When Michael Dukakis was asked about news stories casting doubt on George Bush’s World War II heroism, he said, “I don’t think that kind of thing has any place in the campaign . . . You don’t fly 58 missions without enormous courage and tremendous patriotism.” Not long afterward, Bush said of Dukakis, “What is it about the Pledge of Allegiance that upsets him so much?” There is no mistaking Bush’s point. It has nothing to do with the constitutional question of whether Dukakis eleven years ago should have vetoed a bill mandating recital of the pledge in school classrooms every day. Bush is implying that Dukakis is unpatriotic, that he doesn’t love America as much as he should or as much as Bush does. “He sees America as another pleasant country on the U.N. roll call, somewhere between Albania and Zimbabwe,” said Bush in his convention acceptance speech. Keynoter Thomas Kean, the New Jersey Governor formerly admired for his decency and moderation, accused the Democrats of “pastel patriotism,” neatly combining the suggestion of insufficient national ardor with the sexual innuendo of Jeane Kirkpatrick’s famous “San Francisco Democrats” phrase of 1984. Bush praises his running mate Dan Quayle on the peculiar grounds that he “damn sure never burned the American flag,” as if Dukakis or Lloyd Bentson or anyone in mainstream public life ever did. Meanwhile, other Republicans spread the baseless rumor that there are photographs of Kitty Dukakis burning the flag. If Bush thinks that kind of thing has no place in the campaign, he lacks the gallantry to say so. He also lacks the candor to say straight out about his opponent what he suggests by innuendo. Maybe this confession will just tar me as unpatriotic too, but nothing since I came of political age has depressed me so much about American democracy as the apparent success of Bush’s pledge offensive. What, after all, is American patriotism about? It’s not about purple mountain majesties — they have those in Switzerland. There was endless babble about “freedom” at the Republican Convention. But freedom doesn’t mean reciting a loyalty oath on command. They have that kind of freedom in the U.S.S.R. American freedom means the right not to recite a loyalty oath if — for reasons of religion, politics or simple perversity — you don’t want to. Bush may reject this vision of American freedom, although it is shared by the Supreme Court. That is his privilege: it’s a free country. It is not his privilege to imply that anyone who disagrees with him is unpatriotic. The Bush campaign claims to be running on “issues,” while the Democrats emphasize mere “personalities.” But these are issues of a peculiar sort. The two Bush has chosen to stress — reciting the pledge in schools and state prison furlough policy — have nothing to do with the duties of the President of the U.S. Bush in fact is virtually ignoring real issues. He’s running on emotions.
