George McGovern

90th Birthday Of George McGovern: A Case For National Celebration For A Great Statesman!

Ronald Leave a comment

Today is the 90th birthday of former Senator and 1972 Democratic Presidential candidate George McGovern, and should be a reason for national celebration.

A truly great statesman, the former South Dakota Senator had a distinguished career of national service, including his efforts as a pilot in World War II, and is a true inspiration to many Americans for his principles, his values, his ethics, his commitment to public service, and his great decency and compassion for others.

At a time when we have a political party which has no compassion or concern for the average citizen, George McGovern stands out for his courage in opposing the war in Vietnam, and being a major advocate of the New Frontier of John F. Kennedy and the Great Society of Lyndon B. Johnson!

McGovern has continued to be active, writing and speaking on issues that matter to him, supportive of President Barack Obama, and continuing to advocate the liberal and progressive tradition, of which he is such an exceptional advocate all of his life.

When this author wrote recently about the concept of a “Liberal-Progressive” Mount Rushmore as a thought, he included McGovern, along with Robert La Follette, Sr., George Norris, and Hubert Humphrey, as the rightful faces which should be on such a monument.

Let all good people salute George McGovern on his 90th birthday, and wish him many more years of health, happiness, and contributions to the liberal-progressive cause!

The Republican Attack On “Chicago Politics”: Pitiful And Ridiculous!

Ronald 2 Comments

The Republican Party is reacting to attacks on Mitt Romney and his refusal to release tax returns, with the accusation that this is old style “Chicago politics”, because Barack Obama comes out of the Illinois political system.

Give me a break, as if only in Chicago, has politics been seen as manipulative and corrupt!

What about New Jersey politics; West Virginia politics; Texas politics; Ohio politics; New York politics; Pennsylvania politics; Georgia politics; Florida politics; Louisiana politics; Missouri politics; Oklahoma politics; Los Angeles politics; California politics; Nevada politics; Arizona politics; Alaska politics; Washington DC politics; and NATIONAL politics, and the list goes on!

The story of American politics is the story of corruption, manipulation, deceit, unfair attacks, character assassination, etc, including some people going to prison for corruption!

This is the big time, Mitt Romney and the Republican Party!

You used dirty tactics against George McGovern, Walter Mondale, Michael Dukakis, Al Gore, John Kerry and many other Democrats!

You have also been brutal in your attacks on Jimmy Carter, Bill Clinton, and Barack Obama, as well as Hillary Clinton and other Democrats.

You have been involved in corruption big time with your SuperPACS already this year, refusing to support DISCLOSE legislation yesterday in the US Senate, to allow Americans to know how much money wealthy people are contributing to Mitt Romney!

You are NOT interested in “good government’! You are interested in wishing to dish out attacks, but cannot tolerate attacks by the Democrats!

But there is some news for you! Democrats, including Barack Obama and Joe Biden, are no longer going to allow themselves to be attacked and play defense!

The Democrats will be on the offensive, and give back in kind what you have been doing for many years with a poor response by Democrats!

We are finally using the tactics of Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry Truman, and Lyndon Johnson, giving the Republican Party and its candidates “Hell”, and rightfully without apology! This has been LONG overdue!

A Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore And A Conservative Mount Rushmore: Who Would Be On Such Mount Rushmores?

Ronald 9 Comments

Last Friday, Joe Scarborough and MORNING JOE on MSNBC had distinguished historians assess which Presidents might be on a new, second Mount Rushmore, if such a monument were ever built.

This brought to mind the idea of who might be on a Liberal-Progressive Mount Rushmore, and who would be on a Conservative Mount Rushmore, if such were ever constructed anywhere in America.

This is mostly just interesting scholarly speculation, but here goes my suggestions for such honoring on both sides of the political spectrum.

LIBERAL/PROGRESSIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Robert La Follette, Sr.–Republican Governor (1900-1906) and Senator (1906-1925) of Wisconsin–Mr. Progressive of the early 20th century and 1924 Progressive Party nominee for President.

George Norris–Republican Congressman (1902-1912) and Senator (1912-1942) of Nebraska–the most creative reform figure and longevity of the first half of the 20th century, a bridge between the Progressive Era of Theodore Roosevelt and Woodrow Wilson and the New Deal of Franklin D. Roosevelt.

Hubert H. Humphrey–Democratic Mayor Of Minneapolis (1945-1949), Senator (1949-1964, 1970-1978) of Minnesota, and Vice President of the United States (1965-1969) and Democratic Presidential nominee in 1968, who had the most creative record of promoting reform in the years after World War II throughout the 1960s.

Ted Kennedy–Democratic Senator (1962-2009) of Massachusetts, the fourth longest serving US Senator in American history, and the most creative reformer in the years from the 1970s until his death in 2009.

A possible alternative would be Democratic Senator George McGovern of
South Dakota (1922-2012), who ran for President in 1972, and was a major critic of the Vietnam War, one of the most decent men ever in American politics, serving in the Senate from 1963-1981.

CONSERVATIVE MOUNT RUSHMORE

Arthur Vandenberg–Republican Senator (1928-1951) of Michigan, who opposed the New Deal and was an isolationist in foreign policy through World War II, but then became an internationalist in support of the United Nations and President Harry Truman’s Cold War policy against the Soviet Union after World War II, and potential Presidential candidate twice.

Robert Taft–Republican Senator (1939-1953) of Ohio, son of President and Chief Justice William Howard Taft, promoted the anti labor union Taft-Hartley Act, promoted an isolationist foreign policy, and considered Mr. Conservative by his party, and a potential Presidential candidate numerous times.

Barry Goldwater–Senator (1952-1964, 1968-1986) of Arizona, succeeding Robert Taft as Mr. Conservative, and 1964 Republican nominee for President, becoming the hero of conservatives long term, and having an effect on President Ronald Reagan.

Ronald Reagan–Republican Governor of California (1966-1974), and President of the United States (1981-1989), after a career as a movie actor, influenced by the principles and ideas of Barry Goldwater, who he publicly backed in a famous speech in 1964.

The author welcomes commentary on these selections!

Mitt Romney As Compared to Barry Goldwater And George McGovern And Walter Mondale

Ronald Leave a comment

Mitt Romney is infamous for constant change in his positions on every issue imaginable, making people unable to trust him.

In the past half century, we have had three losing Presidential candidates, all of whom lost by landslides, but even so, kept their dignity as men of principle, who did not change their views to fit the changing mood of the country, and therefore, even in losing badly, can been seen as men who truly believed what they advocated.

These are Republican Senator Barry Goldwater of Arizona, who lost to President Lyndon B. Johnson in 1964; Democratic Senator George McGovern of South Dakota, who lost to President Richard Nixon in 1972; and Senator and former Vice President Walter Mondale of Minnesota, who lost to President Ronald Reagan in 1984.

All three men are regarded more highly because they stuck to their principle, but when Mitt Romney loses to President Barack Obama in 2012, he will NOT be regarded highly as a man of principle, as he has NO PRINCIPLES, except his own advancement!

“Cool” Vs. “Stiff” Presidential Candidates: The Vote Goes To The “Cool’ Candidate Eighty Percent Of Presidential Elections Since 1932!

Ronald 1 Comment

One aspect of the battle for the Presidency over time, particularly in the age of modern media and national campaigning, is the personality of the candidates, and whether a person running for the Presidency is “cool” or “stiff” with people.

When one investigates this from the time of Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1932 onward, in most cases, but not all, the “cool” , more personable, candidate wins.

This happened with FDR against Herbert Hoover in 1932, against Alf Landon in 1936, against Wendell Willkie in 1940, and against Thomas E. Dewey in 1944.

It also occurred with Harry Truman against Dewey in 1948; Dwight D. Eisenhower against Adlai Stevenson in 1952 and 1956, and John F. Kennedy against Richard Nixon in 1960.

1964 was a rare year, where Barry Goldwater seemed more personable by far than Lyndon B . Johnson, but the Johnson campaign successfully depicted Goldwater as dangerous and extremist.

