What Ails the Democrats: A Look at Party of the People by Patrick Ruffini

Posted on February 10, 2025 by billmanzi

Party of the People: Inside the Multiracial Populist Coalition Remaking the GOP by Patrick Ruffini

My rating: 5 of 5 stars


A book written by a Republican that Democrats should be paying attention to. Patrick Ruffini wrote this book before the 2024 election, and for those who have expressed some shock at the Donald Trump victory maybe a look at some of the key data contained in this book might have lessened that shock or helped to explain it after the fact.

I picked up knowledge of the book from the Ezra Klein podcast that produced a fascinating show with Ruffini. I do not think you can review this book without a reference to the book “The Emerging Democratic Majority” by John Judis and Roy Teixeira (and Ruffini refers to it often) in framing the discussion. (They have since written a follow-up, “Where Have All the Democrats Gone?”)

Judis and Teixeira, in 2002, forecasted, with some caveats, that the demographic tide that was increasing minority numbers in the United States would accrue to the electoral benefit of the Democratic Party. The assumption was that Hispanics, and Asians, would continue to vote predominantly for the Democratic Party. In combination with increasing Democratic strength with the professional class this theory of the case had Democrats emerging with an electoral base that would make them the majority party. I remember discussions of Texas being in play. I have, of course, oversimplified the Judis-Teixeira theory, but it will suffice for this review.

Ruffini gets to hard data, which was available to everybody before the 2024 election. We know that the basic divide in the country is between those with a college degree and those without a degree. The “professional class” had been, traditionally, solidly Republican. That has changed dramatically in favor of the Democratic Party. The Democratic hold on the white working class, a traditional source of strength over the years, has been slipping. It is not slipping any longer but is in free fall. To go back to Judis-Teixeira these losses for the Democrats would theoretically be made up by the strong hold of the party on so called minority groups. That is where Ruffini starts this evaluation.

The 2020 Presidential data, even with a Trump loss, should have set off alarm bells for Democrats. It would appear to me that no alarms were sounded. Some examples:

“With the suddenness of an Infinity Gauntlet finger snap Miami-Dade reset the conventional wisdom, thrusting the political world into a new reality, one where a second Trump term was within sight. In the largest Hispanic metropolis in America, Trump had gone from a 29-point drubbing four years earlier to just a 7 point deficit, a 22-point swing. …Trump had surged all along the Mexican border with Texas, including a 55-point swing in rural StarrCounty in the Rio Grande Valley, nearly winning a county that Clinton had captured four years earlier by 60 points. He won next door Zapata County, the first Republican since 1920 to do so.”

Ruffini, Patrick Party of the People pg. 10

These were not simply outliers, but reflective of nationwide trends. What was the constant? The college/non college divide was now being reflected in minority communities.

As Ruffini dives into the data he gets to one of his theories of the case. The gravitational pull of college educated white liberals has pulled the Democratic Party so far left that they have moved way beyond the ideological comfort zone of much of its rank and file, including and especially working class minorities.

“The ‘Latinx’ debacle provides an obvious and extreme example. A 2020 Pew Research Center study found that the gender-neutral alternative to Latino or Latina is known by fewer than one in four U.S. Hispanics, and used by just 3 percent. When we asked in a 2022 survey what term was best to use to describe Hispanics or Latinos in America, 9 percent of white liberal Democrats said Latinx, but zero Hispanics did. …Democratic representative Ruben Gallego of Arizona has pleaded with the parties allies to stop. ‘To be clear my office is not allowed to use ‘Latinx’ in official communications,’ tweeted Representative Gallego in December 2021. ‘When Latino politicos use the term it is largely to appease white rich progressives who think that is the term we use.’”

Ruffini, Patrick Party of the People pg. 109

You might think that is an example that does not mean much, but it is reflective of a mindset that is separating key constituencies from the Democratic Party. The drift of the working class away from the Democratic Party is not new. Ruffini goes back to the 1976 political science journal article by Everett Carll Ladd (link at my blog post.) The “hard hat riot” in New York where construction workers attacked Vietnam War protestors was an early sign of the divergence. That divergence moved to the cultural, where the chasm has just continued to widen. After continued labor support for the Nixon position on the Vietnam war a young aide named Patrick Buchanan saw the possibilities and outlined them in a memo to Nixon:

“It should be our focus to constantly speak to, to assure, to win, to aid, to promote the president’s natural constituency-which is now the working men and women of the country, the common man, the Roosevelt New Dealer. There is a great ferment in American politics; these, quite candidly, are our people now.”

Ruffini, Patrick Party of the People pg. 166

Even the younger Buchanan saw the potential that he would attempt to exploit as a Presidential candidate many years later, and that Donald Trump would successfully exploit in 2016.

There is just so much more to talk about on this subject. Ruffini, using data, has shown some things that we knew, but some things that were maybe not so well known.

1. The main split in the electorate is between those with college degrees and those that do not have degrees.
2. This divide, which had principally shown itself in the white working class, has begun to spread to other segments of the population (minority groups that had been seen as reliably Democratic)
3. The Democratic losses can be attributed to a misreading of the cultural values of some of these groups. Kitchen table issues, fear of crime, and a strong dislike of illegal immigration are key issues for many in these groups, with these issues not at the top of the Democratic Party agenda, or where they were the messaging was poor.

I thought the last quarter of the book was weaker than the strong start, but it gets five stars as the message, especially for Democrats, is critically important to understand. The follow-up by Judis-Teixeira has to be next up.


The Ezra Klein Interview with Patrick Ruffini

https://www.youtube.com/embed/HL_YhlMbheQ?si=9Kh4ZdgH5G4r_H_X

Liberalism Upside Down by Everett Carll Ladd Jr.

An interview with Ruy Teixeira
https://www.youtube.com/embed/XGdSSJ6uVHw?si=Otk0xJ2nkBPj80df



View all my reviews

Posted in Books | Tagged , | Leave a comment

A Look at Reagan: His Life and Legend

Posted on February 1, 2025 by billmanzi

Reagan: His Life and Legend by Max Boot

My rating: 5 of 5 stars


Max Boot has produced a biography of the Gipper that he explicitly says is neither hit job or hagiography, and I believe that the book bears that out. It is an even handed approach that recognizes the positives without ignoring the negatives.

Like everything else these days the issue of Donald Trump comes up in the introduction. “Did Reaganism contain the seeds of Trumpism?” I think the reader can make those judgements on their own, but Boot gives us plenty to think about.

This book is a genuine biography, and not simply a look at the Reagan political career. I learned a lot, as there was much about Reagan’s early life that I did not know. Boot has done a good job on the early life, and there is a lot to cover. Most certainly there is a lot of ground to cover. Might have been enough for multiple volumes that would have allowed for a more detailed look at the political life, but I have no complaints.

Reagan, to his critics, was always considered to be an intellectual lightweight. I have been of that belief myself, but Boot shares the complexities of Reagan, and I think the truth is more nuanced. His early life shows us Reagan with a tough childhood, and plenty of excuses for failure. But he was deeply ambitious, and he made his way out of his home roots to first become a star of radio, as a broadcaster, and while thriving in that profession Reagan showed himself willing to reach higher by leaving the job for an opportunity in Hollywood, signing a studio contract that led to his eventually becoming a legitimate, and popular, movie star. His family struggled financially, and that fact led Reagan, much like many Americans, to idolize FDR, and to become a New Deal advocate. Of course this changed, and Boot does an excellent job of showing us that evolution of the Reagan political thought and affiliation.

