Sandoval’s only error

There’s a new radio ad for Mitt Romney’s presidential campaign airing in Nevada, with endorsements from Lt. Gov. Brian Krolicki, Reps. Joe Heck and Mark Amodei and former Clark County Commissioner Bruce Woodbury.

That’s almost the entire Republican firmament in Nevada, save for U.S. Sen. Dean Heller, who has yet to choose a candidate, and Gov. Brian Sandoval, who has.

Remember? Sandoval backed Texas Gov. Rick Perry back in September. And it doesn’t make any more sense today.

Sandoval gave Perry his backing out of loyalty, a good quality and a rare trait for a politician. In 2008, Perry backed Sandoval’s bid for governor, notwithstanding the fact that Nevada already had a Republican chief executive, Jim Gibbons. Perry was vice chairman of the Republican Governors Association at the time, so supporting Sandoval over a Republican incumbent was risky, but Perry took the risk.

Not only that, but some key Sandoval advisers who wanted to go to work for Perry in the Silver State urged the governor to come out publicly for Perry.

Since then, of course, we’ve all learned that Perry is a slightly more incurious version of George W. Bush, only without the debate skills or ability to recall precisely which parts of the federal government he wants to excise.

And the Perry we know is the one from the campaign trail, from 30-second ads and from debates, when he’s ostensibly working to put his best foot forward. Sandoval, however, knows Perry personally, and would have had much more of a chance to privately observe the Texas governor’s shortcomings.

Yet still, Sandoval recommended Perry to his fellow citizens as the best choice in the Republican field to lead the free world? Precisely how much loyalty was Sandoval feeling at the time?

Perry has been derided for stumbling during debates, but the problem isn’t just presentation. In fact, it’s when Perry unties his tongue and says what’s on his mind that he gets into trouble.

How else can we explain Perry’s blithe willingness to send troops back into Iraq despite his concern — displayed in a 30-second ad recently — that some of them may be gay?

Perry flatly called President Barack Obama a socialist, a talking point that nonetheless raises the serious possibility that Perry is totally unaware of the definition of the word.

He gave a pandering answer to a silly question during a debate — what would you be doing on a Saturday night if you were not debating? Perry said he’d probably be at the shooting range. Look, I enjoy firearms myself, but I don’t date them.

Perry’s embrace of civil religion is legendary — he sponsored and participated in a gigantic prayer rally for the nation at Reliant Stadium in Houston in August as he prepared to announce his candidacy for president. 

And his impromptu finish to a lackluster speech at October’s Western Republican Leadership Conference — “Let’s do it! Let’s roll!” — evoked not so much enthusiasm as a very bad Saturday Night Live Bush impersonation.

To sum: Perry — no matter his accomplishments as governor of Texas — is decidedly unserious as a presidential contender, and personal loyalty can’t quite cover Sandoval from at least some of the blowback.

Sandoval was savvy enough not to travel to Iowa or New Hampshire to campaign for Perry, which would have subjected him to unanswerable questions about why in the world he backed a guy who thinks it would be a good idea to make the Congress a lot more like Nevada’s state Legislature — i.e. part-time. But as far as Sandoval’s tenure goes, endorsing Perry has been our governor’s only real mistake.

Personal loyalty is certainly a good thing, and rare in politics. But let Perry’s soon-to-be-ended presidential candidacy be a lesson to Sandoval that there must be limits.

Steve Sebelius is a Review-Journal political columnist and author of the blog SlashPolitics.com. Follow him on Twitter at www.Twitter.com/SteveSebelius or reach him at (702) 387-5276 or ssebelius@reviewjournal.com.