In 1968, Hubert Humphrey was certainly more gregarious and warm than Richard Nixon or George Wallace, but still lost, due to the Democratic split over the VIetnam War; and in 1972, George McGovern came across as more trustworthy and personable than Richard Nixon, but was depicted as extremist and radical in a way similar to Goldwater eight years earlier.

In 1976, Jimmy Carter, a new face on the scene, came across as more personable than Gerald Ford, who seemed stiff and uncomfortable to many.

By 1980, Ronald Reagan easily came across to Americans in a more charming manner than Jimmy Carter, and Walter Mondale never could overcome the Reagan mystique in 1984.

In 1988, neither George H. W. Bush nor Michael Dukakis came across as personable, the only time in modern history that such a situation existed.

In 1992 and 1996, Bill Clinton easily came across much better in personality than Bush or Bob Dole.

George W. Bush definitely had the edge in his personality in 2000 and 2004 against Al Gore and John Kerry.

And Barack Obama had a clear advantage over John McCain in 2008, and certainly has that edge as well against Mitt Romney in 2012.

In conclusion, only Lyndon B. Johnson and Richard Nixon were the less personable candidate when they ran in 1964, 1968, and 1972, and only in 1988 could it be said there was no difference between George H. W. Bush and Michael Dukakis in the level of their “coolness”.

The conclusion is that the more personable or “cool” candidate has a clear edge in the modern era in being elected to the Presidency!

Losing Vice Presidential Candidates And Their Careers

Ronald 2 Comments

In the past fifty years, since the Kennedy-Nixon election of 1960, we have had a total of 12 losing Vice Presidential nominees of major parties, not including Vice President Walter Mondale under President Jimmy Carter in 1980, and Vice President Dan Quayle under President George H. W. Bush in 1992.

What ever became of these 12 losing Vice Presidential nominees?

Henry Cabot Lodge, who ran with Richard Nixon in 1960, went on to be Ambassador to South Vietnam for President Kennedy in 1963-1964, a sign of bipartisan cooperation, even though Lodge had lost his US Senate seat to President Kennedy in 1952. He then was a candidate for the Republican nomination for President in 1964, but did not get very far in the race. Lodge had had a distinguished career as Senator from Massachusetts from 1937-1953, played an influential role in drafting Dwight D. Eisenhower for President in 1952, and served as Ike’s United Nations Ambassador for eight years, before becoming Nixon’s running mate in 1960. Overall, a very distinguished career, to say the least!

William E. Miller, who ran with Barry Goldwater in 1964, served as a member of the US House of Representatives from upstate New York from 1951-1965, and was Republican National Chairman from 1961-1964. His public career ended with the Goldwater defeat, but his daughter, Stephanie Miller, is a comedian and radio talk show host, and also on Current TV five mornings a week. Interestingly, she is very liberal, while her father was a solid conservative.

Senator Edmund Muskie of Maine ran with Hubert H. Humphrey in 1968, after having served in the US Senate for ten years, and continued to serve in the Senate until 1980, when he agreed to be President Jimmy Carter’s Secretary of State for one year. He also sought the Presidency himself in 1972, was considered a front runner, but his candidacy floundered.

Senator Thomas Eagleton of Missouri was George McGovern’s first running mate in 1972, but was forced out over revelations that he had undergone shock treatments and taken psychiatric medication. Despite that, he served in the US Senate for 18 years from 1969-1987, and served with distinction, with whatever mental problems he had not interfering with his performance.

Sargent Shriver, the brother in law of President Kennedy, replaced Eagleton, and was well known as the head of the Peace Corps under Kennedy, and as head of the War on Poverty under President Lyndon B. Johnson. Then he served as Ambassador to France under Johnson and Richard Nixon, before running for Vice President. He also ran for President unsuccessfully in 1976, and became the head of the Special Olympics. His daughter, Maria Shriver, became an NBC reporter and the wife of Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger of California. His decline due to Alzheimer’s Disease had an impact on publicity about that disease. He died a much beloved public servant.

