Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory.
For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.
Source Description
This file contains:
From Buchanan to Haldeman & Colson RE: suggesting having RN being photographed in quasi-religions services and taking out ads in 'black publications' attacking McGovern. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/16/1972
From Buchanan RE: "political prostitution." Draft. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 10/26/1972
From Buchanan to Haldemna, Ehrlichman, and Colson RE: attacking McGovern and the media on the 'corruption issue.' 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/13/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: potential political problems which could cause a rapid dissipation of the present lead. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/9/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26144225
label
WHSF: Contested, 1-16
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26144225
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 1-16
description
This file contains:
From Buchanan to Haldeman & Colson RE: suggesting having RN being photographed in quasi-religions services and taking out ads in 'black publications' attacking McGovern. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/16/1972
From Buchanan RE: "political prostitution." Draft. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 10/26/1972
From Buchanan to Haldemna, Ehrlichman, and Colson RE: attacking McGovern and the media on the 'corruption issue.' 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/13/1972
From Buchanan to RN RE: potential political problems which could cause a rapid dissipation of the present lead. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 10/9/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26144225
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
32a98d6784c6959f
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
1
16
10/16/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to Haldeman & Colson RE:
suggesting having RN being photographed in
quasi-religions services and taking out ads in
'black publications' attacking McGovern. 1
pg.
1
16
10/26/1972
Campaign
Report
From Buchanan RE: "political prostitution."
Draft. 2 pgs.
1
16
10/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to Haldemna, Ehrlichman,
and Colson RE: attacking McGovern and the
media on the 'corruption issue.' 3 pgs.
1
16
10/9/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: potential
political problems which could cause a rapid
dissipation of the present lead. 3 pgs.
Monday, June 14, 2010
Page 1 of 1
[Item N-2]
October 16, 1972
MEMORANDUM TO:
H. R. HALDEMAN
CHARLES COLSON
FROM:
PAT BUCHANAN
Some ideas sent in that have some merit: Considering
the "corruption" charge, etc., why not have the
President photographed in quasi-religious services;
either Sunday services, funerals, if they come up --
or other -- which in and of itself makes McGovern look
nasty in the character ofhhis charges.
Secondly, strongly recommend that we take out ads in
all major black publications attacking McGovern for taking
Blacks for granted -- and calling on blacks to repudiate
that sentiment. These ads would serve to force McGovern
to spend money to answer them -- and they might well weaken
him in the black community as McGovern has never been
strong there personally. This is the one major voting block
where McGovern wins overwhelmingly -- and some hard
negative ads might convince blacks either to "go fishing"
or cut McGovern.
Buchanan
DRAFT:PJB:10/26/72
Wednesday's edition of the Washington Post presents the most
conclusive evidence of political prostitution of the press in recent memory.
The Post's banner story of that day was and is a phony from beginning
to end. It had been floating around town for more than a week that it was
coming. Larry O'Brien, Senator McGovern's campaign manager had
been publicly promising and preditting its arrival almost to the hour.
And, lo and behold, it arrived the morning of the evening of George
McGovern's paid broadcase on the so-called "corruption" issue. Indeed,
it arrived precisely at the point where it would do the most to promote
the McGovern show -- by forukiggnetworks, wires and afternoon papers to
follow up the story with questions and coverage.
As an example of collusion between the McGovernites and the Post,
as an example of good P.R. promotion of a McGovern show by the editors
of the Post -- it was first-rate. As an example of objective and honest
reporting and coverage -- it was a joke.
Mrs. Graham and her obsequious subordinates at the Post have allowed
their undisguised hatred of the President of the United States to get the
better of them. They should be, frankly, more discreet about their
cohabitation with Mr. McGovern.
Here is how the daisy chain operates. The Post puts a banner headline
on some unsubstantiated charges by unnamed sources. Within minutes
George McGovem is out on the stump accusing the President personally
-2-
of being responsible for whatever the Post has alleged and the next
morning the Post runs McGovern's repetition of the Post's charges as
the hard political news of the day. And on and on and on.
