BUSH SHOULD CONFESS HIS LONG PAST 'SINS'

George W. Bush's real problem is not the cocaine he may or may not have
tried somewhere in the distant past. His problem is that he doesn't have the
kind of people around him who follow their leader and lie to anyone about
anything in order to get their guy elected and keep him in office.

The national press -- many of whom experimented with drugs in their "youth"
- -- refused to hold the Clinton administration accountable when many of its
staffers failed to qualify for security clearances. The buzz was that they
probably would have had to admit drug use in their very recent past. Instead
of telling the truth, they got around it by accepting "temporary passes,"
allowing them access to government secrets when they had not passed the
mandatory FBI background checks.

According to the Media Research Center, at least two networks -- NBC and ABC
- -- lagged far behind other news outlets when Juanita Broaddrick first
charged that Bill Clinton raped her when he was Arkansas attorney general.
But they are all over the Bush cocaine story, even though no one has made
any charge of drug abuse by the governor.

Why should Bush's credibility be called into question when he lectures young
people about the evils of drug abuse and President Clinton's credibility is
not questioned when he advises teenage girls not to have premarital sex?

"The questions just won't go away," say the various coiffed anchors.

That's because they keep asking them.

When you run for president, you should expect to keep no secrets.

Whoever knows what you did wrong in the past will be found by a tabloid, or
a reporter, or a political operative working for your opponents.

That's why it is important to issue a press release or write a book in which
you include every known sin you've committed before you announce your
candidacy. The lure for the press is what you haven't told them and what
they can find out to advance their careers.

If you tell them up front, your wrongdoing loses power and is less useful in
their eyes.

Unlike Bill Clinton, George W. Bush testifies to having had a life-changing
experience. This resonates with many people who have similar testimonies. I
recall a black preacher once saying about a white preacher who used to
preach segregation but long ago repented: "I'm not so much interested in
where a man was 25 years ago as where he is today." That's a good standard
to apply in the case of Bush. If he were a hypocrite and currently leading a
secret life, that would be one thing.

But none of his challengers for the nomination or Demo-crats are accusing
him of an ongoing, reckless lifestyle.

What should Bush do now? The temptation is to stonewall and not say another
word about it. That won't work without a lying staff, an enabling wife and a
fawning press.

But let him own up in church or before a group of recovering addicts, not at
a press conference, where confession is not good for the political soul.
There, he can say what he did with drugs and why it was wrong and that he
asked for and received forgiveness from God and his family. He should then
say that he agrees with President Clinton who said (but apparently didn't
mean it) that the politics of personal destruction should end. Bush should
say that he wants to talk about the future, not his past or anyone else's
past. His past isn't going to help or harm anyone's future. But his ideas
about the future could impact the nation.

That approach might not fully silence the press on personal issues, but it
probably would satisfy the public.

Since surveys reveal the press usually votes for Democrats, the public is
the only constituency Bush must please.

Cal Thomas, a columnist for the Los Angeles Times Syndicate, appears on The
Eagle's Op-Ed Page on Wednesdays.