Gerald Ford had Senator Bob Dole of Kansas as his running mate in 1976. Dole had been a member of the House of Representatives from 1961-1969, and served in the Senate from 1969 until his resignation in 1996, when he became the Republican nominee for President. He remains active today, and is highly honored for his public career, and his wife Elizabeth also served as a United States Senator from North Carolina. Additionally, Dole had served as Republican National Chairman from 1971-1973 under Richard Nixon. He also was, at different times, Senate Majority Leader and Senate Minority Leader.

Geraldine Ferraro was Walter Mondale’s running mate in 1984, becoming the first woman to run for Vice President. She had been a Congresswoman from Queens County, New York City from 1978-1984, and was later US Ambassador to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights under President Bill Clinton from 1993-1996. She ran unsuccessfully for the US Senate in 1992 and 1998, and later was involved in the Hillary Clinton Presidential campaign of 2008.

Senator Lloyd Bentsen of Texas was the running mate of Michael Dukakis in1988. He served in the House of Representatives from 1949-1955, and as US Senator from 1971-1993, winning his seat the first time over future President George H. W. Bush, He was also Senate Finance Committee Chairman, and Treasury Secretary under BIll Clinton in 1993–1994.

New York Congressman Jack Kemp, a former football player for the San Diego Chargers and the Buffalo Bills of the American Football League, served in the House of Representatives from upstate Buffalo, New York, from 1971-1989. He ran for President unsuccessfully in 1988, before agreeing to be Bob Dole’s running mate in 1996. He also served as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under the first President Bush from 1989-1993. He was a major supporter of economic conservatism, and a follower of President Ronald Reagan. He continued to advocate his views after losing the Vice Presidency.

Connecticut Senator Joe Lieberman was Al Gore’s running mate in 2000, and was the first Jewish nominee for Vice President. He had served in the Senate since first being elected in 1988, and will retire from the Senate in 2012, after four complete terms, as a controversial independent Democrat, progressive on social issues, but hard line conservative on foreign policy. He was called conservative intellectual William F. Buckley, Jr’s “favorite Democrat”.

In 2004, North Carolina Senator John Edwards was John Kerry’s Vice Presidential running mate. He served in the Senate for one term from 1999-2005, and sought the Presidency in 2008, and when his campaign failed, he was revealed to have a consensual affair with a woman while his wife was sick with cancer, and the liaison produced a daughter, and now has led to a trial that might lead to his imprisonment on charges of illegal use of campaign funds to cover the affair and the needs of the child and mother. This is truly a sad situation, still to be played out.

And finally, who could forget Alaska Governor Sarah Palin, who came out of obscurity as the second woman to run for Vice President, with John McCain in 2008. She became a lightning rod, and many blamed the debacle of the McCain campaign on her, and her obvious ignorance of the issues and the facts of American politics and history. She has remained a controversial figure, who has made millions writing some books and giving speeches,and is seen by many as a major factor in the conservative wing of the Republican Party. Her future is still ahead of her, and we will not be able to ignore her, as she will be part of political news for a long time.

So who stood out among these losing VP candidates?

Clearly, Lodge, Muskie, Eagleton, Shriver, Dole, Bentsen, Kemp, and Lieberman had a positive effect on American history.

The same cannot be said for Miller, Ferraro, Edwards, and Palin.

However, all of them contributed to our history, and should be remembered!

Presidential And Vice Presidential Candidates: “Shot Gun” Marriages Most Of The Time!

Ronald Leave a comment

When a Presidential nominee selects his Vice Presidential running mate in any Presidential campaign, it can be regarded as a judgment of the Presidential nominee’s leadership.

It can also cause much grief, as too often, the combination of Presidential and Vice Presidential nominees does not work, whether elected or not.

Since the time of Richard Nixon as Vice President under Dwight D. Eisenhower, as the Vice Presidency has become a significant and powerful office, there has been much distrust, stress, and alienation between the people running for the top two offices, and if elected, has become a major problem that affects the nation.

Witness the following:

While President Eisenhower allowed Vice President Nixon to take on more authority as Eisenhower suffered health crises, the two men never were very close, and Eisenhower held off on backing Nixon publicly for a second term as Vice President in 1956.

Lyndon B. Johnson had very little role and a difficult relationship with President John F. Kennedy, and his brother, Attorney General Robert F.Kennedy.