Reagan’s evolution started with his ascendancy to the Presidency of the Screen Actors Guild at a time when the red scare was engulfing the nation, and Hollywood. His strong anti-communism started here. Boot does a good job of mixing the life with the politics, with good insight on his first marriage to actress Jane Wyman, and how Reagan’s increasing interest in politics was a contributing factor to the breakup.

Reagan, despite being a legitimate star at Warner Brothers, eventually lost his star luster and was in difficult shape professionally. He ended up getting other than movie gigs, eventually becoming the host of the General Electric Theatre on the new medium of television. He was the host of this show for eight years, and a corporate spokesman for G.E., traveling the country to push G.E. products. His political interests continued to sharpen, and his political leanings moved right. By the time that journey was complete Reagan was ready to hit the political stage. He made a tremendous, and positive, impression with the Republican Party by his speechmaking on behalf of Barry Goldwater in the 1964 Presidential election. Reagan as “the great communicator” on the political scene, started here.

Reagan’s ascent on the political scene could not have occurred without the support of Nancy Davis, who became his second wife and guiding light. Boot gives Nancy Reagan the central role that any biography of Ronald Reagan should.

Reagan’s election as Governor of California in 1966 was central to his eventual rise to the Presidency. We get a look at the campaign, and the players who helped him to win that race against incumbent Pat Brown (father of future California Governor Jerry Brown)

Reagan’s tenure as Governor gave us a look at the governing style of Reagan, which he would carry into the Presidency. Reagan spoke like an ideologue, and often times used some fairly harsh rhetoric. His “reputation” as an ideological warrior of the right gave him chops with the right, but Reagan, when faced with difficult choices, showed himself willing to cut a deal. His eventual compromises as Governor, and President, included concessions on abortion, on tax increases, which happened on more than one occasion, and even on guns. These compromises just would not be possible today for any Republican. Reagan showed himself to be a governing pragmatist. This pragmatism is always overlooked by Republicans who have created a legend of the Reagan Presidency that does not always comport to reality.

Reagan’s flirtation with the Presidency is obviously a big part of his story. The unsuccessful challenge to a sitting Republican President, Gerald Ford, was a contributing factor in the Ford loss in 1976 to Jimmy Carter. That fascinating campaign is a great part of the book.

Any biography of Reagan has to look at his central role in the relationship with the then U.S.S.R. Reagan famously said of his idea on how the cold war would end: “We win, they lose.” He was willing to vastly increase military spending, and most certainly was an internationalist. His ideas of the possibility of doing away with nuclear weapons alarmed his own advisors, and his negotiations with General Secretary Gorbachev are covered extensively. Reagan is seen by many as the driving force behind the policies that led to the breakup of the Soviet Union. Boot is not entirely convinced on that score, but Reagan can fairly be given much credit for that eventual result.

The pratfalls of the Reagan presidency, including Iran-Contra, are of course covered, and Reagan does not come off well. He was always a delegator, but delegators tend to get themselves in trouble when the staff is divided, or worse goes off on adventures that may be illegal. Reagan, by the end of his Presidency, had some staff changes that did not serve him well. Losing Jim Baker as Chief of Staff, and bringing in Don Regan, proved to be a disaster for him.

Reagan as an individual gets a close look, and we see that despite his geniality and warmth to people he was essentially a loner, with even close staff never really getting anywhere near him.

Boot’s book is a serious work on Ronald Reagan, and I think a fair one. I rate it highly, and it brought to me a better understanding of the 40th President of the United States, Ronald Reagan


https://www.youtube.com/embed/MfQGQeE57IY?si=0AKE5w195JCUKFPk

https://www.youtube.com/embed/WX00QkvK-mQ?si=A9DoM2ryzU5-mRca



View all my reviews

Posted in Books | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Look at “The Price of Power: How Mitch McConnell Mastered the Senate, Changed America, and Lost His Party” by Michael Tackett

Posted on December 21, 2024 by billmanzi

The Price of Power: How Mitch McConnell Mastered the Senate, Changed America, and Lost His Party by Michael Tackett

My rating: 5 of 5 stars


A fine biography of the longtime Republican Senate leader who has just stepped down from his leadership position, which he has held since 2007. McConnell is the longest serving party leader in Senate history and certainly one of the most consequential Senate leaders to ever occupy the position. As a Democrat I certainly found many of McConnell’s actions objectionable but that is not important for the purposes of the review. McConnell, in several key areas, has had an outsized impact on the results, whether it be campaign finance, the Supreme Court, and politically strengthening the GOP in the Senate.

One of the best aspects of the book is the truth that came from McConnell himself. When called out for some positions he took earlier in his career (he actually supported campaign finance reform at one point) McConnell simply admits to political expediency as a justification. He is also quite open about some of the early career fights that happened in Kentucky in a way that you might not expect from someone as tight lipped as he is. He was even willing to admit gaining political revenge on a fellow student who had worked against him in a run for a student leadership position. When that fellow popped up on his radar screen many years later McConnell exacted revenge. He has a long memory.

Prior to reading the book I was unaware that McConnell had contracted polio as a child. The story of how his mother fought for his health in difficult circumstances, with his father being in wartime service, brought home how mothers can influence, and in some cases save their children with love and care.

McConnell’s actions in so many areas have stoked controversy, and deep animus from Democrats. One of these areas is obviously the Supreme Court. This story does not start with Derrick Garland, but rather with Robert Bork. Bork, nominated by President Reagan to the Supreme Court, was rejected by the Senate in a highly contentious process. McConnell, as he would later on the issue of filibusters, issued a warning that the Democrats were changing the rules of the game in a way that could bring regrets, or gridlock, later. He debated then Senator Biden on the issue.

“McConnell had his law journal article on Supreme Court nominations entered into the record and stood by its central thesis, that the Senate should judge nominees by their qualifications more than their philosophies, which he argued was the province of the president. ‘It was pretty clear to this Senator back in those days, and it is still clear to him today, that if we decide that the Senate and the President are on coequal footing on these nominations -in other words, any inquiry that is relevant to the Senate-we have a formula for gridlock in the future. What disturbs me is that if a majority of the Senators in this body today decided for whatever reasons that the test is no longer competence or qualifications or a variety of other questions of fitness, but that we instead should look at all of the criteria that a President, any President, might take into account, we have a formula for gridlock. If the Senate happens to be conservative at a given moment and the President is a liberal, he might never be able to get a nominee approved.’”

“The Price of Power: How Mitch McConnell Mastered the Senate, Changed America, and Lost His Party” pg. 132

Without getting into the argument on Bork McConnell’s prediction ended up becoming reality.

