W'S HANDLERS NEED LESSONS

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 to handle his equivalent of "bimbo
eruptions." He needs a cadre of ethically challenged minions such as
President Clinton had and has, who follow their leader and lie to anyone
about anything in order to get their guy elected and keep him in office.
This president has so lowered the moral, ethical and legal bar that it is
hard to see how anyone can get under it. 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 teen-age 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 Democrats 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.