When Nixon ran against Kennedy in 1960, his running mate, Henry Cabot Lodge, followed a very relaxed campaign strategy, taking long naps and breaks during the Fall campaign, and it was clear that the two men did not get along well.

When Lyndon Johnson chose Hubert Humphrey as his Vice President in 1964, he treated Humphrey in a very disrespectful way, similar to what had occurred to Johnson under Kennedy. Humphrey was ruined in his later Presidential candidacy by having to endorse and support the Vietnam War, a war he had grave doubts about, and was often left out of important cabinet meetings.

When Nixon became President, he looked at his Vice President, Spiro Agnew, in a less than respectful way, and just allowed Agnew to do “dirty work” of attacking liberals and the news media, and refused to keep him informed about many policies, and let him resign due to scandal, without a word of support.

When Nixon chose Gerald Ford after Agnew resigned, he saw him as a lightweight, who would insure his own survival in the Watergate scandal, an assumption that Nixon was totally wrong about!

George McGovern chose Thomas Eagleton in 1972, without any knowledge of his mental treatments and then, effectively abandoned him for Sargent Shriver, a Kennedy brother in law.

Gerald Ford got along well with Nelson Rockefeller as his Vice President, but dropped him in favor of Bob Dole when he ran in 1976, a move that probably caused his defeat.

When Ronald Reagan chose George H. W. Bush in 1980, the two men did not trust each other, and had been major rivals, and although Bush worked hard for Reagan, there was no personal chemistry between them, and the Bushes were never invited to stay at the White House under the Reagan Administration.

Walter Mondale chose Geraldine Ferraro in 1984, without knowing about the illegal activities of her husband, and they did not seem very close during the campaign.

George H. W. Bush did not have much confidence, or give much authority, to his Vice President, Dan Quayle, who was a major burden during his administration, due to Quayle’s blunders and misstatements.

Michael Dukakis and Lloyd Bentsen seemed like oil and water, when they ran together in 1988.

Much the same can be said for Bob Dole and Jack Kemp in the 1996 Presidential campaign.

The combination of Al Gore and Joe Lieberman never seemed to click during the 2000 Presidential campaign, and Lieberman publicly called for giving up the fight for Florida’s electoral votes when Gore was still suing for a recount against George W. Bush.

In 2004, John Kerry and John Edwards did not get along very well, as Edwards was very much his own man in his own mind.

And sadly, the same holds true for John McCain and Sarah Palin, with her becoming a major headache, embarrassment, and burden in 2008.

The only times running mates really seemed to work well together were:

Hubert Humphrey and Edmund Muskie in the 1968 campaign.

Jimmy Carter and Walter Mondale in the Carter Presidency, with Mondale practically seen as co-President.

Bill Clinton and Al Gore in the Clinton Presidency, until the time of the Monica Lewinsky scandal, when there was a falling out between the two men, which affected the 2000 Presidential campaign.

George W. Bush and Dick Cheney in the second Bush Presidency, although their relationship started to deteriorate in the second term.

Barack Obama and Joe Biden, presently, in the Obama Presidency, working very well together, as united as Carter and Mondale were in the 1970s

This is all discussed as reality in our history as Mitt Romney edges closer to the Presidential nomination of his party.

And even if, somehow, Rick Santorum, or someone else ends up as the Republican nominee, who is chosen to be his Vice Presidential running mate will be crucial to the campaign, and if he wins, to the office of Vice President, and to the nation.

The Tragedy Of The Republican Party: A Split Personality Outside The Mainstream!

Ronald Leave a comment

Chris Matthews on MSNBC this evening summarized the tragedy of the Republican Party: that it has been “hijacked” by disparate groups that cause the party grief!

First, we have what Matthews calls the “Dixiecrats”, the Southern segregationists, who left the Democratic Party after the passage of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 under President Lyndon B. Johnson.

Then, due to the school prayer decision (Engle V Vitale) and abortion rights decision (Roe V Wade) of the Supreme Court, the “Moral Majority” or “Christian Coalition” or “Evangelical Right” went over to the Republican Party in the 1970s.