On the filibuster McConnell objected to the Democrats filibustering many George W. Bush nominees to the federal appellate courts. Filibustering judges had not been the norm, and McConnell issued a warning:

“The sad thing for the Senate as an institution is that the old view that you would never kill a judge on a filibuster is over, and one day there will be a Democratic president and those chickens will come home to roost, McConnell said in December 2023. Democrats, he said, were being ‘very short sighted because they’re just living in the present and not thinking of the impact of this on them when they get somebody they like in the White House. Now there will be no barriers against defeating liberal judges in the future…I think it’s unfortunate but I think it is with us forever.”

“The Price of Power: How Mitch McConnell Mastered the Senate, Changed America, and Lost His Party” pg. 185

Another McConnell prediction that was prescient. And to boot there was the course of action chosen by Democratic Leader Harry Reid, who, tiring of GOP filibusters against Barack Obama nominees, enacted the so called “nuclear option,” eliminating the filibuster by a rule change on nominees for the lower courts. McConnell issued the requisite warnings of payback there as well, and when the time came that rule change came back to bite the Democrats hard. They were unable to filibuster Republican nominees in the future (see Trump, Donald) but McConnell, using Reid’s actions as precedent, moved to abolish the filibuster with a GOP majority, for Supreme Court nominees as well, paving the way for straight party line votes for Supreme Court justices. McConnell, to his credit, did indeed play a long game. Democrats, to his point, played a very short game.

McConnell was a major player in the ultimate destruction of the campaign finance reforms pushed by John McCain and others, including Massachusetts Congressman Marty Meehan. He was a block of granite, fighting against campaign finance reform, and ultimately prevailing. The current system, essentially a free for all allowing money to flow largely unregulated, can be laid at his feet. And he is not at all regretful.

The book gives a quick reflection, by McConnell, on the Senate career of Lyndon Johnson. McConnell read “The Master of the Senate” by Robert Caro, and while acknowledging the LBJ skill also pointed to “luck” as a factor in the Johnson success. If he did read it he likely did not do so with great attention, as luck had very little to do with the Johnson ascension to Leader in the Senate.

McConnell’s blocking of Merrick Garlands nomination to the Supreme Court in Barack Obama’s last year cannot be attributed to past actions by the Democrats. It was simply a naked power play designed to stop Obama from making an appointment. Much like his earlier admonitions to the Democrats on the filibuster this action will likely, at some point, rebound to the dismay of the GOP. So be it.

The Mitch McConnell we see is someone geared towards winning elections for the GOP, and willing to use the levers of power to achieve his objectives. He has to be considered one of the greatest legislative tacticians in the history of the Senate, even if you are on the other side of the political fence. Joe Biden has shown that McConnell can be a productive legislative partner where there is perceived benefit for his side. He has been considered, by Democrats, to be the personification of everything bad about the GOP. But as McConnell brings his career to a close he is increasingly seen that way by the MAGA movement that has taken over the Republican Party. Donald Trump has referred to him as that “old crow” and he has been openly attacked, both in the Senate and outside the Senate, for opinions that no longer match up with MAGA beliefs. McConnell has been old school on NATO, and especially on U.S. aid to Ukraine. These views, his desire for legislative order, and his open dismissal of MAGA affiliated candidates for Senate, have not endeared him to the MAGA faithful. Tackett’s title says it all. He lost his Party, even while producing for them, great victories.

This is an outstanding book, and I highly recommend it. Even for Democrats.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/mfCoLNphq3I?si=RUW6aibFXtwxAaFU


Mitch McConnell’s gift package for the Kentucky Derby included a bottle of Old Crow bourbon, to have some fun with the Donald Trump designation of him as an Old Crow.

Donald Trump was not the only President to make fun of Mitch McConnell.



View all my reviews

Posted in Books | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Seabrook Financial Report 2023

Posted on November 12, 2024 by billmanzi

Budget season in Seabrook has started. As budgets get prepared it is always vital to understand the financial dynamics involved in past budget and tax decisions. 2023 had some truly unique financial headwinds, and this report helps us to understand those while providing data to help to formulate future budgets. I will post the draft 2025 budgets in the next day or so.

Finance Report Executive Summary 2023Download
Seabrook Financial Report 2023Download
Posted in Seabrook | Tagged , | Leave a comment

A Look at “War” by Bob Woodward.

Posted on November 2, 2024 by billmanzi

War by Bob Woodward

My rating: 4 of 5 stars


Another book by Woodward, and like most of the prior Woodward books I could not resist. It was a quick, enjoyable read. As always Woodward managed to extract some information/quotes that created some pre-publication buzz around the book. Nobody is better at that than Bob Woodward. He had his usual access to all the top policy makers and with that access authored a pretty good book on the foreign policy challenges that the Biden Administration has faced in the Middle East, and with the Ukraine-Russia war.

I would characterize Woodward as coming from the traditionalist school of U.S. foreign policy, believing in NATO and a larger role for the U.S. in maintaining stability in the world. The book gives us a great look at the run-up to the Russian invasion, and the great work by the U.S. intel agencies in discerning, and then publicizing the Russian intent to invade. The Biden Administration interactions with Putin pre-invasion are highlighted, and for me were some of the best parts of the book.

The conflict in the Middle East, precipitated by the brutal attack by Hamas on Israel, and the Biden Administration response to the tough Israeli military action, is also very well covered. The personal dynamic between President Biden and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is fascinating, and Woodward digs in there. These two have a long and complicated history together. Biden had a difficult hand to play, trying to walk a line that protected Israel and defended the Israeli right to defend itself, but also tried to limit the damage to Palestinians living in Gaza. Biden’s cease-fire efforts, which continue to this day, have failed not because of a lack of effort or smarts but because the principal combatants did not, and do not, desire one. Not even Kissinger would be able to separate combatants that wish to continue fighting.

As I mentioned above Woodward, to me, is a foreign policy traditionalist. While he is relating the actions of the participants he ultimately expresses the view that the Biden Administration has handled the multiple foreign policy challenges very well. There were many items in the book that could be highlighted, but I chose one that shows Woodward’s strong grasp of history and brings forward some of the challenges involved with Germany and NATO. It has often been pointed out that Germany tends to be a laggard when it comes to required defense spending under NATO guidelines. With the U.S. urging the Germans to provide Ukraine the Leopard II tank the Germans resisted.

“But the Chancellor is not enthusiastic,’ she said. ‘He said in one of our meetings, ‘Can you imagine the images of German tanks sweeping over Europe? How are people going to react to that?’”

Woodward, Bob “War” pg. 147

There are many, beyond the Russians, that prefer that the Germans not rearm. Ultimately Biden was able to get the Germans to provide the Leopard, but it took a bit of skill and a deal. The larger issue of Germany remilitarizing is a story for another day.

If you have been an avid newspaper reader some of the book may be familiar, but Woodward always get below the surface. I do recommend the book, and I wonder who will be doing these types of books when Woodward stops.


https://www.youtube.com/embed/lKsiBV_jdOM?si=KiGfF2Mf4KzLa_2m



View all my reviews

Posted in Books | Tagged , | Leave a comment

A Look at “At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House” by H.R. McMaster

Posted on October 26, 2024 by billmanzi

At War with Ourselves: My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House by H.R. McMaster

My rating: 3 of 5 stars


He is no Kissinger.

Where to start with this book? I picked this up with a sense of respect for McMaster based on his rank and just general knowledge of his career. After reading the book that respect has not gone away but is diminished.

