Democrats Need to Aim Much Higher

It took forever, but the Democratic presidential wannabes are finally on their way to California. So I pulled out my sample ballot to check the team roster.

Joe Lieberman? Scratch.

Wesley Clark? Scratch.

Howard Dean? Scratch.

Dick Gephardt? Scratch.

Carol Moseley Braun? Scratch.

Their names are all still on the ballot, but their campaigns flat-lined before we even had a chance to take their temperature here in the state with the most delegates. That leaves Democratic candidates John Kerry, John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, Al Sharpton and, last as well as least, Lyndon LaRouche.

I thought President Bush got off a pretty good line Monday when he went after his challengers. It’s an interesting crowd, he said, because it’s for and against his tax cuts, for and against NAFTA, for and against the Patriot Act, and for and against the Iraq war.

“And that’s just one senator from Massachusetts.”

Bush’s line was aimed at John Kerry, of course, but it neatly summed up the entire Democratic Party, which lost its way when Bill Clinton got one look at Monica Lewinsky’s thong and went crazy.

Ever since that hallmark moment -- if not when Clinton started shoplifting Republican ideas like ending the welfare state -- Democrats have been like teenagers suffering through adolescence.

They’re rebels who aren’t sure what the cause is any longer, which is why they appear on the verge of a nervous breakdown over gay marriage, and don’t have much in their arsenal beyond trashing George Bush.

The identity crisis makes for one awkward moment after another, as Sen. Edwards has just demonstrated. After railing against the North American Free Trade Agreement for siphoning jobs out of the United States, Edwards conceded this week that his redrafting of NAFTA wouldn’t stem the job loss.

Huh?

Trade was the one flag the senator from North Carolina was flying to distinguish himself from Kerry. That issue could have won him some fans in California, which has seen thousands of jobs flee for Asia and India.

But Edwards has now waffled on NAFTA, and he also flubbed a question on European trade so badly, he had to confess his ignorance.

Kerry, meanwhile, has had his own problems figuring out why he’s running for president. For a while, he chose an utterly banal course, charging that Bush is a prisoner of special interests.

Who in politics isn’t?

Kerry’s strategy backfired when his own record was put on public display, and it became downright embarrassing when The Times reported that he had written 28 letters in support of a defense contractor who happened to be a campaign donor.

The front-runner also has a patrician aloofness and genuine lack of pizazz, and you wouldn’t call him a legislative visionary, either. So what we’ve been sold so far is Kerry’s Vietnam record of valor.

Sure, it compares favorably with Bush’s daring missions to secure airspace over San Antonio and Plano. But that was then. Like Edwards, Kerry voted to blunder into war in Iraq, and like Bush, he hasn’t made a compelling case for how to get us out of the mess there.

What I’m telling you, in other words, is that my heart has not been won by either Kerry or Edwards, so I’d like to invite the two of them to go for broke in Thursday’s debate.

Yeah, I’m aware that current polls show either Kerry or Edwards beating Bush in November, but as GOP strategist Arnie Steinberg points out, this is February.

“Are the numbers accurate? Yes. Will they hold up? No.”

Not if the Democratic candidate doesn’t learn something from the essential truth about George Bush and the Republican Party: They know exactly what they stand for and how to herd the sheep.

It’s always the same recipe: tax cuts, heterosexuals, tax cuts, God, tax cuts, military prowess, tax cuts, small government, tax cuts, big business, and, of course, tax cuts.

Stick to that formula, and all sins are forgiven. You can fudge claims about the reasons for war. You can go duck-hunting on Air Force Two with a Supreme Court justice.

Sure, there are sharp differences within the GOP on whether Bush is too big a spender, and on any number of social issues. But true conservatives would vote for a one-eyed parakeet if it promised to go after tax-and-spend liberals.

I’m asking the Democratic candidates, beginning with tomorrow night’s debate, to put their own package together and start hammering away at it as Republicans do.

A total healthcare overhaul.

A fearless defense of the environment.

A guaranteed living wage.

A chicken in every pot.

A fat surtax on everyone in Dick Cheney’s income bracket.

Something bold. Anything.

Lashing out at George Bush is great sport, sure, and certainly worth the effort. But I don’t think it gets you the keys to the White House.

Steve Lopez writes Sunday, Wednesday and Friday. Reach him at steve.lopez@latimes.com.

Look for sunny skies and highs of 102 today in Santa Paula.