Search Salon

- - - - - - - - - - - -

Recently in Salon News

Who is Eliza May?
Is the woman at the center of the Texas funeral home scandal a wronged government watchdog or a Democrat with a political agenda?
By Robert Bryce
[08/20/99]

The funeral scandal time line
A chronology of the battle between the Texas Funeral Service Commission and Service Corporation International.
Compiled by Robert Bryce
[08/20/99]

Feingold's new gimmick
In his never-ending quest for campaign finance reform, Russ Feingold has been calling out monied special interests before important Senate votes.
By Jake Tapper
[08/19/99]

There's no place like home
Three Albanian-Americans who fought for the KLA struggle to find their place after the war.
By Elsa Davidson
[08/19/99]

Contempt charges sought against Bush
Did the Republican front-runner lie in his sworn affidavit? It all depends on what the meaning of a conversation is.
By Robert Bryce
[08/18/99]

Complete archives for News

- - - - - - - - - - - -

- - - - - - - - - - - -

When a candidate's shortcomings -- or even his alleged shortcomings -- become part of the late-night yuk-yuk fest, there's trouble. Until now, Texas Gov. George W. Bush had been spared this bizarre American hazing ritual. Not any more.

"They've got a problem on their hands," says a senior GOP official.

For months, Bush supporters, from congressmen to Iowa voters, have given the same, somewhat Machiavellian answer when asked why they were backing the Texas governor: because he could win. Of course, there's no shame in wanting to back a winner -- indeed, it was one of the chief reasons why Democrats supported then-Gov. Bill Clinton back in '92. And it's one of the most cogent arguments against the presidential candidacy of former veep Dan Quayle. It's not that there's anything wrong with him, Republicans will tell you, it's just that Quayle is such damaged goods he doesn't stand much of a chance of winning.

But if you live by electability, you die by electability. And as Bush joins Dan "a mind is a terrible thing to lose" Quayle as a resident in the Hall of Punchlines, suddenly his electability doesn't seem so guaranteed.

That the drug issue could become a problem for Bush has been known for a long time. Even many of the popular Texas governor's most ardent official supporters believed that sooner or later he'd have to address the rumors about his self-described "irresponsible" youth. But the way Bush addressed those rumors in the last few days has only added fuel to the fire.

Under a barrage of tenacious media inquiries, as well as polling data indicating that the American people find the question relevant, Bush finally decided to abandon his refuse-to-answer-questions strategy. In a testy exchange with a reporter on August 18, he said that he would be able to pass the traditional White House background check question as to whether he'd used drugs in the past seven years.

But that answer only raised more questions than it answered, and amid a hail of media criticism Bush felt impelled to issue yet another clarification the next day, extending the time frame when he could have passed the background check to include the time when his father was president -- "a 15-year period." Finally, a Bush spokesperson expanded the definition yet again, stating that Bush was saying he had not used illegal drugs at any time since he was 28, in 1974 -- the year he graduated from Harvard Business School and moved back to Texas.

(The Clinton White House background check, it should be noted, asks prospective senior officials if they have ever used illegal drugs since the age of 18. Bush refuses to answer that question.)

"There are two issues operating here," says a Democratic strategist. "What went up his nose then, and what comes out of his mouth now. And on the latter, he's backtracking already." This strategist said the last few weeks of media coverage -- which included a Talk Magazine interview in which Bush repeatedly used the word "fuck" and made light of the execution of Carla Fay Tucker -- made him "wonder if this guy is clear at how high a level he's playing."

But it's not just Democratic strategists, liberal reporters, late-night talk show hosts or even Bush's Republican opponents who find this issue relevant. "Bush has now created this whole narrative which could be interpreted as Clintonian obfuscation," says William Kristol, editor of the conservative Weekly Standard. "And that chips away at this picture we've been presented with of Bush as the white knight leading Republicans back into the White House."

Next page | If Bush falls, it'll be the most "spectacular crash we've ever seen"