In terms of the book itself, and in light of McMaster constantly citing Kissinger, I have to make the comparison to the Kissinger memoirs. Kissinger’s first volume dealt with his tenure as national security adviser to President Nixon, the same position that McMaster held. The difference is stark, with Kissinger offering great detail about policy and tactics and strategy that went into developing that policy. It was well known that Kissinger, during his tenure, had an extremely poor relationship with Secretary of State William Rogers, and a rocky relationship with defense Secretary Mel Laird. Despite that Kissinger did not use his memoirs to even scores. He went out of his way to acknowledge these differences but did not score settle, In fact Kissinger assumed some measure of blame for the poor relationships, and actually expressed regret for some of his actions. In this book McMaster constantly slams Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Defense Secretary Jim Mattis. They are the bad guys and he is the policy white knight. McMaster tells us of a Zoom call with Kissinger:

“I told him that around the time of our lunch together in my office, I realized that I faced a fundamental choice of either fighting off those who were engaged in subterfuge with the president and were weaponizing various media against me or ignoring the noise and doing the best job I could. I chose the latter. Kissinger told me in his distinctive German accent, ‘You made the right choice; they would have eaten you alive.’”

H.R. McMaster At War with Ourselves My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House pg. 137

I think McMaster may have missed Kissinger’s essential point there, but I am not surprised.

McMaster left the job after being fired by Trump. It is amazing that he lasted for as long as he did (13 months)and despite being at odds with Tump on so many national security issues he chose to blame those folks that he believes undermined him with Trump. He does not appear to believe that fundamental differences with Trump on NATO, on Russia and Vladimir Putin, on North Korea, Afghanistan, and on the fundamental role in the world to be played by the U.S. contributed to his ouster.
McMaster tries to give us the two-step on the relative merits of the Trump Administration foreign policy while poking big holes in his own position. We get some praise for the effectiveness of the Trump foreign policy, coupled with his belief that Trump was in thrall to Putin. He describes a meeting between Trump and Putin:

“Putin used his time with Trump to launch a sophisticated and sustained campaign to manipulate him. Profilers and psychological operations officers at Russia’s intelligence services must have been working overtime. … Putin got the desired effect from the meeting and the dinner.”

H.R. McMaster At War with Ourselves My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House pg. 188-189

I doubt the Russian profilers had to work overtime. The serious differences between Trump and McMaster on NATO are also highlighted, with some lip service given by McMaster to the need for NATO members to increase their own defense spending. Aside from that the ignorance of how and why NATO was formed, and that the true beneficiary of NATO division or destruction is Russia, is principally ignored. But McMaster does take plenty of time to question why some people are uneasy over the influence in U.S. elections of Vlad Putin. I am not quite sure how McMaster believed he could effectively serve a President with whom he had such major disagreements on fundamental policy.

In areas where McMaster does get into policy it is my view that we were talking small ball. Some tactical victories but nothing that would bring any comparisons to Kissinger. We do get plenty of criticism of Mattis, with Mattis (and Tillerson) taking the hit for the lack of additional achievement.

As a final note on how this guy, in my opinion, got some pretty basic stuff wrong McMaster compares Trump to LBJ.

“I saw in Trump trail similar to those in Lyndon Johnson. As with LBJ, Trump’s insecurities and desire for attention left him perpetually distracted and vulnerable to a mainstream media that was vehemently opposed to him. Also, like LBJ, he had a loose relationship with the truth and a tendency toward hyperbole.”

H.R. McMaster At War with Ourselves My Tour of Duty in the Trump White House pg. 67

Everybody is entitled to their opinion, but this one betrays a rather fundamental lack of understanding. LBJ , like him or not, is arguably the President with the greatest hands on knowledge about how government works in U.S. history. Trump has no real idea about how government works and is not interested in learning. Johnson, even when his policy was wrong, was driving towards his policy goal(s). Johnson was not distracted in the least. He worked around the clock, and when the time came he gave up the levers of power voluntarily. Pretty poor comparison.

Despite my many objections I am glad I read the book and I can say that it is not likely that H.R. McMaster will be working in any administration, Democratic or Republican, in the future.



https://www.youtube.com/embed/NXGQGgxpM3w?si=oqOJ_He57Qrk7Sh3





View all my reviews

Posted in Books | Tagged , , , , | Leave a comment

The Hitler Apologists or Sympathy For the Devil

Posted on September 7, 2024 by billmanzi

I recently bumped into a Tucker Carlson interview on Twitter with Darryl Cooper, a man Carlson described as “may be the best and most honest popular historian in the United States.” I had not heard of Cooper before, and being very interested in history thought I would give it a listen. A multitude of subjects were covered but for the purposes of this post I will focus on Cooper’s take on World Wat II and Winston Churchill.

Cooper essentially gives us a word salad when asked why he has started a “project” on World War II. In a seemingly benign way Cooper expresses the thought that there is a mythology to World War II, and a state mindset on that war. Essentially Cooper identifies “groupthink” on World War II, and Carlson joins in with the innocuous thought that “questions” that might produce answers that contravene that group think should be a good thing. Never identified is what the “groupthink” actually is? Is that groupthink the idea that Hitler was the aggressor and that the genocidal gassing of millions of people was evil? Again Cooper treads carefully, claiming that this groupthink prevents historians from “understanding how the Germans saw the war.” The fact that there is a vast historical record, and writing, on exactly that topic appears to have eluded Cooper.

While historian Cooper tries to tread carefully, claiming that his description of Churchill as “the main villain of World War II” does not indicate support for Churchill’s enemies he just cannot hold back his real thoughts. Cooper does not deal with Nazi racial policies but jumps right to the German invasion of the Soviet Union, and the millions who perished as a consequence of that invasion. Cooper deals not so much with combat deaths but with the German “failure to plan” for the millions of POW and “civilians” that were going to “come under their control’ as a consequence of the German invasion. Cooper references letters from German commanders at the front back to the German High Command indicating that these millions could not be fed. These millions, according to Cooper, were POWs and others that had been “rounded up” and placed in “camps.” He fails to address who the non-combatants actually were. Cooper mentions that in one of these letters, from a Camp commandant, the suggestion was made that rather than letting these millions starve to death the more humane method might be to finish them off quickly. So we can surmise that quite possibly “poor German planning” led to the “humane” liquidation of millions of people.

Some rudimentary analysis of the historic record shows how Cooper, according to Tucker the best historian in the United States, seems to have missed or deliberately omitted key, established facts. (Groupthink?) As Adolph Hitler planned the invasion of the U.S.S.R. he addressed the fate of some of the “detainees” that would come under German control through the now infamous “Commissar Order.”

“The war against Russia (Hitler said) will be such that it cannot be conducted in a knightly fashion. This struggle is one of ideologies and racial differences and will have to be conducted with unprecedented, unmerciful and unrelenting harshness. All officers will have to rid themselves of obsolete ideologies. I know that the necessity for such means of waging war is beyond the comprehension of you generals but…I insist absolutely that my orders be executed without contradiction. The commissars are the bearers of ideologies directly opposed to National Socialism. Therefore the Commissars will be liquidated. German soldiers guilty of breaking international law…will be excused. Russia has not participated in the Hague Convention and therefore has no rights under it.”

