I have a sense of humor. I really do.

Still, the Hillary Clinton fundraising web video parodying the final episode of "The Sopranos" failed to amuse me. I was swamped by the ethics oogies. The piece sets off too many cultural and ethical alarms in my brain to ignore, and certainly too many to enjoy. It is obviously evidence of something unsettling in the political and popular culture. It obviously tells us something about the Clintons. What, exactly, I'm not quite sure.

In the clip, Senator Clinton, like Tony Soprano in the infamous last episode, peruses the musical selections on a jukebox in a diner. Like Tony, Hillary chooses Journey's "Don't Stop Believin."' Actor Vince Curatola, who played New York mob boss Johnny "Sack" Sacramoni in the series, walks menacingly by the Clintons' table.

While Tony ordered onion rings in his final moments on the show, Hillary orders carrots for Bill. "No onion rings?" the former president asks sadly. "Where's Chelsea?" Senator Clinton asks. Outside, a car tire bumps the curb. "Parallel parking," President Clinton replies, referencing Meadow Soprano's parking misadventures that were used to create suspense in the last "Sopranos" episode. And so on, right up to the sudden black screen. Clever?

OK. It's clever. But…

• Am I the only one disturbed to see a presidential candidate selling her fitness to be POTUS with a comedy skit that belongs on "The Mad Show?" There was no policy content or substance to the spot at all. "Gee, those Clinton's are a stitch---let's give them some money!" Has the democratic system really sunk this low?
  
  
• Ronald Reagan, a professional actor, said that even though it would be great fun, he could never return to film after leaving the presidency, because it would be beneath the dignity and status of the office. Former president Bill Clinton, on the other hand, thinks it is appropriate for him to play Carmella Soprano. Perhaps Clinton reasons that he couldn't possibly drag the office's dignity down any further than he already has, but that's no excuse. A former president is always a living symbol of the nation. What kind of nation is symbolized by a smirking ex-Chief Executive doing Mafia parodies?
  
  
• Is it really appropriate and responsible for a former U.S. president and a current senator to play the roles of a fictional murdering mob boss and his spouse? Arguments that the deeds and morals of the characters evoked by the Clintons in a parody don't matter are disingenuous. Would it be responsible for Bill and Hillary to parody, for example, Adolf Hitler and Eva Braun? How about Hannibal Lector and Clarice Starling? If the answer is no (A former president playing a mass murderer or a cannibal? Offensive! A desecration of the office!), then why is it cute to play Tony Soprano, who either participated in or was directly responsible for multiple murders during the seven year run of the HBO series? Because he killed Italians instead of Jews? Because he just killed them and didn't eat them?
  
  
• Is Mrs. Clinton really so dense that she does not detect the uncomfortable similarity between her relationship with her philandering, dissembling, power-broker husband and Carmela Soprano's tolerance of philandering, lying, mob boss spouse? Two current books on Hillary explore her willingness to accept her husband's unacceptable behavior in exchange for the tangible and intangible benefits of his power. If Hillary doesn't see the parallel, what's the matter with her? And if she does, why was she willing to highlight it in a video? Because it would attract contributions? Or because she is simply shameless?
  
  
• Bill Clinton was impeached for lying in court, and has a well-deserved reputation for dubious integrity. Senator Clinton's career shows solid streaks of ruthlessness, deception and Machiavellian guile. Both are famously unapologetic for their conduct. Are they embracing "The Sopranos" to make a statement? If so, a rough translation would be: "Nyah! Nyah! Nyah! Our tactics work, and there's not a thing you can do about them!

I think the last two bother me most. Either the Clintons are so insensitive to the ethical implications of their conduct that they can't see the unflattering similarities between them and the Soprano family, or they are simply taunting their critics, blatantly celebrating their unethical practices and violations of principle in the belief that most of the public doesn't care, and that a fawning media will continue to fawn.

And they are right, which is the oogiest thing of all. How would the public and media have reacted if Richard Nixon, after resigning from office, had played a mob boss in "Godfather II?" The answer is, "Exactly the way today's public and media should be reacting to Bill and Hillary playing "The Sopranos." The fact that they aren't says a great deal about how far our character standards for elected leaders have fallen.