Roanoke Times
Copyright (c) 1995, Landmark Communications, Inc.
DATE: THURSDAY, September 8, 1994 TAG: 9409210029
SECTION: EDITORIAL PAGE: A-13 EDITION: METRO
SOURCE: Ray L. Garland
DATELINE: LENGTH: Long
The conventional wisdom was that incumbent Sen. Charles Robb, former Gov. Douglas Wilder and former Attorney General Marshall Coleman would divide that large majority of voters who professed no intention of supporting GOP nominee Oliver North. That would leave North a real shot at victory with something in the range of 35 percent unless Robb could convince Wilder-Coleman voters not to waste their ballots, in which case he would win.
But two things happened on the way to Nov. 6 to render much of that logic obsolete. First was the sad deflation of the hopes of the two independents, Wilder and Coleman. Second has been North's well-oiled machine rolling across the state, backed by saturation bombing of the TV channels, developing a sense of gathering momentum.
Thus, the new conventional wisdom going into the first real debate of the campaign at Hampden-Sydney College was that the independents had missed the bus, Robb needed to pull something out of the hat and North was pulling ahead.
The debate itself was first-rate political theater: a hot, crowded hall, a keenly attentive audience and the candidates free to roam the political landscape. Moderator Judy Woodruff did a smooth job of pitching pointed questions and keeping the candidates on point.
There was the added drama of knowing that Wilder and Coleman arrived with their backs to the wall, needing to fetch back the credibility that was slipping away. While people came from all over, this was North country, as pre-debate cheering clearly showed. In that climate, and having to fend off thrusts from three candidates, Robb had his work cut out for him.
On points alone, this old debater scored Wilder the winner. At critical moments, he intervened with incisive barbs at Robb and North. He was energetic, agile and the best at improvisation to meet the moment. North and Coleman were most inclined to stick with lines long in the can. When confronted directly, however, North held his own.
Robb is a special case. He certainly got the worst of it, but made effective points when he drew a contrast between the luxury of campaign rhetoric and the hard choices he faces in the Senate. He deserves special marks for being the only one prepared to say anything guaranteed to lose him votes.
Best-line awards as follows:
Most original goes to Wilder for "The Mardi gras is over, it's time to unmask."
Most hackneyed goes to North for "My only special interest is the hard-working, God-fearing people of Virginia."
Most unambiguous to Robb for this statement on the pending invasion of Haiti: "If the president asks Congress for authorization, I will vote to give it; if he goes in without it, I'll still support him."
Robb also wins the wish-I-hadn't-said-that award for "I would take food from the mouths of widows and orphans, if necessary, to begin to solve the problem of the deficit."
Most coldblooded goes to Coleman for "We need more capital punishment."
Most dubious goes to North for "This administration has cut our defenses well beyond the point at which we can protect our sovereignty. ... "
Most devastating goes to Wilder for ending his pitch about drugs being America's No. 1 problem by turning to Robb and saying, "You've been in the company of people who said limited drug use is OK and who've been convicted, so don't tell me you're going to stand up on your moral horse now."
Best comeback line, a tie. To Wilder for his quick rejoinder to North's boast of being the most-investigated man on the planet: "And I may say, Colonel, it may be a very good reason for that to be the case." And to North for ending the long colloquy on character with the crowd-pleasing, "I'll match my credibility ... with anybody on this platform or anybody up there today."
Robb was raked by the others for supporting tax increases. He tried to turn this to a sensible debate on the deficit, asking, "Who here has got any kind of way to reduce the deficit?" The others naturally took refuge in such bromides as the line-item veto, term limits and a balanced-budget amendment. But Robb courageously stuck to his guns: "Every single entitlement has to be on the table."
Wilder met him halfway by saying we should examine which entitlements can be means-tested. But North and Coleman - the candidates quickest to claim the mantle of fiscal responsibility - weren't buying that. North even said he wouldn't tax Social Security benefits - knowing full well the present tax on those benefits is in no danger of being repealed - and called for a new program of tax credits for those educating their children at home or in private schools. Robb got nowhere trying to make the point that a tax credit is an appropriation by just another name.
When North persistently refused to specify a deficit-reduction plan that touched entitlements, Robb had the last word, "It's very clear he doesn't have one." The senator may have earned a profile in courage, but he clearly trespassed on ground dangerous to a politician with every right to be running scared.
In this first real test of the campaign, the candidates gave a good account of themselves. We need at least two more just like it. That done, no voter will have any legitimate cause to plead ignorance of who these men are or where they're likely to stand in the Senate.
Ray L. Garland is a Roanoke Times & World-News columnist.
by CNB