Shirer William The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich pg. 830

Hitler pre-ordained the fate of a group of these Cooper referenced “detainees” through this order to liquidate Soviet officials in advance of the German invasion. Cooper referenced the “poor planning” of the Germans relative to the feeding of all the new detainees. In fact the Germans appear to have planned very well. One of the Nazi “experts” on the East was Alfred Rosenberg, who was one of the group charged by Hitler with drawing up plans for the German occupation and exploitation of the newly conquered areas to the east. Rosenberg, in advance of the invasion, told his collaborators:

“The job of feeding the German people (he said) stands at the top of the list of Germany’s claims on the East. The southern (Russian) territories will have to serve… for the feeding of the German people. We see absolutely no reason for any obligation on our part to feed also the Russian people with the products of that surplus territory. We know that this is a harsh necessity, bare of any feelings… The future will hold very hard years in store for the Russians.”

Shirer William The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich pg. 833

Shirer observed that these would be “very hard years indeed, since the Germans were deliberately planning to starve to death millions of them.”

For those that might discount the importance of Rosenberg Herman Goering committed the policy to writing:

“The German Administration in these territories (the directive declared) may well attempt to mitigate the consequences of the famine which undoubtedly will take place and to accelerate the return to primitive agricultural conditions. However, these measures will not avert famine. Any attempt to save the population there from death by starvation by importing surpluses from the black-soil zone would be at the expense of supplies to Europe. It would reduce Germany’s staying power in the war, and would undermine Germany’s and Europe’s power to resist the blockade. This must be clearly and absolutely understood.”

Shirer William The Rise and Fall of the Third Reich pg. 833

German policy was laid out in advance of the invasion of the U.S.S.R, and that policy included starving millions of Russians to death. The historical record is quite clear on that. (Groupthink?)

Hitler had pre-ordained the fate of Soviet government officials. German occupiers, in all other conquered zones, targeted the Jewish population for detainment, “resettlement’ and ultimately extermination. It was no different in the Soviet invasion. A large group of the “detainees” referenced by Cooper were Jews rounded up by the “special task forces” sent into the occupied Russian territory (Einsatzgruppen) under the control of Heinrich Himmler. These “detainees” did not magically drop into German control, but were rounded up by Himmler and his henchmen. Cooper fails to mention this aspect of the invasion as well. (Mythology?)

It is not surprising to me that Carlson would engage in this type of nonsense. His motivations are not hard to figure out, and he referenced them in the interview. Yes the Ukraine war. What is puzzling to me is that more folks have not stepped up and condemned what is obviously an attempt to whitewash the atrocities committed by Hitler and Nazi Germany. Why is the media not asking major political figures if the massive casualties caused by the Germans on the eastern front were the result of poor planning? Does the GOP leadership and opinion leaders like Elon Musk believe that Darryl Cooper is one of the best historians in the United States?

There is much more to talk about on this subject, and the views expressed on Churchill shall be next.

The Carlson interview with Daryl Cooper.

Posted in History | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Look at “When the Clock Broke” by John Ganz

Posted on September 2, 2024 by billmanzi

When the Clock Broke: Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990s by John Ganz

My rating: 5 of 5 stars


I saw this new book and though I was not familiar with John Ganz I thought I would take a look. I am glad I did.

One of the book “blurbs” on the back cover comes from Rick Perlstein, the author of a series of books on the rise of the right in the GOP. (Before the Storm, Nixonland, The Invisible Bridge, and Reaganland.) This book made me think of those, and The Invisible Bridge might make a decent title for this book. We arrive at where we are today in the GOP not by accident, but through the efforts of those who pushed up against GOP orthodoxy over the years, mostly in a losing cause. Like the Goldwater debacle (for the GOP) in 1964 the ideological basis for a right wing resurgence was created through that loss, with an infrastructure that was not really visible to many, but was there and working. Ganz shows us how some of the losers of the 1990’s laid the groundwork for the Trump movement that has captured the GOP these days. In telling this story there likely will be much recollection of at least some of these events by readers, but Ganz manages to connect the dots in a way that has produced a fascinating and very readable book. I had a hard time putting it down.

Ganz recognizes some of the monumental changes that occurred in American society in the 90s. The hollowing out of the American manufacturing base, and the start of the devastation that change brought to some areas of the country, is front and center. In the view of Ganz that was the building block for what was to come. He then highlights some of the characters that seemed to grasp the changing dynamic, and tried to advantage themselves in ways that rejected “mainstream” Republicanism as well as the Democratic Party. Some of the tools in that toolbox look very familiar today.

One of the “characters” that Ganz pays attention to is David Duke, the neo-Nazi/Klan member who tried to break into Republican politics in Louisiana and then nationally. I remember Duke as a fringe candidate, with lots of condemnation from across the board. But Ganz brings some information that has to open your eyes a bit. That invisible bridge comes into view. When Duke ran for Governor against Edward Edwards (in Louisiana) in 1991 he got crushed 61% to 39%, and that is what I remember. But what I did not remember is that Klansman Duke won 55% of the white vote, and a whopping 69% of the white evangelical and fundamentalist vote. (Page 51)

Ganz brings us back Pat Buchanan, who many, including myself, believe to be the godfather of the MAGA movement. Buchanan was a few years ahead of the large wave that has swept the GOP, but he most certainly created many ripples that contributed. Buchanan, whose challenge to GOP President George H.W. Bush in the 1992 Republican primaries managed to wound Bush politically, hit some many of the themes that we see today. The book had so many pieces that jolted the memory, and many of those emanated from “Pitchfork Pat.” Reverence for the Confederacy, and for the monuments to the Confederacy, obviously is not new.

“In Georgia, with cameras in tow, he gazed up admiringly at Stone Mountain, the massive bas-relief monument to Robert E. Lee, Stonewall Jackson, and Jefferson Davis. He told gathered supporters there that the Voting Rights Act was ‘an act of regional discrimination against the South.’In the midst of a dramatic downpour, he stopped to lay flowers at the grave of his great-grandfather William Martin Buchanan, a Confederate soldier who he claimed had owned a plantation. He said that another great-grandfather ‘died on the way to Vicksburg’ during what he was calling ‘the war of northern aggression.’”

When the Clock Broke Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990s. Ganz, John pg. 167

The Civil War as a “war of northern aggression?” Let that sink in a bit. The movement away from GOP orthodoxy on free trade did not begin with Donald Trump. In a foreword to a book called “America Asleep: The Free Trade Syndrome and the Global Economic Challenge” Buchanan wrote:
“Suspicion of Japan is not only related to race…but to a sense that Tokyo’s trade policy is a bastard child of Hirohito’s imperial policy of 1941. It is related to a sense that Japan’s invasion of U.S. markets have been plotted at the highest level in Tokyo with the same thoroughness that Admiral [Isoroku] Yamamoto plotted Pearl Harbor, that Japan’s objective is to ‘go the economic road’ to acquire the hegemony in Asia and the world her army and navy were unable to win half a century ago.”

When the Clock Broke Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990s. Ganz, John pg. 176

Buchanan, an ardent free trader when he worked for Reagan, had now started the GOP movement away from free trade.

