One of the few true conservatives in the 2008 presidential race
also has a resume far more impressive than is generally recognized,
and a quiet toughness that at least has a chance of making him a
real player in the race.
Consider, first, the impressive background of former Virginia
Gov. James S. Gilmore III. Born in Richmond, he graduated from the
University of Virginia and then joined the U.S. Army as a
counterintelligence agent in West Germany, speaking fluent German
while trying to ascertain where and how the Soviet bloc might
attack if the Reds ever did try such a thing. He returned stateside
to U. Va. Law School, then served as a private attorney while
building the Republican Party (including service as county
chairman) in Henrico County. He was elected Commonwealth’s Attorney
there twice (the first Republican, he says, ever re-elected to any
countywide post there), and then moved up to state attorney general
while George Allen was governor. He was elected to succeed Allen,
and kept his word to cut automobile taxes despite intense pressure
from the Washington Post and others to the contrary. He
also did a good job keeping spending in check, and successfully
convinced the state legislature to dedicate ongoing lottery
proceeds to education rather than letting it be lost in the state
general fund. He also produced a very strong pro-life record.
Meanwhile, he polished his already solid party-building record,
while putting his gubernatorial prestige on the line mid-term, to
elect Republican majorities in both houses of the state legislature
for the first time in state history.
Of tremendous significance, he also chaired the Congressional
Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Capabilities for Terrorism
Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction (the eponymous “Gilmore
Commission”), which, less than a week before the Sept. 11
terrorism, sent to the printer what turned out to be a highly
praised report whose recommendations would have been of great help
in response to the attacks if there had been time to implement
them. He also chaired the Congressional Advisory Commission on
Electronic Commerce, which under his leadership surprised most
observers (but pleased most conservatives) by recommending against
taxation of the Internet. And he served as chairman of the board of
advisors of the Air Force Academy.
He also briefly served as chairman of the Republican National
Committee, to mixed reviews. Some conservatives say he was not as
effective there as he had been in other jobs; others say that he
did just fine but, as a governor accustomed to giving orders rather
than taking them, that he was not willing to be a “yes man” to
presidential guru Karl Rove.
SO HERE’S A GUY WHO CONSISTENTLY wins elections, builds his party,
is experienced in foreign intelligence, is well-versed in
technology issues, cuts taxes, has puts large numbers of criminals
in jail, and is generally acknowledged as an expert against
terrorism. Not bad; not bad at all.
There’s more: “First of all, he’s a man of integrity: I think
his character and integrity are above reproach.” So said Will
Bryant, Virginia Secretary of Education under Gilmore and now
associate director for management at the Peace Corps after serving
in high posts in the Bush Department of Education as well. Bryant,
an African American, also praised Gilmore’s outreach to the black
community and added: “He’s sincere. He is fair in his dealings. And
he is very methodical. When he goes into any situation, he’s very
prepared for it. He is very prepared to be President of the United
States.”
Ah, yes, president. What does Gilmore himself say that he offers
for the nation’s highest office?
“I am a conservative that people can count on. I am very
concerned that spending is out of control that we continue to
overspend in the United States….You are seeing more and more and
more pressure on taxpayers that are having to pay for all kinds of
systems, Medicaid particularly….We need an entrepreneurial
society that gives people a chance to be more self-sufficient and
to create wealth so they can have financial independence.”
On national security, Gilmore repeatedly and convincingly (and
creatively in a good sense) discusses that issue in tandem with
energy issues. Greater self-sufficiency on that score, he suggests,
will help keep the United States from being as easily held hostage
to foreign interests. He says we need to go all out on all fronts:
“Nuclear, coal, gas, oil, ethanol, biomass, and also there has to
be some grasp of how we use energy. More public discussion about
how we use energy to find ways we can conserve energy [by economic
choice rather than through heavy regulation].”
But there is another aspect of Gilmore’s message that he raises
repeatedly and fervently, making a point that well needs to be
made: “When I served in the Army during the Cold War, nobody had
any doubt who the good guys were and who the bad guys were. We were
the good guys….We were seen as people who wanted to reach out a
helping hand….We need to recapture the moral high ground. There
is a sense right now that it is debatable that we are the ones on
the moral high ground and we need to make sure we are the ones
planted there. We have to make sure that people around the world
understand that we have their interests at heart.”
He went on to explain that the United States does not need to
stop insisting on its own national interest, but to do a better job
explaining to the rest of the world that “We can protect our own
national interest without threatening others as well.”
Gilmore advocates tough border enforcement. He advocated school
vouchers when he was governor. He equivocates a bit on whether he
would support private accounts in Social Security. He likes the new
media and promises to blog from the Oval Office. He does not
shy from clear (but not nasty) criticism of his main opponents as
insufficiently conservative. And he insists that firm adherence to,
and advocacy of, conservative issues is a political boon that
expands rather than limits the pool of potential supporters.
“It is not just conservative that care about the kitchen table
issues and the quality of life issues that I talked about….We
will win [voters in] the center if we address their economic issues
and convince them we will protect their interests. Independents are
concerned about these and are concerned about the security of our
nation….Conservatives address these issues better than anyone
else.”
ONE QUESTION, THOUGH, IS WHETHER Gilmore is the right salesman for
the task. His rhetoric and style both are straightforward, low key,
not tremendously inspirational. On the plus side, though, he comes
across as credible, solid, trustworthy.
Will that be enough to beat Hillary Clinton?
Conservatives I’ve spoken to (privately) in the past few months
seem to see Gilmore’s performance as governor as solid, but not
dynamic. Workaday, not tremendously innovative. At least reasonably
competent.
Of course, to the Washington Post, which trashed
Gilmore’s record a few weeks back when he announced his probably
candidacy, none of that is praiseworthy. Government wasn’t big
enough or active enough under Gilmore for the Post’s
tastes.
Then again, there was a time when that sort of record would have
been the ideal for mainstream conservatives. There’s something
comfortingly 1950s-ish about Gilmore, not in the sense of being
behind the times but in the sense of personal style and values.
“I am what I am,” Gilmore told conservative bloggers last
week.
And what he is, is exactly what he appears to be. That’s a
virtue. Conservatives looking for a presidential candidate could
definitely do worse.
