It is in times of crisis when you can really judge a man’s character. In 1981, Ronald Reagan calmed the nation and the world with his style and wit in the hours after the assassination attempt on his life. And conduct, especially under fire, is why we give awards to people who perform above and beyond the call of duty.

Lesser men, like the current occupant of the White House, go into a fetal position or lash out at their real or imagined enemies when faced with a crisis. Such was the case when Mr. Clinton addressed the nation after appearing before a federal grand jury to answer charges of lying under oath, obstruction of justice and of high crimes against the American people. His defiant attitude and self-denial brought criticism from leaders of his own party.

In a lecture ironically given on the campus of Harvard University in 1837, Ralph Waldo Emerson boldly told the distinguished academic audience that “character is higher than intellect.”

Emerson’s contention was that an overemphasis on “book knowledge” would prevent students from learning the most important skills in life of being good, decent and responsible human beings.

This year, Americans got the chance to see up-close-and-personal the character of the two would-be leaders of this country. In the days after the election and during what arguably was not only one of the most wrenching but also unsettling times in our nation’s history, the characters of these two men were clearly defined.

There was Vice President Al Gore, slobbering after the presidency, screeching from media stop to media stop pleading his case … too often, too much and too hard.

On the other hand, there was Gov. George W. Bush, the model of understated class and dignity. Bush is clearly – to coin a phrase – “his own man,” reminding many of Ronald Reagan. Rather than talk to reporters every day, he talked to close friends and family. Unlike the rest of the political class, Mr. Bush wasn’t glued to the television to hear the latest reports from Broward County or the Florida Supreme Court. In fact, Bush doesn’t even get cable at his Crawford, Texas, ranch.

How did he survive those trying 36 days without constant analysis by the legal experts at MSNBC, CNN and FOX?

Bush, like the Gary Cooper of “High Noon,” showed the stoic, honor-bound man facing opposition with a quiet dignity and reassuring strength. While many in his party were ready to run from trouble like the townspeople in the film, Bush held the team together and stood strong in the face of adversity.

It goes without saying that Bush, had he lost, would not have gone into seclusion and lost his self-identity. He knows who he is and, like his father, handles adversity like a man … and a leader.

We just might look back on those days after the election as somehow providential or certainly beneficial because we were able to see what kind of president each was going to be.

One can imagine Mr. Gore entering the White House on Jan. 20, 2001, as if it were some sort of entitlement. On the other hand, President Bush will enter with awe and a deep sense of responsibility and obligation.

Polls clearly bore out that the overwhelming majority approved of how Bush handled himself while the same majority disapproved of Mr. Gore’s behavior.

As another American statesmen Henry Clay said, “Of all the properties which belong to honorable men, not one is as highly prized as that of character.”

Clearly President-elect Bush knows the value of understatement and being underestimated. While liberal opponents are even now plotting their assault on the Bush administration, like Ronald Reagan, he might just surprise the Beltway establishment.

One thing is for sure. The better man won.

Shirley is a veteran political consultant and president of a Washington-based public affairs firm where Diana Banister serves as vice president. Readers may write them at Craig Shirley & Associates Inc., 123 South Patrick St., Alexandria, VA 22314.

LOAD-DATE: December 31, 2000

LANGUAGE: ENGLISH

Copyright 2000 The Post Register