After his loss to Bush in the primaries Buchanan, with Bush looking to shore up the right, was granted a prominent speaking role at the GOP convention. His speech is considered by many to be the opening salvo in the “culture wars,” a term he used explicitly. It was a different world back then for sure but his attack on gays and abortion rights , amongst other things, managed to galvanize Democrats and tarnish George H.W. Bush.

“My friends this election is about more than who gets what. It is about who we are. It is about what we believe, and what we stand for as Americans. There is a religious war going on in this country. It is a cultural war, as critical to the kind of nation we shall be as was the Cold War itself, for this war is for the soul of America.”

When the Clock Broke Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990s. Ganz, John pg. 282

The speech led New York Times columnist Garry Wills to declare that George H.W. Bush was a “Prisoner of the Crazies.”

“The crazies are in charge. The fringe has taken over. A year earlier, Wills recalled, the televangelist Pat Robertson had published The New World Order, ‘arguing that the President’s gulf war, his protest achievement, was part of a diabolical plot to destroy America. By submitting to the U.N. and calling the world to its banner, President Bush was proclaiming the New World Order of the Antichrist.’”

When the Clock Broke Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990s. Ganz, John pg. 284-285

Even GOP hating on the Bush family did not start with Trump. The book is a bit unkind to George H.W. Bush, playing on some of the, for lack of a better term, goofy moments of his re-elect effort. Unkind as they were Bush simply being out of touch with average voters was a major reason for his loss.

Buchanan is, as mentioned, a key figure in this movement, and his communication skills made him prominent where others had been ignored.

Ganz pays some attention to the Ross Perot independent candidacy for President, which had so many goofy moments of its own.


Ganz did bring to us some people that are less well known but just as important to the book. Sam Francis is one of those folks. I would describe him as a “theoretician” of the movement to change the focus of the right in the GOP. I was not acquainted with him before this book but like Buchanan he has been an advocate for the change that we have seen in the GOP. His rhetoric is even harsher than Buchanan’s.

“What is really amazing about American society today is not that there is so much violence and resistance to authority but that there is so little, that there is not or has not long since been a full-scale violent revolution in the country against the domination and exploitation of the mass of the population by its rulers. A people that once shot government officials because they taxed tea and stamps now receives the intrusions of the Internal Revenue Service politely; a society that once declared its independence on the grounds of states rights now passively tolerates federal judges and civil servants who redraw the lines of electoral districts, decide where small children will go to school, let hardened criminals out of jail without punishment, and overturns local laws that are popularly passed and have been long enforced.”

When the Clock Broke Con Men, Conspiracists, and How America Cracked Up in the Early 1990s. Ganz, John pg. 368

Francis is a key thread that runs through this book, bringing real insight as to the origins of the turbulence that we see in our politics today. The changes in the GOP did not happen overnight. Ganz draws us an excellent roadmap, as did Perlstein in his earlier series. This is my first exposure to Ganz, and based on the excellence of this book I anticipate much more in the future. This book is highly recommended.


https://www.youtube.com/embed/Tuwkno7Czus?si=eJidUXvunnU2WgEQ


https://www.youtube.com/embed/2olwuAy3_og?si=fVdxE7hkz-JbSGHh




View all my reviews

Posted in Books | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

Waiting for Caro. A Look at “The Triumph and Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson by Joe Califano

Posted on July 27, 2024 by billmanzi

The Triumph and Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson: The White House Years by Joseph A. Califano Jr.

My rating: 4 of 5 stars


This book popped up in a Kindle fire sale so despite the fact that I am patiently waiting for Robert Caro to deliver the last installment of his magnificent series on LBJ I could not resist this book at the price.

Joe Califano had an up close look at how LBJ operated as President, serving as a chief domestic advisor to Johnson. Califano was named in 1965, serving at a time when the most activist Administration in history was enacting the most sweeping legislative program since the New Deal. The legislation enacted during this period changed the country forever. The Civil Rights Act, the Voting Rights Act, Medicare, Medicaid, Head Start, and so much more. Johnson, in his sweeping victory in 1964, brought massive Democratic majorities into the Congress. If there was one man who knew how to use legislative majorities it was Lyndon Johnson.

Califano was strictly on the domestic side and hence had no real access to the detail involved in decision making on the Vietnam War. Despite that he could see the exhaustion that came to Johnson as a result of the workload he put onto himself. LBJ’s way was to get involved directly in many matters where there was a need for his people to be guided by his expertise. Even where the outside world may not have perceived Johnson as being involved in so many cases he was directing the action in a way that likely has not ever been matched. Nixon essentially outsourced domestic policy, having no real interest in it. Johnson, having an intimate knowledge of both the institution of Congress and the players serving in Congress, in many respects served as his own Congressional liaison. LBJ did not have a Chief of Staff, so he served as his own Chief of Staff as well. For better or worse LBJ ran the program, and he drove his staff, Califano included, mercilessly.

LBJ has been well covered but no matter how much has been written some great new (to me) LBJ stories always manage to come through. This book has its fair share of them. When LBJ sent Califano over to see wily Senator John McLellan to work out a deal on creating the federal Transportation Department (McLellan was holding out and was a Chairman.) Califano reported back directly to LBJ on his progress, which was non-existent. He reported that McLellan was indicating that he was having serious trouble getting a Committee quorum for the bill markup. After getting fed up with McLellan Califano phoned some of the other committee members, who informed him that McLellan had assured them that their presence was not needed for this matter in Committee. Johnson told Califano that:


“Johnson laughed. “You know something,” he said, “John McClellan is teaching you more about politics in two months than your old boss Tom Dewey III learned in two presidential campaigns.”

Califano Jr, Joseph A.. The Triumph & Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson: The White House Years (p. 157). Atria Books. Kindle Edition.

When Califano finally reached agreement with McClellan on this matter he rushed back to tell LBJ that he had achieved success. He was very proud of himself, and reported the terms of the deal to Johnson. His pride in the deal was soon over:

“When I finally came to an agreement with McClellan on easing standards for Corps of Engineers water projects, I returned to the Oval Office and proudly reported to Johnson that I had a deal and McClellan would move the bill. As I described the agreement, Johnson was sitting behind his green leather-topped desk and I was standing to his left, leaning on the cabinet that encased the AP and UPI wire-service tickers that constantly clicked away in his office. “Open your fly,” Johnson ordered. I just smiled, knowing he wasn’t serious but surprised nonetheless. “Unzip your fly,” he said rising from his green chair, “because there’s nothing there. John McClellan just cut it off with a razor so sharp you didn’t even notice it.” Johnson hit a button on his phone. “Get Senator McClellan for me.” As Johnson was telling me what a bad bargain I’d struck, McClellan got on the phone. ‘John,” the President said, “I’m calling about Joe Califano. You cut his pecker off and put it in your desk drawer. Now I’m sending him back up there to get it from you. I can’t agree to anything like that. You’ve got to realize that the transportation system of this country needs something besides more highways in Arkansas.’ ”

Califano Jr, Joseph A.. The Triumph & Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson: The White House Years (p. 157). Atria Books. Kindle Edition.

For those that might tell you that LBJ was not directly involved in legislative matters that story is but one of so many that show how involved he really was.

