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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
Brent Scowcroft had a long lasting and outsized role as a top figure in the U.S. foreign policy establishment, serving as national security advisor to Gerald Ford as well as George H.W. Bush. This book, on the long side, gives us a view of his life and contributions to U.S. foreign policy. Scowcroft may be the most important foreign policy figure of the last half century or so that many have never heard of. That is how Scowcroft worked, as an advisor that actually did stay in the background.
Brent Scowcroft was a military man (Air Force) and started assuming some vital positions in the Nixon Administration, where he became military assistant to the President, and was eventually tapped by Henry Kissinger to be Deputy National Security Advisor. As anyone familiar with Kissinger knows working for him could be considered a form of purgatory. As the Deputy and as a superb staff man Scowcroft impressed both Kissinger and Nixon, and his career as a key member of the U.S. foreign policy establishment began. Scowcroft was in charge of advance for the Nixon trip to Beijing and became the first U.S. military man to be in China since 1949. From this initial appointment Scowcroft was on hand for some major U.S. foreign policy achievements, such as the opening to China as well as the Nixon detente with the Soviets. He was also on hand for some U.S. foreign policy lows, including the incursion into Cambodia and the ultimate U.S. withdrawal under terrible circumstances from Vietnam.
Scowcroft, initially considered a Kissinger man, grew solidly into a figure with distinct views that were all his own. After the exit of Nixon and the ascension of Gerald Ford to the Presidency Ford determined to not allow Kissinger to be both security advisor and Secretary of State, forcing Kissinger out as security advisor. Scowcroft assumed that role, carving out his own area of influence. To replace Kissinger and then have to work with him as Secretary of State could not have been easy but Scowcroft managed the transition smoothly. It is a strength that Sparrow highlights continuously in the book, as Scowcroft showed a great ability to manage people and process. His rather large handprint on the National Security apparatus serving the President is still felt today. In that sense, as an organization man, he was superior to Kissinger, whose processes were more ego-centric and designed to meet Kissinger’s needs. Scowcroft sought to put together an apparatus that would manage to get the best information to the President, including information that may not have towed the President’s line.
Scowcroft, even while out of government, became an influential voice on foreign policy. After the Ford loss to Carter he worked at Kissinger Associates (and later formed his own consulting firm) but was consulted on a number of different issues. He showed a trait that would later become more pronounced, which was a willingness to speak (softly) against policies he did not agree with, regardless of the party of the President. He was very critical of the Reagan-Gorbachev summit in Iceland that had discussed the possible elimination of the nuclear arsenals of both countries.
Scowcroft filled some important roles in the Reagan Administration, as Reagan turned to him to serve on commissions charged with arms control issues as well as on the Tower Commission that wrote a report on Iran-Contra.
With the presidency of George H.W. Bush Scowcroft once again assumed the role of national security advisor to the President. In that role and working with the strong willed James Baker as Secretary of State Scowcroft was involved heavily in managing the collapse of the U.S.S.R, the reunification of Germany, the first Gulf War, which not only succeeded militarily but diplomatically, as the Bush Administration managed to win massive worldwide support, including from the Soviets, for the military effort to expel Saddam Hussein from Kuwait. The policy that drove the first Gulf War, a limited military objective that eschewed regime change, would come back for debate in the administration of George W. Bush. The book critiques that decision, looking at the alternatives, along with the real human cost to the anti-Saddam elements in Iraq, who were eradicated by the left intact Saddam regime. In the end the Bush policy, despite not being perfect, was the correct call, in my opinion.
Scowcroft remained close for life with George H.W. Bush. (They wore a book together) That relationship did not stop Scowcroft from opposing the George W. Bush move to invade Iraq. His letter to the Wall Street Journal precipitated his temporary fall from grace with his former colleagues Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and his protege Condoleezza Rice. Many speculated that the Scowcroft letter was a way for George H.W. Bush to send a hard piece of advice to his son. I personally do not believe that but who really knows. Scowcroft ended up, of course, being shown to be correct on this issue.
In reading some of the reviews the book has been described as “laudatory” but I believe there is balance, as criticism is offered where the author thinks it warranted. Scowcroft was a major demo of the U.S. foreign policy establishment. In addition to being a real mentor to Condi Rice he was also the man who brought Bob Gates along. This book, on a figure involved in some of the most impactful foreign policy decisions in U.S. history, is a bit long but a very worthwhile read.
