Editorial: Hypocrisy isn’t very endearing

Sunday, Feb. 27, 2000 | 9:39 a.m.

In the wake of George W. Bush's victory in the South Carolina primary, and his subsequent defeat just a few days later in the Michigan primary, political analysts have worked overtime to assess the meaning of the results. Many commentators argue that while Bush's emphasis on issues dear to the religious right was critical to his win in South Carolina -- which kept his candidacy alive -- this tactic hurt him in Michigan, a state that has a higher percentage of moderate voters.

One of the defining moments in South Carolina was Bush's controversial appearance at Bob Jones University, a school that bans interracial dating and marriage among students. But a broadside by Bush that didn't receive as much coverage -- yet is of huge interest to Nevadans -- were his comments about the gaming industry.

In South Carolina, Bush tried to portray McCain as a friend of the gaming industry. As columnist Jon Ralston reported last week, a Bush campaign mailer lambasted McCain for saying that "he battles the special interests, but has received $51,700 from gambling interests." But this charge by Bush is hypocritical. Sun reporter David Strow noted a week ago that through Feb. 1 Bush had received $95,450 in donations from individuals in the gaming industry compared to just $69,312 for McCain.

How could Bush suggest it is a badge of dishonor for McCain to receive contributions from the gaming industry when the Texas governor himself is hauling in more money from casino interests than McCain? Besides, McCain has angered many in the casino industry. After all, the Arizona senator wants to hold congressional hearings on slot machines that critics say entice children. In addition, McCain signed on as a sponsor of legislation that would ban betting on college sports.

Bush's assault on McCain's "ties" to the gaming industry also is worrisome since his prominent Republican supporters in Nevada have said the Texas governor has assured them that he doesn't have a problem with casinos here. Bush's pandering to the religious right about the gaming industry's influence should dismay his Nevada supporters, who include most of the state's top Republican elected officials, party leaders and political consultants.

If a candidate doesn't care for gambling, that's fine. There's nothing wrong with having a legitimate disagreement. But candidates shouldn't insult our intelligence by telling us one thing and saying something radically different to residents of another state. Nevadans don't appreciate being taken for rubes.

Bush's surrogates in Nevada, such as Gov. Kenny Guinn and Rep. Jim Gibbons, claim that Bush would be sympathetic to the concerns of this state, whether it's gaming or the federal government's misguided efforts to build in Nevada a high-level nuclear waste repository. But if South Carolina is any indication of the direction his campaign is headed, heaven help Nevada if Bush desperately needs to win a primary state that wants to get rid of its nuclear waste.