W. IS IN A HYPOCRITICAL BIND

DURING the 1988 Democratic primary, after Al Gore and Bruce Babbitt
volunteered that they had smoked marijuana in the '60s, an earnest Dick
Gephardt bounded up to the press in Des Moines to announce that he had done
absolutely no drugs whatsoever, ever.

After a moment of silence, one reporter asked, "Why not?"

It's time for the boomer brain-twister again, this time about George W. and
cocaine. If a candidate is from the generation of sex, drugs and rock 'n'
roll, how much should he be held accountable for a past of sex, drugs and
rock 'n' roll?

In 1992, Bill Clinton's supporters accused the press of going too far in
pursuing the particulars of the candidate's restless libido, saying it was
in the past and it did not matter. As it turned out, it wasn't in the past
and it did matter. Now those same supporters are goading the media to dig
into Bush's past.

Democrats want payback. And Republicans have been throwing stones from glass
houses for so long, they can no longer recognize hypocrisy. For instance:
Newt Gingrich's affair with a young Capitol Hill aide was an open secret in
Washington all during impeachment, and all through his pompous lectures
about America's cultural and moral decline.

W. is in a bind: He stresses some personal history as relevant to his
election, even as he dismisses other personal history as rudely beside the
point. Personal history that could have landed him in prison.

Maureen Dowd is a New York Times columnist.