The grand opening of the Weare-Merriman Community Park happened over this past weekend. This park comes to the Seabrook community from the very generous donation of a twenty acre parcel by the Merriman family. Diane Merriman Shenberger, Cathy Merriman Cygan, Susan Merriman Synodis and Carol Merriman Schwanhausser together made this very generous donation, and then consented to having the Town explore for water on the site. Water Superintendent Curtis Slayton. Chief Operator George Eaton and the fabulous water team hit water, providing Seabrook with two major wells that will help to provide water security for Seabrook for the next twenty years. The water wells will not negatively impact the beautiful passive recreation desired by the family, along with the nine hole disc golf course that was constructed on site. My thanks to the family, who traveled to the site from as far away as California, to Curtis Slayton and his great Water Department, who did so much of the site work. My thanks to TEC, who helped to engineer the site and who brought us Dennis Grzywacz, of Acme Disc Golf, who designed the golf portion. The Seabrook Board of Selectmen were instrumental in making this happen. My thanks to Shaylia Wood, who worked diligently on getting the beautiful sign procured, and then helping to make sure the site was ready. The work has been going on since 2016. Slow and steady wins the day! Thank you to all.
A very big thank you to the American Legion Raymond Walton Post 70, Cassandra Carter of Seabrook Recreation, the Seabrook DPW, and the Seabrook Police and Fire Departments, as well as the Board of Selectmen for supporting and attending, the annual Memorial Day Service. Thank you to the legislative delegation as well. It was an honor to have Gold Star Mother Florence Souther in attendance as well. It turned into a beautiful day for the ceremony and the Parade to honor the service and sacrifice of those that have given their lives in the defense of our nation. Thank you.
Jim Sciutto has given us a very interesting, and obviously timely, book on the new relationship dynamics between the great powers of the world. The post World War II order has not disappeared but is teetering, with an ascendant China, a revanchist Russia, and some like minded middle powers pushing hard to knock down the edifice largely created by the United States.
Sciutto gives us a focus on the great hot spots (Russia-Ukraine, China-Taiwan) as well as the close cooperation between Russia, China, and the smaller powers determined to change the dynamics of the international system. (Iran, North Korea)
Sciutto comes down fairly hard for stopping the Russian military expansion into Ukraine, and I was delighted that he included the perspective of Estonian Prime Minister Kaja Kallas in the book. As we move further away from World War II many have forgotten the horrors visited upon the Baltic states by Russia and Stalin while the West was preoccupied with stopping the naked aggression of Adolph Hitler. The odious Molotov-Ribbentrop pact giving Stalin a free hand in the Baltics while enabling Hitler to invade Poland and start World War II allowed the Russians to simply absorb the Baltic states, including Estonia. Others may have forgotten that lesson but Prime Minister Kallas has not, and she is a strong voice giving warning about Russian intentions were they to win in Ukraine.
I think it important that Sciutto included some detail on the war game results conducted by The Center for Strategic and International Studies on a potential invasion of Taiwan by China. The results are fairly sobering, and despite plenty of public comment on these results they would likely be a shock to many Americans.
Sciutto talks about the difficulties inherent with today’s configuration of great powers for the United States. The U.S. has a strong alliance system in place, but the cooperation of Russia and China is creating major difficulties for the exiting world order. There are major flash points, and as Sciutto points out, fewer guardrails, between the great powers today. Sciutto has done a fine job of looking at the complexities, and dangers, inherent in these relationships.
The Seabrook Water and Sewer reports for 2023 are below. I have produced these reports for many years, and while they retain the existing format they now include capital costs into the calculation of the annual subsidy going from taxpayers to rate payers. The reports show that the annual water/sewer deficit for 2023 is $2.3 million.
The Select Board has determined to make the system self reliant in 2024. They have adopted a rate system that should fully fund both water and sewer departments, including all capital costs. The new rates were effective as of January 1, 2024. These rates will lift that $2.3 million dollar subsidy off of the tax rate and move it to the ratepayers. Taxpayers should realize a large benefit.
If you have any questions or concerns do not hesitate to contact my office.
Bill Manzi.com 