Molly Ivins October 8

AUSTIN — I think Bob Dole won the first debate on the BTE scale. Better Than Expected. Assuming that any number of innocent citizens have been running around taking the media's word for it that Dole is conducting a pathetic campaign, they must have been startled indeed to see the old boy rear back on his hind legs and be both funny and feisty.

As a long-time fan of Dole's humor, I was delighted to see it in play Sunday night. I would say, "They finally let Dole be Dole," except I understand too well that no one runs his campaign except Bob Dole. He just decided to be exactly who he is, and since no one has ever been quite sure that President Clinton knows who he is, it put Dole up several points. I'm not saying that "feisty" didn't shade off into "cheap shots" on several occasions, but whatthehell. The man is behind.

I thought that Clinton's initial performance sounded slick, rehearsed and insincere (unusual for Clinton, who can usually make a paean to apple pie sound like an original thought). He picked up as he went along, which I also think is significant. Dole was needling Clinton throughout the debate, skillfully and constantly. Something that has amazed me about Clinton for four years now is that for a man with a temper, he never loses it in public. (Early in his term, when he learned that an aide had used an Army helicopter to ferry him to a golf date, Clinton got so mad that he picked up a chair in the White House, slammed it down and busted the antique. Had to pay for it, too.)

During almost four years of relentless criticism, Clinton has blown in public once, and even then, it was what I would consider a mild eruption. (I am the daughter of a man who could make the windows shake when he wanted to.) Even on that occasion, Clinton promptly called the reporter who had annoyed him to apologize. I subscribe to the theory that Clinton's mama taught him good manners.

But the Republicans are smart enough to have worked on a psychological weakness of Clinton's: He's not only a people-pleaser, but because he never had a daddy, he is particularly prone to pleasing older men. Listen, the man went to Richard Nixon's funeral and said nice things about Nixon. If you will forgive me for being hopelessly uncharitable politically, I can't think of a single reason for anyone in his right mind to have done such a thing.

One example of Dole's using psychology on Clinton was a reminder that Dole threw into the debate about the time that he and the president had a discussion in the White House about Mamas.

Here's the deal: The day that Clinton flew back to Arkansas for Virginia Kelley's funeral, Dole called for a special prosecutor in the Whitewater case. Clinton, who felt he deserved to be left alone at least on the day of his mother's funeral, was mucho peeved. Dole later heard of his anger and had the grace to apologize. According to Dole's premier biographer, Richard Ben Cramer, Dole was genuinely repentant because he too had A Mama. (Cramer believes that all politicians are mother-driven.)

Clinton can hold grudges — to this good day, he holds one against Jimmy Carter, who once did him wrong and then preached to him about it in a self-righteous way. But the Mama discussion with Dole apparently led to some degree of friendship. Dole, on the other hand, believes that Clinton double-crossed him during the budget negotiations, and he has an old deal-maker's contempt for those who go back on their word.

I thought that Dole's best line was about how he and his wife are the only two lawyers in Washington who trust each other. I thought that Clinton's weakest line was "the bridge to the 21st century." That may be because I'm a political reporter and have already heard it 10,000 times; for those just now tuning in to the presidential race, perhaps it retains the charm of freshness. I'm ready for "Block that metaphor and kill that analogy," myself.

Doing my best to set aside my own prejudices, I thought Clinton won it on policy. Dole can be harsh about Clinton's foreign policy, but he clearly doesn't have a better solution for any problem area in the world. Clinton's better on education — though, for my money, he could have attacked the voucher idea far more directly.

He also could have been more devastating on Dole's misbegotten tax-cut plan, beyond reiterating that it would "blow a hole in the deficit." I missed Ross Perot on that one and on campaign-finance reform. Dole's basic problem is that when he goes after Clinton on the country's real problems — stagnant wages, distribution of wealth and the corporate oligarchy — he's stuck with his record and his party, both of which have only made those problems worse.

As the debate went along, I think people did get a sense of why reporters say Dole is a lousy campaigner, even though he was humorous and aggressive. It's extremely difficult to understand the man — sometimes even to know what he's talking about. This is partly because he doesn't speak in complete sentences. He also speaks in referents, but who knows what they are? Anyone know who the guy in Cleveland, to whom Dole kept referring, might be?

***

Molly Ivins is a columnist for the Fort Worth Star-Telegram.

COPYRIGHT 1996 CREATORS SYNDICATE, INC.