LBJ was not only a master legislative technician but the famed “Johnson treatment” made it very difficult to say no to him on matters where folks really did want to say no. When LBJ was putting together the Washington DC local government he ran into a refusal from John Hechinger to accept the City Council Chairman’s position. Johnson put Califano on it, and after Califano reported the refusal LBJ ordered Califano to bring Hechinger to the White House and persuade him. Califano tried to beg off, to no avail.

“At about 4 P.M., Christopher called to say Hechinger would not take the job. When I reported to the President, he told me to get Hechinger over to see me immediately in a White House car, so that he would have no opportunity to talk to anybody between Christopher’s office and mine. I told LBJ that I didn’t know whether Hechinger would come. “You get him to,” Johnson said as he hung up.”

Califano Jr, Joseph A.. The Triumph & Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson: The White House Years (p. 282). Atria Books. Kindle Edition.

Despite Califano’s best efforts Hechinger was dug in pretty hard. With Johnson ringing Califano’s phone every five minutes for progress reports Califano finally had to report failure. Johnson directed Califano to immediately proceed, with Hechinger, to see him.

“With a shrug, Hechinger walked over to the mansion with me. We went up to the living quarters, where, having gotten up from his nap and showered, the President was getting dressed, putting on his tie. “Mr. President, this is John Hechinger,” I said as the President emerged from the bedroom. The President grabbed Hechinger’s hand, and walked him toward the magnificent view from the southwest window of the living room, from which the Washington Monument is visible. Hechinger sighed, “Mr. President, that is a beautiful view.” “Mr. Hechinger,” said the President, “it certainly is, and what I’d like to do as President is keep that view beautiful and make this whole city as beautiful as that part of it is. But I can’t do it alone. I must have help. “This past year has brought to all Americans the importance of the city and the terrible trouble we’ve had in our urban communities. Washington should be a model. I want to do something for Washington which will make the whole country take notice. Mrs. Johnson and I know you can do this job. I don’t need a politician. Walter Washington is doing just fine in that area. I need someone who cares about this city and who is an administrator, a businessman, to chair this council. You talk about the District and the cities but now there’s an opportunity to do something. And you don’t have to worry about anyone cutting you up. There are two people in the District who can pick up the phone and talk to me. That’s you and Walter Washington.” The President turned to me for emphasis, “Do you hear that, Joe?” “Yes, sir,” I replied. “And there’s something else,” the President added turning again to face Hechinger as the two men now sat on the couch backed against the window. “I’ve extracted a pledge from each member of the council that they will work closely with you so that this first pilot government gets off the ground properly and we get full home rule here.” Hechinger was overwhelmed. Johnson glanced down at his folder on the coffee table in front of them. It was stamped “top secret.” Johnson looked deep into Hechinger’s eyes. “Mr. Hechinger, I know this is a very difficult decision for you.” Then he picked up the folder in his hand and continued, “Thank God you don’t have to make the decision that I do in a few minutes. You see this folder. I have to go over to a meeting and make some decisions whether to bomb the docks at Haiphong in North Vietnam. I’m trying to fight a war over there, to bring our boys back as fast as I can. I wish I could spend more time on the problems of Washington, but I can’t. I don’t need you in Vietnam. I need you right here to help me make this city the way it ought to be and the way I want it to be and the way every American wants their capital to be.” “I understand, Mr. President,” Hechinger said. Before he could say anything more, the President grabbed his shoulders and almost lifted him up from the couch as he rose to stand and said, “I knew you would, Mr. Hechinger. Thank you. I’m delighted that you’re willing to help me and serve as chairman of the City Council.” Hechinger didn’t know what had happened. The President pointed him toward the elevator and whispered quietly to me: “Call George. Tell him to get the press in his office, so that they’re waiting for you. Then announce this right away before he can change his mind.” Change his mind, I thought. Poor John Hechinger didn’t know what his mind was with this presidential rush. The President continued, whispering: “When you announce him, tell them no questions, just photographs.” The President moved toward the elevator with Hechinger. I went to the phone in the living room, and with a hand cupped over the receiver, I told George Christian I was on the way with Hechinger, and passed along the President’s instructions. I caught up with the President and Hechinger as Johnson turned to him. “John,” the President said, “for some reason Joe wants to make the announcement this afternoon. Why don’t you just go on with him over to the West Wing and take care of that and then you and I can get together soon for a long talk about the District and about what’s got to be done here. Mrs. Johnson and I look forward to seeing a lot of you and your wife.” With that, the President held his arm, shook his hand, and sent us on our way. Just as we were getting on the elevator, the President casually said to Hechinger, “Oh, by the way. On that tax matter Joe will have the bill at your house in the morning so you can pay it before noon.” Hechinger was so dazed he just said, “Thank you, Mr. President. Thank you very much.”

Califano Jr, Joseph A.. The Triumph & Tragedy of Lyndon Johnson: The White House Years (pp. 285-286). Atria Books. Kindle Edition.

The Johnson treatment even included forcing Hechinger to pay a disputed tax amount so that there would be no political dirt that could be dug up on him. A long excerpt, but one that shows the LBJ ability to get people on board for tasks that were not on their radar screen until Johnson asked.

Califano was both admiring, and in many ways, awe struck by Johnson. But even so he managed some criticism. As the Vietnam war expanded and became a financial drain Califano was one of the people charged with keeping the Great Society program moving forward in spite of the finances. LBJ did want guns and butter, and he resisted making adjustments that would take funding from the Great Society. Johnson, reluctantly, was forced to support a 10% income tax surcharge to help fund the war and the Great Society.

Califano had a front row seat for the LBJ withdrawal from the 1968 Presidential race. That withdrawal has been much discussed recently, with the Biden withdrawal spurring many to look back at what LBJ did. Different circumstances, but much similarity.

I did note that Califano expressed his view that LBJ did not like or respect Richard Nixon. While they had been rivals for some time the historical record on LBJ’s true thoughts on Nixon is mixed. Califano brought up the Chenault affair, which without question upset Johnson. While we will never really know the truth it is likely that LBJ understood Nixon, and at some level had respect for his political skills. Nixon most certainly respected those skills in LBJ.

For me an excellent Kindle read. Of course we shall wait on Caro, but this book makes the wait easier.




View all my reviews

Posted in Books | Tagged , , | Leave a comment

A Look at “True Believer: Hubert Humphrey’s Quest for a More Just America” by James Traub

Posted on July 5, 2024 by billmanzi

True Believer: Hubert Humphrey’s Quest for a More Just America by James Traub

My rating: 4 of 5 stars


Hubert Humphrey was the first Vice President for me as a youngster, as I was too young to remember LBJ in that position. Humphrey, in my view, was one of the most consequential American political figures of the 20th Century. James Traub does a really good job of bringing the Humphrey life out, and does so in a balanced way. Humphrey, like most, was not perfect, but he led a life of consequence and achievement. Traub manages to give us the full story, even when the facts are not so sympathetic to the subject.

Where to start with a review? Before I read the book I confess to a life long empathy for Humphrey, and I always regretted the way that he was treated by many on the “new left” that became ascendant in the Democratic Party. As someone who read and enjoyed Hunter Thompson I would wince when the good doctor launched his vitriolic attacks on Humphrey, but those attacks were largely in line with the thinking of the younger folks that took over the Democratic Party in 1972. I wondered whether Traub would reference Thompson, and sure enough he did.

