as Santos for allowing such scum to run in the first place.

The Republican Party seldom does anything right, but kicking this creepy-crawly out of the House was one of the few times it has been ethical (and I’m including “competence” is that description) in recent years. Both parties are responsible for upholding the dignity and honor of government institutions, particularly Congress and the Presidency. Right now, I fell secure in saying that the current crop of House members is the least qualified, the least trustworthy and the least ethical by far, and that condition is dangerous. There are probably ten or more members who would greatly enhance the body by leaving it, but Santos was unquestionable the worst of the worst. (As I wrote in the last Santos post, Rep. Bowman, the Mad Alarmist, would probably be next on my list, “Bowman should be sanctioned, “but compared to Santos he’s John Quincy Adams.”)

Congress has to insist on standards, and a political party has to insist on standards. At least the GOP demonstrated that it has some. It’s about time.

But even as Santos was being made only the sixth in history to be deemed unworthy of an elected seat, the unethical Machiavellians in the party and the conservative punditry were screaming that Republicans keeping their narrow majority in the House was too important not to allow a sociopathic idiot like Santos to stick around. This, I hope you note, is the current unethical mindset of the Democrats, who refuse to tell Joe Biden that he is no longer able to lead the country (if he ever was), and Biden himself, who in his addled state refuses to fire the most deserving among his hires and a appointees, though his press secretary is hopeless and his cabinet in even worse than, well, Trump’s cabinet was. His Secretaries of State, Transportation, Defense, Homeland Security and Biden’s Attorney General have proven themselves incompetent beyond a reasonable doubt; I doubt any previous President would have allowed all of this motley crew to keep their jobs. Democrats are basically telling the country that you can never be too incompetent and untrustworthy for their party. At least the Republicans had the minimal integrity required to prove there are people too disgusting and dishonest for their party.

But after Democrat and former Rep. Tom Suozzi won back Santos’s seat in the New York Third District, a large number of conservative pundits decided to employ consequentialism, the dumbest and most insidious of ethical systems, to say, “See? I told you it was a mistake to dump Santos!” If the GOP had held the seat, these same hacks would be saying, “Brilliant! Our party proved it has standards, and now we have someone in that district who may be competent!”

Here’s a representative pundit without scruples, Stephen Kruiser of PJ Media, whose headline read, “Super Cool That ‘Principled’ House GOP Majority Gave a Seat to the Dems.” Yeah, imagine that: “principles.” Republican don’ need no stinkin’ principles! He writes,

I have been expressing my irritation with the House Republicans’ ouster of George Santos since the day it happened. We are at such a critical and fragile juncture that I’m willing to overlook a host of personal foibles in any politician who will vote the way we Constitution-loving folks want him to. A host of foibles, I tell you.

People who disagree with me will no doubt say that George Santos’s wrongdoings were well beyond the level of foibles. Let’s just say that my definition of foible, when considering the behavior of people on my side, will be greatly expanded during the duration of this constitutional peril.

The rest of his argument is equally repellent. Calling Santos’s myriad crimes and lies “foibles” is redolent of Harvard’s characterizing Claudine Gay’s mass plagiarism as few “missing quotation marks.” Worse, that description by Kruiser is the epitome of Rationalization #28. The Revolutionary’s Excuse: “These are not ordinary times.” Remember that one?

An argument for those who embrace “the ends justify the means”—but only temporarily, mind you!—the Revolutionary’s excuse has as long and frightening a pedigree as any of the rationalizations here. Of course, there is no such thing as “ordinary times.” This rationalization suggests that standards of right and wrong can and should be suspended under “special” circumstances, always defined, naturally, by those who defy laws, rules, and societal values. Their circular logic results in their adversaries feeling justified in being equally unethical, since times in which the other side engages in dishonesty, cheating, cruelty, and more is, by definition, extraordinary.

The inevitable result is a downward spiral of conduct, until unethical behavior is the norm. Ironically, the rationalization that “these are not ordinary times” no longer is necessary at that point. Unethical conduct has become ordinary, the new normal. This is, it is fair to say, the current state of American politics.

People who think this way are to be avoided at all costs in a democracy, especially one with aspirational values like the United States. Kruiser and his breed are as great a risk to become totalitarians as today’s Democrats. In the end, Republicans will be far more competent and trustworthy if losing that seat teaches them not to run just anyone with a pulse and no other virtues for key offices (the losing Republican in the New York race is a registered Democrat!) and to do better.

Maybe they should watch this relevant clip from the Ethics Alarms clip collection too: