Pete Wilson: A Liberal in GOP Clothing : Pushing tax increases and appointing tree huggers belies his election-time masquerade.

There’s a saying: “Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.”

That’s why Gov. Pete Wilson will not get my vote this November. He has fooled the California electorate too many times by occasionally (usually around election time) masquerading as a conservative.

Lots of people--good, honest, well-meaning conservatives--got hoodwinked into voting for Wilson in 1990. Remember the line four years ago? We were told we needed to hold our noses and vote for Wilson because only a Republican governor could ensure a fair reapportionment of congressional districts. Today, the attempted extortion of our votes is solely based on fear-mongering about how bad Kathleen Brown will be if she’s elected.

Could she really be that bad? Probably. But it’s doubtful that she could be much worse than Wilson. It’s doubtful that anyone could be. And, at least, with Kathleen and Willie Brown running the state, there won’t be any doubt about who is responsible when things get worse. Voters need to understand the bankruptcy of liberalism and hold those responsible accountable. Politicians like Wilson only serve to confuse the issue.

It’s funny, though: At the same time Wilson is predicting doom and gloom if Kathleen Brown gets real power, he’s also complaining publicly that she has been staking out positions just like his.

Wake up, Pete! The reality is that Kathleen Brown has been running a fairly conventional liberal campaign--so conventional and so liberal that she has blown a once seemingly insurmountable 25-point lead in the polls. If she had done what most observers expected her to do, run to the right of Wilson (and, Lord knows, there’s plenty of room over there), chances are she would be coasting to victory. So, governor, if Kathleen Brown’s positions on the issues mimic your own, there’s a reason for that. You’re a liberal, too!

Am I exaggerating? Check out Wilson’s record:

* He pushed through the largest tax increase in the history of any state in 1991.

* He supported shifting $2.3 billion in local property-tax money to the state in 1993.

* He dramatically increased funding for the Office of Family Planning, the state’s little piggy bank for Planned Parenthood and other population-control extremists.

* He teamed up with Willie Brown in support of the permanent sales-tax increase, tricking the public into believing they were supporting law enforcement.

* He has placed far-out, tree-hugging nature-worshipers in key regulatory roles, chasing old businesses out of state and shutting down job-creating entrepreneurs before they ever get started.

* He has signed anti-gun legislation; asset-forfeiture laws; higher property, corporate, gasoline and estate taxes; new snack and newspaper taxes, and higher motor-vehicle registration fees. He has also supported massive bond measures.

Would things have been any better if Dianne Feinstein had been elected in 1990? As awful as Feinstein is, the answer is probably yes. Why? Had a Democrat been governor for the past four years, the Republican minority in the Legislature would have galvanized its opposition to pork-laden state budgets. Instead, Wilson has consistently undercut Republicans in the Assembly and Senate by supporting unconscionable budget increases during California’s worst recession ever. That’s why even Kathleen Brown would be preferable to another term of Wilson.

Am I advocating a vote for Brown? No way. That would only be validating the bad choices the two major parties have given us. I plan to vote for the Libertarian candidate, Richard Rider, and urge all conservatives--Democrats or Republicans--to do the same. Rider is not some nut. He’s not a fringe character. To prove the point, before the primary election, he selflessly urged his own supporters to vote for conservative Republican Ron Unz, even though Rider himself was on the ballot. A stockbroker and financial planner with a degree in economics, Rider is a Vietnam veteran. Unlike most Libertarian candidates before him, he’s running full-time and even has a modest television campaign. In other words, he could be the straw that breaks Wilson’s back.

There’s another reason why conservatives should be looking for such an opportunity. If Wilson is reelected, he becomes the favorite for the Republican presidential nomination in 1996. Scary? Hard to believe? Remember, the field will be crowded, and many in the Wilson camp are already planning to do for the nation what they have done for California. God forbid!