As the First Lady strode to the podium at the party convention and proceeded to defend a broad view of family and community, few in the audience were surprised. "When we speak of families," she said, "we mean extended families. We mean the neighbors, even the community itself." Yet this was not Hillary Rodham Clinton's oft-repeated defense of a certain African proverb that by now even the village idiot has heard a few too many times. These words were uttered by Barbara Bush at the far-right, fanatic 1992 Republican Convention in Houston. Four years later, Bob Dole, in his convention address, repudiated not only Hillary Clinton, but Barbara Bush, when he made the silly distinction that "it does not take a village to raise a child. It takes a family."

The shift in rhetoric on this subject matches the rightward migration of the Republican Party on major questions of policy over the past few years. The reasons for this, while including the rightward movement of political culture and the ascendancy of conservatives into Congressional leadership, also include an often overlooked explanation: Bill Clinton. One of the most telling political cartoons of the past four years was a drawing of eight figures arrayed on the political spectrum. On the far left was Jesse Jackson and next to him, moving rightward, was Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, Bill Clinton, and Jesse Helms. The fact that Clinton has managed to occupy so much of the political spectrum between the two Jesses indicates why he has so befuddled Bob Dole and why the Republicans have been forced to move precipitously rightward in order to gain breathing space.

As President Clinton has worked to park himself squarely in the political center, the Republicans have had to reject their traditions in order to differentiate themselves on the issues. Thus when Clinton saw their balanced budget demand, they raised their wager to include a 15 percent tax cut. When the President proposed a crime plan with 100,000 new police on the streets, 100,000 new jail cells and an expansion of the death penalty, the Republicans leapt forward to denounce him for including funds for "midnight basketball," one of George Bush's 1000 Points of Light. When President Clinton pushed for adoption of an urban agenda based on Jack Kemp's empowerment zones proposal, the Republicans said he was wasting taxpayers money. When Clinton signed President Bush's GOALS 2000 education plan into law, Republicans cried he was trying to institute federal control over local school districts. It's true that you can't you please all the people all the time. For President Clinton, however, it seems he can't please the Republicans anytime.

In fact, Clinton's refusal to fit into the traditional Democratic box seems to be giving the Republicans palpitations. The President's march to the middle has required Republicans to rush to the right. Nowhere was this more clearly demonstrated than in Sunday night's debate. Inexplicably, Bob Dole forgot about his main message of the night until two-thirds of the way into the debate. Then, however, like Old Faithful, it was unstoppable. About once every two minutes, Bob Dole announced to the world that Bill Clinton was a big government, wild-eyed "liberal." The Bill Clinton who signed a welfare reform law more stringent than Ronald Reagan ever considered. The Bill Clinton who cut the size of the federal government to its lowest level since the Kennedy Administration. The Bill Clinton who lowered the deficit for four consecutive years for the first time since 1844. If you believe Bill Clinton is a liberal, I have a Brooklyn Bridge to the future I'd like to sell you.

The saddest thing is that Bob Dole, with 45 years of political experience, has been reduced to making an attack that does little more than allow the party loyalists to bask in the warmth of nostalgia for the days when they had Walter Mondale to run against. Dole has an economic plan that he does not believe in (as evidenced by the fact that he could bring himself to mention a 15 percent tax cut only when directly asked about it by the moderator) and one that the American people are not willing to buy into at a time of relative economic prosperity. Dole as the challenger has to realize that this race, like 1992 and every other race with a president running for re-election, is about one subject: the incumbent. The American people will decide based on Bill Clinton's character and his record. This is entirely appropriate.

Yet Bob Dole, with his reputation for meanness in mind, has thus far shied away from taking the campaign to the door of the Oval Office. His attacks on Clinton have usually come in one of three ways. First is his habit of throwing out little verbal grenades that seemingly come from nowhere and fail to detonate. An example of this was his repetition of the charge that in the debates four years ago, Clinton did not refer to George Bush as "Mr. President." While perhaps this will end up swinging the votes of millions, it probably did little more than cause people to scratch their heads in befuddlement.

Second, Dole tells us what he won't talk about. On Sunday, he interrupted a discussion of the possibility of pardons for those convicted during the investigation of Whitewater by making sure we are all aware that "I'm not discussing Whitewater now." He interrupted his discussion of drugs to tell Clinton "I won't comment on other things that have happened in your administration or in your past about drugs." This is much like the congressional candidate who went around his district telling every audience that he would refuse to discuss the tax evasion charges leveled against his opponent.

Third, much of Dole's campaign has been built around a discussion of Bill Clinton's character. The drug issue is not only about national policy. It is about the implicit question of why President Clinton has failed to speak out about drug use and why it is impossible for him to do so. The answer is because of Clinton's "unmentionable" past drug use. Dole doesn't really need to say this. As his "Saturday Night Live" character would say, "You know it, I know, the American people know it." The same applies for Dole's erstwhile discussion of his economic plan. For Teddy Roosevelt, the Republican president in the first year of the twentieth century, the issue was trusts. For Bob Dole, who hopes to be the Republican president in the last year of the twentieth century, the issue is trust. It is no accident that his soon to be best-selling campaign tract is entitled "Trusting the People." Dole wastes no opportunity in using the word "trust" because of its value in reminding people of their lack of this feeling for Bill Clinton.

All this is not enough. There is less than a month to go in the election. One could hear the tennis claps of pundits around the country lauding the civility of Sunday's debate. Editorial pages around the nation are tripping over themselves in order to congratulate Dole on refusing Jim Lehrer's invitation to discuss the issue of character. "I don't like to get into personal matters," said Dole in demurral. Character, along with convictions, is the most important assessment that America must make when it chooses her president. If Dole truly feels that Bill Clinton's character is deficient, then he not only has every right, but he has the responsibility to make it an issue in this last month of the campaign.

Andrei H. Cherny is The Crimson's election columnist.