“Stewart Alsop, a confirmed centrist, like most of the members of the permanent establishment, even quoted the gonzo journalist Hunter S. Thompson to the effect that Humphrey ‘was a swine in 1968, and he’s a swine now. He should be put in a bottle and sent out with the Japanese current.’ “

Traub, James True Believer: Hubert Humphrey’s Quest for a More Just America pg. 420

For a more accurate version of the quote, which is even more brutal than the one above, see the Hunter Thompson classic “Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail ’72” pg. 158.

Of course I get ahead of myself. Traub gives us just enough biographical information on Humphrey, showing us how his youth influenced the politician he became. There were some contradictions in that upbringing, and Humphrey became a politician of some of those contradictions. He was a Mayor, of Minneapolis, but struggled to get started. He was a progressive when it was not so fashionable, especially in the mid-west, and a true leader on civil rights when such leadership was not wanted or valued in the Democratic Party. His speech at the 1948 Democratic Convention, calling for the Party to “get out of the shadow of states rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights” both electrified the convention and split the Party, leading to a walk out of the Mississippi delegation. This fissure would eventually lead to the migration of the segregationists to the Republican Party. Humphrey, in his role as Mayor, and eventually as U.S. Senator, was a driving force in the creation of the Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) as well as the brains and political force behind the fusion of the Minnesota Democratic Party with the Minnesota Farmer-Labor Party, creating the Minnesota Democratic Farmer Labor Party. In this effort Humphrey established himself firmly as a progressive, but also as a strong anti-communist voice. The party building effort looked to eliminate, or mute, socialist influence where it had existed prior. Humphrey never wavered from this conviction. His leadership in Minnesota was a given, and he mentored much political talent, including Gene McCarthy and Walter Mondale.

Humphrey’s ascent to the Senate brought him to a new level of politics, and one, quite frankly, that he did not take to immediately. His full bore charge ahead on what he considered to be important issues not only brought conflict with his colleagues, but some level of ostracizing from those colleagues. He did not understand the game, but he was soon to get taught by possibly the greatest Senate Leader of all time, Lyndon Johnson. The life story of Hubert Humphrey cannot be told without a pretty big role for LBJ. Coming to know LBJ was both a blessing and a curse to Humphrey, who was brought along by LBJ in the Senate. Johnson helped Humphrey to overcome some of the initial animus of his Senate colleagues by showing him the legislative ropes and lending Humphrey some of his own massive credibility in the Senate. Traub describes Humphrey as a “star pupil” in the “Lyndon Johnson Academy” and gives us a couple of LBJ anecdotes that show what a legislative master he was.

“During the minimum wage debate he was standing by Johnson’s side when the majority leader turned to him and said ‘ I think we’ll pass that minimum wage bill now.’ Johnson had waited until Spessard Holland, who had been leading the opposition, left the floor. He instantly issued a quorum call, which was required for a vote, and then just as rapidly called for a vote before Holland had had a chance to return and rally his troops.”

Traub, James True Believer: Hubert Humphrey’s Quest for a More Just America pg. 176

“On the housing bill, Humphrey’s vote was crucial, but his flight from Minnesota, due to land at 2:30 in the afternoon, was delayed. In a tour de force, even by his own standards, Johnson used every parliamentary tactic in his bag of tricks to put off the vote while simultaneously bullying air traffic controllers to get Humphrey’s flight on the ground. The plane landed at 4:45, Humphrey was whisked to the Senate, and he cast the deciding vote to build one hundred thousand units of public housing rather than the thirty-five thousand Ike had called for.”

Traub, James True Believer: Hubert Humphrey’s Quest for a More Just America pg. 176-177

Johnson’s influence helped to establish Humphrey in the Senate as a man that could get things done. But in order to achieve legislatively compromise was a necessary part of the process. Humphrey was willing to do what he needed to do to get legislative victories, but compromise was not something that some of his liberal friends were interested in. Humphrey lost some ideological support during this period, and those losses continued right to the very end of his career. Traub described him as “ideologically incoherent” but sincere nonetheless.

Humphrey ran for President in 1960, but was simply trampled by the money and organization of the Kennedy family. LBJ always considered Humphrey as a “bridge” to the northern liberals, and selected Humphrey in 1964 to run with him as his Vice President after the assassination of JFK. As tough as LBJ was as Senate Leader he was even more mercurial as President. Humphrey would feel the LBJ lash continuously, and any independent thoughts he might have had as Vice President were ruthlessly suppressed by President Johnson. His 1965 memo to Johnson on Vietnam, in my view, showed where his head was at all along. After that private memo LBJ essentially froze Humphrey out of everything, forcing the Vice President to heel. Humphrey would suffer with this legacy as people, especially the anti-war activists, simply wrote him off on the war. LBJ, as smart as he was, always believed Humphrey to be “soft” on the war, and I think the 1965 memo is where his head stayed, no matter what came out of his mouth. In the tumultuous political year of 1968 Hubert Humphrey became the Democratic nominee for President without entering a primary. Super delegates indeed. The disaster that was the Chicago nominating convention in 1968 for the Democratic Party hurt Humphrey badly. His Republican opponent, Richard Nixon, had managed to tap into the backlash in the country over civil rights, Vietnam, and the LBJ Great Society, and it appeared that Humphrey’s candidacy was a lost cause after Chicago. Humphrey, despite the bad start and the lukewarm endorsement of LBJ, rallied to close the gap substantially, but not enough. He lost to Nixon by about 500,000 votes (43.4% to 42.7%) but the Electoral College margin was wider (301-191, with George Wallace at 46) The fissure in the Democratic Party started by Humphrey in 1948, and made permanent by the LBJ/Humphrey Civil Rights bills of 1964-65 drove the South away from the Democratic Party permanently. The Nixon “Southern Strategy” was borne out of the ramifications of that fissure.

This book gives you a great view, from Humphrey’s perspective, on some of the most monumental events in American history. After Humphrey’s loss in 1968 he managed to return to the Senate from Minnesota, and his estrangement from the left continued, as Humphrey grappled with the school busing issue, and the issue of crime, which Nixon had gotten such great political mileage out of in 1968. His old base of support blanched at some of his ideas on those matters, and the “Happy Warrior” continued to lose some old friends.

If you do not know much about Huber Horatio Humphrey Jr. this book is a great place to start. He was one of the major players in post World War II America, and one of the impactful participants in the watershed year of 1968. His early leadership on Civil Rights changed forever the Democratic Party, and arguably led to a major realignment in the American two-party system. While Humphrey may have brought on some of the enmity showered on him by the “new left” in the end that treatment, in my mind, was largely unfair, and shortsighted. This book is highly recommended.

The Humphrey 1948 speech to the Democratic Convention is linked directly below.

https://www.youtube.com/embed/8nwIdIUVFm4?si=JWUe16Lh94kIQPmy



Link to the Vice President Humphrey 1965 Memo on Vietnam to President Johnson.




View all my reviews

Posted in Uncategorized | Tagged , , , | Leave a comment