The New GOP Disorder : The Bush White House has alienated the right, the left and everything in between : The Right Stalks the President

David Duke is the Max Cady of American politics. Duke is stalking the Republican Party with the same deceptive sanity as the Robert De Niro character in “Cape Fear.” He sounds reasonable. But he means to destroy.

It’s already working. Under pressure from the extreme right, the Bush Administration is beginning to self-destruct. The fragile consensus that has held the GOP together since 1980 is breaking apart. The right is ready to bolt. And the moderates may not be far behind.

Look at what happened on civil rights last week. When the President signed the new civil-rights bill into law, it was supposed to be a public celebration. Instead, it turned into a public-relations catastrophe. The Administration flipped and flopped and flipped again, trying to figure out what kind of statement it wanted to make on civil rights.

For 20 months, George Bush said he would veto any civil-rights bill that would lead employers to impose numerical quotas. Then on Oct. 24, the President flipped and said he would sign a new civil-rights bill if Congress made a few wording changes. This was shortly after the Clarence Thomas hearings, when Bush was scoring points with blacks. It was also shortly after Duke won a place in the Louisiana run-off election for governor, when Bush set out to banish Duke from the Republican Party.

Duke lost the run-off last Saturday. But he carried the white vote. On Monday morning, Duke said he was considering running against Bush next year in the Republican primaries. On “CBS Evening News” that night, he denounced the civil-rights bill as “a civil-wrongs bill.”

White House conservatives freaked out and drafted an executive order that would have phased out all federal affirmative-action guidelines--25 years of regulations that have transformed business as well as government in this country. Conservatives said they wanted to make it clear that the President was signing a civil-rights bill, not a quota bill.

The flip flopped. Civil-rights leaders were outraged. They said the President was trying to “eliminate with one hand what he is signing into law with another.” Several congressional leaders boycotted the signing ceremony. So Bush did a double flip. He withdrew the executive order, claiming he had never approved it.

The Administration has been equally inept in trying to figure out how to deal with Duke. Bush denounced Duke for his neo-Nazi past and his skepticism about the Holocaust. But he did not attack Duke’s issue positions. For good reason. When Duke talks about welfare, quotas, taxes and government, he says the same thing mainstream Republicans have been saying for 20 years.

Vice President Dan Quayle acknowledged as much when he said on ABC News, “The message of David Duke is . . . anti-big government, get out of my pocketbook, cut my taxes, put welfare people back to work. That’s a very popular message. The problem is with the messenger.” Bush called Duke an “insincere charlatan.” Actually, the President had it wrong. Duke is a sincere charlatan. Like Max Cady.

And like Sam Bowden, the character Cady stalks in “Cape Fear,” the Republican Party is not entirely blameless. The Republicans made their deal with the devil when they adopted the Southern strategy after 1968. George Wallace exposed the racist vote in U.S. politics, and the GOP figured out a way to go after it without sounding explicitly racist. They used legitimate issues like law and order, busing, welfare and quotas.

It worked. In 1968, Richard M. Nixon’s worst state was Mississippi. In 1972, Nixon’s best state was Mississippi. The Wallace vote simply got folded into the Republican vote. Now Duke can use the Republican Party for cover. Duke can run on the same issues Nixon, Reagan and Bush ran on. Who are they to call him a racist, when he is saying the same things they say? He may be a charlatan, but the GOP supplied the camouflage.

Bush is facing the classic pragmatist’s dilemma. He is trying to have it both ways--to hold the Republican Party’s conservative base while reaching out to the center. Instead, he is losing both sides. On the civil-rights issue, Bush angered conservatives by abandoning the anti-quota cause. Then he insulted moderates by trying to resurrect it.

Bush is also trying to have it both ways on the abortion issue. Last week, the President vetoed a bill that would have reversed the so-called “gag rule.” That rule prohibits doctors at federally funded clinics from discussing abortion with patients.

Meanwhile, Quayle has suggested that the Administration might accept the idea that the GOP is a “big tent” with room for a diversity of views on abortion.

On abortion, as on civil rights, the Administration wants to hold its conservative base. But it doesn’t want to alienate moderates and baby boomers who are ardently pro-choice and averse to racial politics. That could happen if the President abolishes affirmative action for women and minorities. That could also happen if the Supreme Court reverses Roe v. Wade.

Those developments could bring a moderate candidate into the Republican primaries next year--someone like Sen. John C. Danforth of Missouri or Gov. William Weld of Massachusetts. The purpose of such a campaign would be to challenge Bush on principle. Voters don’t like politicians who change their positions on issues of principle. They suspect they have no principles.

Ronald Reagan may not have had a first-rate mind, but at least he was single-minded. Bush, on the other hand, is of two minds about everything. Civil rights. Abortion. Taxes. Whether or not to go to the Far East this year. Whether or not to work with Congress. Whether or not banks should be forced to lower credit-card interest rates.

Bush can’t seem to make up his mind whether or not the economy is in recession. Or whether he thinks consumers should spend more or save more. Or whether he has, or needs, a health insurance plan. Or whether he has, or needs, an economic recovery program. “I don’t want to emphasize just the bad things, to talk us into a depression,” Bush said in an interview last week. “And I don’t want to emphasize only the good things to make those car dealers out there think I’m out of touch.”

There’s an irony here. For the past 10 years, huge federal budget deficits have kept the Democrats from proposing any major new domestic spending programs. Now the deficit is making it impossible for the Republicans to stimulate the economy. Economic growth is exactly what people expect of a Republican Administration. Without it, the voters start looking to the Democrats for things like fairness and health insurance.

It is always a bad sign when an incumbent is challenged in his own party primaries. Look at what Reagan did to Gerald R. Ford in 1976. Two conservatives have already indicated an interest in challenging Bush next year--Duke and former White House communications director Patrick J. Buchanan. Both have extreme views and somewhat unsavory reputations. Could they really hurt Bush?

They could. Both are identified with issues of undeniable populist appeal. Duke’s issue is racism. He has a klan past and he appeals overtly to white racial resentment. Buchanan’s issue is isolationism. His campaign theme would be “America First.” He is anti-foreign aid, anti-foreign trade and anti-immigration.

Both candidates are also anti-Establishment, and angry voters could use them to “send a message” to Washington. New Hampshire’s economy is in ruins, and Buchanan has the support of the state’s largest newspaper. In Southern primaries, Duke would have a lot of appeal to angry Republicans and crossover Democrats. Half of Louisiana’s white Democrats voted for Duke on Nov. 16.

The economy could be Bush’s Vietnam. And 1992 could be like 1968: no light at the end of the tunnel. In 1968, Sen. Eugene McCarthy built a coalition of angry, disaffected voters in New Hampshire and got 42% of the vote against an incumbent President. New Hampshire “sent a message” to Lyndon B. Johnson. In Bush’s nightmares, Buchanan is McCarthy.

Also in 1968, Wallace was repudiated by both major parties and ended up running for President as an Independent. Most of his votes came at Nixon’s expense, and he cost the Republicans the South. In Bush’s nightmares, Duke is Wallace.

Put the two nightmares together and you’ve got the Republicans’ “Cape Fear” scenario.