DURING THESE recent weeks of celebrating the crowning of Newt Gingrich as America's political leader and maximum moralist, we have gotten to know this man through a plethora of newspaper and magazine articles. If you get far enough down in some of the stories, you find things that do not speak well of Newt's persona.
Newt Gingrich, like Ronald Reagan, seems to have that Teflon quality that causes testimony about some of his actions to be deflected into the atmosphere and beyond.
Of all the allegations -- and evidence -- of Mr. Gingrich's dealings with his first wife, of his early liberal leanings, etc., what concerns me most is that he is a draft dodger who has escaped the acrimony that has been heaped upon Bill Clinton for the same.
Newt Gingrich ducked the draft during the Vietnam War by doing exactly what Mr. Clinton did; he got an educational deferment. For a Ph.D., no less. Bill Clinton, the story goes, actually agonized over his action, while Newt merely is quoted as saying, "What good would I have done over there?"
But do you hear Newt Gingrich being berated by veterans' groups and Republican image makers for being a draft dodger? You do not.
There is something about Bill Clinton that brings out the savage in his opponents. His indiscretions -- some alleged, some not -- are magnified many times over, while others who have sailed a similar course seemingly are exonerated.
Newt Gingrich, presumably, is welcome in fellow Republican Jesse Helms' vision of North Carolina but Bill Clinton is not because, as Mr. Helms mistakenly fantasized, all the military there hate the president for ducking the Vietnam War.
Last June, the president of the Florida division of the Korean War Veterans wrote to a newspaper intemperately bashing Bill Clinton's appearance at D-Day ceremonies and calling him a draft dodger. Will he do the same about Newt Gingrich? Did he do the same when Dick Cheney, a Republican conservative darling who also ducked Vietnam, was secretary of defense? Or Dan Quayle, who, as a result of his influential father's letter writing, hid in the Indiana National Guard during Vietnam?
Just why is it that Mr. Clinton's feet are held to the fire over Vietnam and no one else's?
Did Mr. Clinton go a step further than the others? Possibly. While others merely ducked and stayed in the closet, Mr. Clinton attended protests against the war -- a difference with faint distinction.
During the campaign between Mr. Clinton and George Bush, one of the latter's leading strategists, Mary Matalin, called Mr. Clinton a "philandering, pot-smoking draft dodger." How many others, including many of today's GOP elite, would fit that same description? Newt admits smoking pot, and he ducked the war.
Rush Limbaugh noted derisively the other day that many who fit his version of a liberal and who have been defending themselves against political grenade attacks for the past few years are now getting into position to lob some back.
And why not? Those who have been lambasting Bill Clinton over personal values -- and distorting them -- are now in the spotlight and subject to the same scrutiny as has been Mr. Clinton.
But, my dear fellow veterans, Vietnam should not be an issue any more. It never should have been part of the political game. Mr. Clinton has taken the brunt of diatribe for too long while others have gone unhampered.
This is not a time to add to the witch hunt. The fact is that most, given the opportunity, would have ducked Vietnam.
What it comes down to is this: Whether or not you served during the Vietnam War is immaterial to your qualifications to be an elected representative of the people, or a leading bureaucrat.
That, and whether your maid or nanny had a green card, are overrated issues that need retiring.
E9 Howard Kleinberg wrote this for the Cox News Service.