The tall and short of it

WAS IT MY imagination, or did Attorney General Tom Reilly shrink a few inches in the course of last night's debate? From his very first words -- an attempted ``gotcha" aimed at Chris Gabrieli, , whose campaign chairman he accused of an unfriendly leak to the press -- to his closing remarks, in which he promised, all too believably, that ``if you vote for me, you know what you're getting," Reilly came across as the colorless party hack from central casting. Tired, uninspired, quick to prattle about ``leadership" but unable to demonstrate any -- if ever a politician embodied the Peter Principle, dwindling in stature as he rises to his level of incompetence, Reilly is that politician.

Gabrieli, on the other hand, was the tallest man walking into the Kennedy School forum -- and seemed to be standing even taller when he walked out. His answers throughout were smart, focused, precise, informed. When he spoke of ``accountability" and ``results" -- at times last night, they seemed to be his favorite words -- it was with the air of a man who knows what the words mean. Having made a fortune by successfully investing the money entrusted to him by others, I think he probably does.

I don't share most of Gabrieli's politics, but I like his intelligent, earnest style. Channel 5 reporter Janet Wu challenged him on his self-financed campaign, pointing out that he has spent more of his own money trying to win the Corner Office -- $7.5 million, as of the last reporting period -- than any gubernatorial candidate in Massachusetts history. ``How do you convince voters," she asked, ``that you're not trying to buy your way into office?" Yes, Gabrieli agreed, he is pouring his own money into the race -- not because the governorship is a job he needs, but because in that job he can accomplish things for Massachusetts that aren't being accomplished now. A traditional politician's response? Perhaps. But coming from Gabrieli, the words didn't sound trite or insincere.

And Deval Patrick? I wasn't impressed with him heading into the debate, and I was even less impressed when it was over. Oh, he has the gift of gab so many people have commented on, and he can deliver a speech with brio. But is there any there there, or is it all ambition and wind? Patrick reminds me of Bill Clinton: charming, talented, smooth-talking, and far more interested in his own well-being than in that of the people whose votes he seeks.

At one point, Channel 7 reporter Andy Hiller bluntly asked Patrick if he wasn't playing a ``fiscal shell game." You've got a spending program for every imaginable special interest, Hiller said, yet you claim you won't raise taxes to pay for them. So what would you cut to raise the money? Patrick offered Stock Answer No. 48 -- cut waste, fraud, and abuse.

Hiller was having none of that. ``During this campaign," he wanted to know, ``is there anyone you've just said no to?"

Patrick didn't mention it, but he has said no to me -- me and the 1,541,770 other Massachusetts citizens who voted six years ago for our income tax rate to be reduced, and who are waiting to this day for the law we passed to take effect. Reilly, however insincerely, and Gabrieli, however convolutedly, acknowledge the moral obligation incurred by that vote. Patrick simply brushes it aside. That disdainful attitude, more than anything else, is why Michael Dukakis left such a sour taste in the mouths of Massachusetts voters -- so sour that no Democrat has been elected governor since he left. Put me down as one voter who isn't itching to see that movie again.

Jeff Jacoby's e-mail address is jacoby@globe.com.