Fiedler, Herschensohn Mix It Up on Radio

Most debates in California’s Republican U.S. Senate race have been carefully designed to avoid argument so that the party can abide by its famous 11th commandment--”Thou shalt not speak ill of another Republican”--and focus on the November enemy, Democratic Sen. Alan Cranston.

But KABC radio host Michael Jackson likes to see the candidates mix it up, and on Friday, he put together the GOP field’s two best debaters, Rep. Bobbi Fiedler of Northridge and former commentator Bruce Herschensohn. They were so lively that at one point Jackson had to chastise them for being too combative.

Herschensohn, an obsessive researcher, spent much of the week going over Fielder’s House voting record, and he pounced early when Fiedler implied that he was too inexperienced for the U.S. Senate.

“One of our big differences,” Fiedler told the audience, “is that Bruce has been talking about the issues and presenting his ideas, but I have had a chance to implement my ideas, and I have a proven track record.”

Herschensohn shot back: “Well, about that record, Bobbi, I’d like to know why on April 12, 1984, you voted to condemn the United States for mining the port of Nicaragua? That jeopardized the U.S. position in Central America.”

Fiedler replied: “I felt the action itself jeopardized our position in Central America and our ability to get people to support our policy there. . . .”

Wagging his head and muttering, “No, no . . . ,” Herschensohn retorted, “But Bobbi, you diminished the support for the President. . . . The one thing you have to keep in mind when you talk about Nicaragua is that the Sandinistas are receiving the support of the Soviet Union.”

They finally agreed to disagree on that one, but it wasn’t long before Herschensohn was on the attack again:

“Bobbi, why did you vote on May 4, 1983, for a nuclear freeze?” he asked suddenly.

Fiedler: “I think it is terribly important that we continue to have negotiations with the Soviet Union. In October of 1984, Bruce, you were supportive of the President’s efforts toward arms control. . . . But today, you say you don’t want to sit down and talk with the Soviets.”

Herschensohn (rising in his chair): “I have not said that.”

Fiedler: “You indicated in recent comments that. . . .”

Herschensohn (angrily cutting her off): “Since you are quoting me, Bobbi, let me quote me precisely, because I am right here. What I said was that I would like to talk to the Soviet Union at any and every time but not sign any document, ever, when we have to give something up, because of their violation of past treaties.”

This one got so heated that Jackson finally waved his hands in the air and said, “Wait a minute, wait a minute.”

But Fiedler wasn’t about to let Herschensohn score all the points.

When Herschensohn said that he, like Fiedler, opposed Reagan’s desire to sell defensive weapons to Saudi Arabia, Fiedler took the opportunity to deliver a lecture to the former commentator.

“Here, for instance, is an area where Bruce disagrees with the President, as I disagreed with the mining of the port in Nicaragua. These things have to be dealt with on a case-by-case basis. . . .”

The two did agree on one thing--they don’t think much of the Republican Party’s 11th commandment if it precludes a discussion of issues.

“What Bobbi and I are talking about now are issues,” said Herschensohn, as Fiedler nodded in agreement. “And we have to do that or voters won’t have any idea where we stand.”

Touted Credentials

Earlier, Jackson hosted a much more gentle debate as state Sen. Ed Davis (R-Valencia) and Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich differed only occasionally on the issues and spent much of their time touting their respective credentials for the U.S. Senate job.

Antonovich once again urged homosexuals to change their life-style habits to help combat the AIDS problem.

“Homosexual promiscuity has helped create the AIDS problem . . . , “ Antonovich said. “They are going to have to change their life style. They have the option of abstaining, of limiting themselves . . . to a single partner. And for those who are healthy and normal, (they can) change and go straight. But they have to make that choice, otherwise this terrible disease will continue to be spread.”

Asked why Republicans should vote for him in the June 3 primary, Davis said, “A vote for me means that you are sending someone back to the U.S. Senate who has demonstrated the capacity to listen to all sides, someone who has not made up his mind in advance. . . .”

Lectured Caller

Jackson asked Antonovich the same question, but he passed on it and instead lectured a caller who had challenged his remarks on Soviet military superiority.

“Read the March 15 editorial in the (London) Economist,” said Antonovich, as time ran out.