Dornan Strains Against Restraint

Bob Dornan wants to talk about something. That’s not exactly news. Talking is one of the things the former congressman and occasional talk-show personality does best.

But now, as he girds for an election rematch with Loretta Sanchez that might well end his political career, Dornan wants to talk about what may be the toughest challenge of his life:

Holding his tongue.

But even as he explains during a 90-minute interview why he simply must restrain himself this time around, you get the feeling it ain’t gonna be easy.

For example, he says that national Republican leaders have been “utterly catatonically gutless’ in their muted attacks on President Clinton’s morality. Thus, in one fell swoop, he knocks both Republicans and Democrats.

But that’s not what he’s come to talk about.

He wants to talk about the 46th Congressional District campaign that will kick off soon and how he isn’t going to give people what they’re expecting, which is a negative campaign.

“My wife says not to tell you this, but I’m Bob Dornan, I can’t keep my mouth shut,” he says. “We think we have to run a totally locked-in campaign. If she [Sanchez] gives me a debate, fine. We don’t think we’re going to get one. We think she’s going to run an insular, protected, castle-keep campaign, and we should do the same.”

Still, in vintage Dornan style, he tosses out a few juicy tidbits he says he’d love to use against Sanchez, but can’t. When I suggest that restraint has never characterized his campaigns before, he bridles.

Whatever dubious tactics he’s used over the years, he says, have been in retaliation. Indeed, he says, while flashing some mailers used against him over the years, it is he who has been demonized.

His campaign strategy, he says, will center on Sanchez’s voting record in the House, her public statements and his allegation that she only voted in one election before running for the House. “But I think she gets a free ride, and this changes Bob Dornan, stylistically” on other more provocative allegations, Dornan says.

He sounds clearly regretful about not using them, and so I ask why he’s suddenly concerned about political niceties.

“Maybe for the first time in my life, I’m feeling a little trepidation,” he says. He openly entertains the possibility that he might lose, although he says his polls show Sanchez currently leading only by a few points and that he expects it to be a tossup by election night.

“I told you it [the election] will be about 50-50,” he says. “If I go medieval on her and win, it will be forgotten by all you people in the press, who would say, ‘They both went negative, and he won.’

“But for the rest of my life, I would know that in one race, I went purely negative and tore her face off. But suppose I were to lose?”

Then, he says, people would remember him as a loser who also ran a negative campaign. “If I go medieval on her, I win easily,” he says. “And it isn’t worth the price.”

So, this is about your legacy? I ask.

“It’s more resume than legacy,” he replies, having been convinced by his family that prospective employers in the media might be reluctant to hire him if he’s linked to a dirty campaign.

“I want to be able to say to the press, ‘You can’t even finesse that I did one negative mailing, she did 100, and now you’ve got moral equivalency?’ I think for sitting on radio and television shows, that when someone calls in and says, ‘I heard how dirty your race got,’ I want to be able to say I only talked about her record. That’s the one frailty in me. I loathe being called a dirty campaigner.”

Dornan concedes the strategy is politically calculated, not the late-blooming personality change of a 65-year-old man. He’s also candid when I ask whether his main motivation is to serve in Congress again or just avenge his bitter 1996 loss to Sanchez.

He acknowledges he’s afraid how his answer may look in print. Yes, he says, the revenge element exists. A high-ranking GOP official told him that regaining the seat “would be a victory to dine out on forever,” and that prospect clearly fills him with delight.

Nor will he pretend that he’s ecstatic about serving in Congress again or that he’s thrilled with his own party’s leadership. Dornan says he might even tell House Speaker Newt Gingrich he doesn’t want any committee assignments, preferring to spend his time giving speeches on the House floor.

A new, quieter Bob Dornan? As he says, only St. Peter will give the final evaluation. I take him at his word that he’s being mindful of a post-political career. But it’s also possible he knows that a rip-roaring campaign could attract an anti-Dornan element that might otherwise stay home.

Whatever his motivation, Dornan says he’d like a campaign filled only with public debates between he and Sanchez. Nothing personal, nothing ugly.

He knows he could lose. I ask what he’ll do if he wins.

“I will be something special if I come back,” he says. “I’ll serve two good years, be there for Clinton’s impeachment and/or gutless censure, and go to the floor and show my party what Patrick Henry and Daniel Webster and engagement oratory are all about.”

*

Dana Parsons’ column appears Wednesday, Friday and Sunday. Readers may reach Parsons by calling (714) 966-7821 or by writing to him at The Times Orange County Edition, 1375 Sunflower Ave., Costa Mesa, CA 92626, or by e-mail to dana.parsons @latimes.com.