Finally, conservative “hawkish” Democrats, dissatisfied with the nomination of George McGovern in 1972 and President Jimmy Carter in 1976 also went over to the Republicans as the “neoconservatives”.

The result has been a “split personality” party which has marginalized itself more and more over the years, and moved away from the mainstream of America, as the Republican Party was until the mid 1970s.

Unless Jon Huntsman can, somehow, gain a surge and make a major fight for the GOP nomination, the Republican Party is going to remain outside the mainstream of America!

Historical Reality Of Iowa (Top Three) And New Hampshire (Top Two) Are The Only Choices For Presidential Nomination Of Either Party

Ronald Leave a comment

All of the candidates for the Republican Presidential nomination contend they will go on, even if they perform poorly in Iowa and New Hampshire.

But the historical reality is that unless one ends up in the top three in Iowa AND the top two in New Hampshire, there is no future for such a candidate.

The only exceptions are Bill Clinton in 1992 in Iowa in 4th place behind “favorite son” Tom Harkin, “Uncommitted”, and Paul Tsongas, but Harkin winning 76 percent of the vote; and John McCain, who in 2008 in Iowa ran behind Mike Huckabee, Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson, but lost to Thompson for third place only by a total of 424 votes. NEVER has anyone in either party ending up lower than second place in New Hampshire won the Presidential nomination of either political party!

Thus, only five Iowa third or fourth place finishers have ended up winning New Hampshire and being the nominee: Bill Clinton fourth in 1992, Michael Dukakis third in 1988, George McGovern third in 1972, John McCain fourth in 2008, and George H W Bush third in 1988.

So, assuming the polls are correct, Jon Huntsman (not really competing in Iowa), Michele Bachmann, Rick Perry, and probably Newt Gingrich, are “toast”, with Mitt Romney, Ron Paul and probably Rick Santorum (due to a late surge at the proper time), the real contenders in New Hampshire.

That would mean that Rick Santorum would become the candidate of the “social conservatives”, but the odds are that Mitt Romney will win New Hampshire and go on to become the GOP nominee for President in 2012 against President Obama!

George McGovern’s Advice To President Obama: Worth Considering And Pursuing!

Ronald Leave a comment

Former Senator and 1972 Democratic Presidential nominee George McGovern, now 89, has just published a “Letter To President Obama” in the September issue of Harper’s Magazine, and what he wrote deserves our and the President’s attention.

McGovern, much loved by those who supported him 40 years ago, including this author, said that President Obama has faced greater economic challenge but also greater attacks from the opposing party than anyone since Franklin D. Roosevelt.

McGovern said Obama should pursue the following ideas:

1. Withdraw from Afghanistan over the next year, as no one has ever been able to overcome that nation in war, and it would save a trillion dollars or more over time.

2. Withdraw most of our troops from overseas commitments, as it is no longer necessary in the modern world to have so many troops overseas, and it would save trillions of dollars.

3. Withdraw our troops from the Islamic nations, as they see our military presence as a sign of American and Christian imperialism over their holy lands and territories.

4. Find ways to cut the defense budget over time, by getting rid of unnecessary missile systems and the returning of troops to America, with the amount on defense being cut from the present $700 billion to $500 billion and eventually to $200 billion through the use of intelligence utilized by the Department of Homeland Security.

5. Tax the wealthy the way they used to be assessed, bringing in large amounts of additional revenue to the nation.

6. Spend money on health care through nationalizing Medicare for all; providing government supported educational opportunity for all at the college level; and building high speed rail systems that will lower the energy drain and the power of oil over our lives.

While it might be argued that there is no way to pursue all of these goals in the short run, it certainly is worth consideration, although in reality the accomplishment of much of this is hard to conceive in the present political climate.

However, there is a growing feeling in this country, and even in the Republican Party, that our overseas commitments MUST be cut as we can no longer afford the kind of financial burden that we are dealing with at this time in our history.

Much of our focus must be on improving our own country which is in dire need of domestic investment at this time, and cutting of foreign commitments as long as we have good intelligence gathering, excellent military special forces, and the ability to use drones and other technology to fight the enemies we have in this world!