No, Walter Mondale didn’t drift off into an old fella’s nap
during his hour-long exchange with Norm Coleman earlier today. His
voice was shaky at times, and his hands perhaps too, but for all we
know that just might have been nervousness. What stood out is that
he’s the same true blue lib he was when he ran against Ronald
Reagan. Indeed, he seemed happiest to claim vindication as to his
prediction in 1984 that the Reagan administration would raise taxes
after the election the way he promised to if elected. Now that is
news to anyone who remembers Reagan’s tax increases coming in 1982,
i.e., well before the ‘84 election. Could be that Mondale was
confusing Reagan’s tax reform of 1986 with a tax hike, as more than
one wealthy Republican later came to think as well once all those
loopholes disappeared. So on that score Mondale can be given the
benefit of the doubt.
Rush Limbaugh has already noted how Norm Coleman shut Mondale up
on the subject of abortion. The Minnesotan was almost abjectly
apologetic when Coleman, who lost two young children, noted he
didn’t appreciate Mondale’s calling him an “arbitrary right to
lifer.” Earlier Mondale had dismissively referred to the “right to
life crowd,” and a number of times insisted that a right to
abortion was to be found in the Constitution — the single most
dubious argument that can be made in defense of Roe v.
Wade. In this respect it can’t be said that Mondale
remains stuck in 1984 and earlier, when pro-choicers, for all their
growing power, remained more guarded in their language. But it was
a measure of how far we’ve fallen to hear Mondale also bleat, “I
know that life should be sacred.” If he knows it, then why isn’t
it? What’s happened to him?
Ever since last week it appeared that Mondale might be losing it
in another way: by claiming that once back in the Senate he’ll
immediately assume a leadership role. By most accounts at best he
can expect to receive an honorary leadership title, but nothing
substantive. But that’s now what Mondale appears to think, and
again in the debate he asserted he’ll rise to a leadership post at
his “first moment” back. Is this delusion, or a cheap ploy to win
Minnesota votes?
Several times he alluded to his service as president of the
Senate or to his “years of experience” or to adhering to certain
views or policies “my entire life.” In such instances he was doing
Coleman’s work, reinforcing how ancient and thus out of touch he
might be. And he was the one who brought up Iraq and Afghanistan
circa 1979-80. Coleman, in his patience, didn’t bring up
Carter-Mondale 24% interest rates until quite late in the hour. But
again, there was little need for him to counter such Mondalisms as
this one regarding terrorism: “I’m opposed to it and have helped
fight it for years.” Tell that to the Ayatollah.
Like the New York Times has taught today’s liberals,
always claim that Colin Powell is on your side. When Mondale
repeated that tired line, Coleman again jumped in, as he did when
Mondale claimed Coleman is somehow “sorry” Mondale has spent the
last eight years serving on corporate boards. Au contraire, Coleman
noted, he just didn’t think the introduction of “class warfare” via
attacks on “special interests” served any good purpose. Mondale
naturally was not about to admit to being a hypocrite. But then he
also couldn’t respond to Coleman’s question whether he’d be willing
challenge the trial lawyers.
Strangely, Coleman probably spent as much time referring to the
late Paul Wellstone as Mondale did. For someone who promises to
carry on for the late senator, Mondale had precious little to say
about him.
Most telling were the closing statements. Much as he did
earlier, Coleman made the case for himself: where he stood, what
he’d accomplished, and how willing he is to work for Minnesotans.
He didn’t attack his current opponent. Mondale, by contrast,
couldn’t say anything about himself without impugning Coleman’s
alleged values or beliefs. It was a classic case of optimist vs.
pessimist. Not exactly the repeat of 1984 that Mondale needs at
this stage.
