"CHUTZPAH", which is pronounced "hoot-spuh", is a Jewish word that suggests gall, over-confidence and utter nerve.

The meaning is best understood by an example I read somewhere — you gatecrash a party and then complain to the host that the food is not up to your standard.

I was reminded of the word as I followed the travails of former health minister Datuk Seri Dr Chua Soi Lek, which has surely raised the level of excitement and political pulse in this new year.

What he did is now clear to everyone, even for those who have not inspected the video evidence. There is no need to since he confessed, which is an amazing event, I must say.

There was no teary-eyed confession like from some US preachers when caught breaking the commandments. It was a confident, back straight, eye-on-the-camera, "I'm the man in the sex video" performance that took the breath away.
But what was more amazing was that he inferred and suggested, in not so many words, that he was a victim of political conspiracy. He had worked hard and met a lot of people and as a result, he was seen as a threat to others, he suggested.

Dr Chua, who initially did not want to resign, said he had to, since Malaysians wanted him to leave. Their holier-than-thou attitude meant that his party and government posts were no longer tenable, he said.

Someone caught with his pants down, going after society, and playing the victim? Now that's chutzpah!

What is also amazing is the support he has been getting since his very public mea culpa. Banners and posters greet him, in Hugo Chavez-like manner, in Batu Pahat, his former constituency, and the locale of his misdemeanour.

He has also received considerable support from people extolling his exemplary behaviour by confessing to his indiscretion and betrayal to his family.

Perhaps Dr Chua's predicament reminded us that we are all sinners, and that some of us might just be a step away from public humiliation. We can only imagine what he had to go through for the public confession. Perhaps he had suffered enough when he had to face his family.

But are we so desperate for accountability from our public officials that we became too ready to credit Dr Chua for doing something that he had no choice but to do anyway?

There was video evidence — your friendly neighbourhood DVD guys were hawking it at RM50 per copy, and images and videos were zooming in cyberspace via mobile telephones and the Internet. In fact, a denial would have been readily dismissed and worked against him.

If we were ticketed for double parking, should we be commended for paying the fine for an earlier infringement of the law? Do we have a choice anyway?

Many people said Dr Chua was not the first, and certainly not the last. People I know started reeling off names of public figures past and present and their sexual indiscretions, but at least Dr Chua confessed, they said. Would he have confessed if there were no videos?

This is not an indictment against Dr Chua, whom I am beginning to understand was a good boss, minister and politician. We all have our virtues and vices, the latter of which could come back to haunt us when we least expect it.

Some say it is unfair that politicians are judged by different standards than us mere citizens, but that should be the only way to go. We are not hypocritical, nor holier-than-thou. We have been made to believe by the public figures themselves that they are good people with strong values, religious or moral.

Politicians on the stumps tell us to vote for them because they are better than the person running against them, and some even suggest that they are better than us in looking after our interests. And as such, we expect them to be so. We grant them privileges and positions, and our respect, too.

While individually we would fail our own criteria and standards, we expect better of them, hence our anger when they misbehave and break our trust. It is never anything personal.