2 December—It was 69 years ago today (1954, in case you’re wondering) that the United States Senate “condemned” Joe McCarthy, the Republican from Wisconsin, on two counts: he had, “contrary to senatorial traditions . . . failed to co-operate with the Sub-committee on Rules and Administration,” and “repeatedly abused the members who were trying to carry out assigned duties.”

No doubt about any of it. Edward R. Murrow and television had exposed him.

The vote was 67 to 22 in the barely Republican Senate, which would turn to a one-vote Democrat majority when the new senators were sworn in for the new session in January 1955. The Republicans were split evenly on the condemnation while the Democrats were unanimous. (So what else is new?)

Although the resolution read “condemn,” it was intended as a “censure.” But because one of McCarthy’s pals argued that since “condemn” was used in the final draft rather than “censure,” the resolution was not a censure resolution, the word “censure” was removed from the title of the resolution. Not that it matters. It was and is regarded as a censure.

While McCarthy himself said, “I don’t feel I’ve been lynched,” he acknowledged, “I wouldn’t exactly call it a vote of confidence.” And it was well-deserved downhill for Joe from there.

Why did the Senate allow Joe McCarthy to get away with his shameful shenanigans for a year and why did the notorious and reprehensible House Un-American Activities Committee persist in its witch hunt to brand perfectly decent people as communists since 1938? Easy. The pols simply seized the opportunities as they arose. That’s what politics is about, after all.

The opportunity to ride in style on the anti-commie bus had run its course. So the time had come to seize the new opportunity to throw the driver under the bus. Ethics schmethics.

And that takes us to now-former Congressman George Santos. The House of Representatives expelled him yesterday, by Resolution 878, for essentially doing what most of them do but are more adept at hiding.

After running through all the allegations against Santos, the hypocritical resolution concludes: “Whereas as a Member of the United States House of Representatives, Representative Santos must be held accountable to the highest standards of conduct in order to safeguard the public’s faith in this institution; [editorial emphasis]

“Whereas the Constitution of the United States charges the House with policing the behavior of its own Members, and the House should take action against Representative Santos commensurate with his violations of Federal law and the Rules of the House; and

“Whereas given his egregious violations, Representative George Santos is not fit to serve as a Member of the United States House of Representatives: Now, therefore, be it

“Resolved, That pursuant to article I, section 5, clause 2 of the Constitution of the United States, Representative George Santos, be, and he hereby is, expelled from the United States House of Representatives.”

Not to defend George Santos, but how many of those slimy, self-serving bastards—apologies to bastards—are really fit to serve?