Al Gore sighed audibly when George W.

Monday, October 30, 2000

Al Gore sighed audibly when George W. Bush spoke in the first debate and non-responded with his nose in the air: "I prefer to deal with the issues and not attack character." Bush had raised the question of Gore’s obligation as vice president when the president behaved offensively with that girl and then lied about it to the nation and, also, Gore’s use of the White House to make campaign phone calls and appearing improperly at a fund raising event with the claim he didn’t know it was what everyone else knew it was. Bush could have, and probably should have, made the point Gore was smugly seeking to escape. Private behavior and personal character are always an issue when voting for candidates for public trust when those matters affect job performance.

What President Bill Clinton did in private – even protected by a Secret Service agent – plunged the office of president into international disgrace, and his persistently lying about it seriously injured the public trust placed in him as an individual. "Having lied about this, what else has he lied about and how can we believe anything he says?" is still being asked by millions. Clinton demonstrated that character does affect job performance of the president. Bush wanted to know why Gore believed Clinton’s lie and why he didn’t use his office to correct the president. He wanted to know that inasmuch as Gore would dissimulate about fund raising, if we can believe him in other things. Those matters are not personal attacks, but themselves issues.

When private behavior and personal character have not affected negatively on performance in office by an incumbent or cannot reasonably be predicted to do so by a candidate, then private behavior and personal character are not issues. Raising them in these cases would be, indeed, personal attack.

To his credit, Mark Dayton has not attempted to use the behavior of Sen. Rod Grams’ son against him. The son is legally and socially adult, and Grams cannot be logically or fairly held accountable for him. So, too, the Republican candidate for the Minnesota House for this district, Jeff Anderson, has not attempted to exploit Rob Leighton’s recent law violation. He has left it to his opponent to demonstrate by subsequent behavior his ability both to obey and support the laws he legislates. Without raising the issue of character, this restraint quite naturally commends the character of both Dayton and Anderson.

Instant reply might have shown Gore’s nose not literally to be in the air, but his demonstrated attitude created the impression. Gore has come off in the debates as arrogant, overbearing and disrespectful. Bush, on the other hand, seems to some people as timid, deferential and obsequious. Voters will need to decide for themselves if debate attitude can be logically and fairly projected into office behavior. This is a matter of character, and voters are making it an issue despite the candidates’ platforms. But assessment must be a good deal broader than just the debates, especially emotionally reactions to them. We need to factor in whatever it is we know about character in personal lives and in the performance of present office.

Private behavior and personal character are always an issue to be explored. When it so happens that they are at least reasonably good, they should then be set aside and we should move on to substantive issues. But they cannot be ignored until their significance is determined. If they are relevant to job performance in particular cases, they must be considered. While political issues are essential for consideration, private behavior and personal character must and will be respected as critical.

Wallace Alcorn’s column appears Mondays