Donald Kaul
That Chuck Hagel, he’s a caution. The Nebraska Republican called a press conference in Omaha the other day and there was a sense of portent in the room.
Fifteen television stations were on hand to record the event, as well as political reporters from all over the map. They smelled a presidential announcement in the air. Then he got up and said: “I’m here today to announce that my family and I will make a decision on my political future later this year.”
“Wow!” I said to myself, thinking like a political reporter, “A decision this year and not next. Stop the presses and break out the big type. I’ll bet those television guys are glad they schlepped all the way out there to hear that.” No that’s not really what I said, not even to myself. It was more like “That’s it? The whole thing? You couldn’t have sent an e-mail?”
We’ve grown used to the strange ways of Democrats in presidential contests, but this year the Republicans are outstranging them. While Hagel was announcing his decision to make a decision, someday, Newt Gingrich, the former Republican Speaker of the House, was hinting at his readiness to assume the duties of office by confessing he’d had an extra-marital affair while the Monica Lewinsky-Bill Clinton scandal was raging, thereby sewing up the adultery vote.
Meanwhile, back at the ranch, nine-term Texas Rep. Ron Paul, a Republican libertarian, was announcing that he too would seek the nomination and, to prove his seriousness, had already raised $50,000 for his campaign.
Former Tennessee senator and current “Law and Order” actor Fred Thompson recently indicated a certain willingness to run, but said he’d “wait and see” before making a decision.
Then there’s Sam Brownback of Kansas who is going around the country, accosting strangers, saying:” I’m Senator Sam Brownback, and I’m running for president,” an approach that risks inspiring the response: “Of what?”
Have I mentioned Mike Huckabee of Arkansas? I won’t.
The reason for this flurry of unusual activity (Republicans generally take the next guy in line as their nominee) is that the current field of Republican front-runners has more flaws than a cheap engagement ring.
On the family values front, one leading candidate has had three wives, one has had two and one has had one. Guess which is the Mormon. As a matter of fact the Mormon, Mitt Romney, is the candidate most Republican on all the litmus test issues---abortion, gay rights, stem cell research. The only problem is that a few years ago when he was governor of Massachusetts, he was wrong on all of those same issues.
In other words, in the Massachusetts style made famous by John Kerry, Romney was for those things before he was against them. (Do you think it could be something in the water up there?)
Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City, is much admired for the stalwart way he responded to the crisis of 9/11, but from a Republican perspective he is wrong on the big issues, even gun control. When this is pointed out to him, he waves dismissively and points out that he’s Republican where it counts most. He’s for the war, against taxes.
Arizona Sen. John McCain seems conservative enough on key issues, but…he is the master of “but” politics. He favors putting more troops into Iraq, but has offered blistering criticisms of the conduct of the war. He voted against President Bush’s tax cuts but now wants to make them permanent. He’s against the role of special interest money in elections, but has refused federal funding for his own campaign so he can raise money from---you guessed it---special interests. He’s also called his beleaguered president’s record on global warming “terrible.”
What’s a poor Republican voter to do? Lucky for them they’re running against a Democratic Party whose handbook on firing squad etiquette begins: “First you form a circle.”
It’s going to be a long election year.