This Post operation is a desperate last-ditch effort to prevent the
political humiliation of their radical friend, Mr. McGovern, and to
inflict maximum political damage upon the administration and person
of the President of the United States.
Like George McGovern, the Post is an imposter and a pious fraud.
The former, who promised Senator Eagleton his 1000% support and then
stabbed him in the back in one of the most cynical and savage political
acts of our time, runs about the country posing as Mr. Morality. The
latter, the Washington Post, postures as an objective high-minded,
even-handed newspaper while working the gutter for George McGovern.
Mr. McGovern is going down to defeat because his radical defeatest
politices would disgrace this nation before the world, his domestic ideas
border on the idiotic, and his campaign tactics and rhetoric are among
the most vile and filthy in American political history. And the Post, just
as it has collaborated and conspired in his campaign, will hhare with
him the nation's repudiation.
#####
October 13, 1972
ADMINISTRATIVELY CONFIDENTIAL
POLITICAL MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM FOR:
H. R. HALDEMAN
JOHN EHRLICHMAN
CHARLES COLSON
FROM:
PAT BUCHANAN
McGovern appears to have but one card left to turn over -- the
"curruption" issue. And it is not a bad one. There is a theme
abuilding in the media, which runs like this: What has happened
that America and Americans are sympathetic that they will not
become enraged at the atmosphere of scandal and chicanery that
now exists in Nixon's Washington. Agronsky, Sidey, Severeid,
Reasoner, Shana Alexander and a host of others are pushing the
theme.
The Times has put its top Mafia guy on the Watergate-Espionage-
Sabotage issue -- and the Washington Post may very well have a few
more trumps to play.
My concern is that we not "freeze the ball" with our twenty-odd point
lead, and three and a half weeks to go -- as we did in 1968. We have
two possible lines of attack as I see it, and I would prefer the latter.
First, is to attack the Post head-on along these lines. "Just as in
1968, the leftist press is digging up all the dirt it can print between
now and the election to salvage the collapsed McGovern campaign.
In 1968 it was the Times when their smear on Agnew; in 1972 it is the
Post's desperate last-ditch effort to smear the President on Watergate.
Innuendo and unproven charges are being given the kind of ride they
have not gotten since the dayssof Joe McCarthy. Where Dick Tuck's
screw-ball antics were applauded and laughed off -- pranks performed
by some over-zealous types a) have not even been tied to the
President's organizations; and b) are dondemned as though we were
running a concentration camp."
Something along these lines -- taking the attack to the Post.
However, before proceeding up this avenue, we had best know
exactly how much more the Post has than the stuff it is running
right now.
However, my preferred line would be for us to use the above only
as an "answer" and to respond to the Washington Post's vendetta, and
the others who are fortifying McGovern's charges, with their venom
and outrage -- by stepping up the attack on McGovern on our issues.
To this end, I believe that:
A)
The earlier we use Connally, the broader time audience, the
better. This speech not only creams McGovern it turns the focus
of m tional debate back onto our issues -- foreign policy, defense
cuts, amnesty, bipartisan tradition -- and hits McGovern hard for
his radicalism.
B)
We need new and more attack ads, in my view; and a crash
program should be initiated to provide them. What are the issues
hurting McGovern most? When we find these, we ought to have one
minute reminder ads for massive use on a state-by-state basis in
the waning days of the campaign.
C)
We ought to consider theppossibility of placing print ads in
black papers all over the country condemning McGovern for not
placing such ads and "taking blacks for granted." An ad which says
in effect you won't see McGovern taking an ad in this paper because
he thinks you're already in his pocket.
D)
While we have hit McGovern some on his Vietnam speech, it is
not enough, and not hard enough his speech disappointed and
concerned even Kraft and Reston we should be hitting him hard
and repeatedly, and at high levels on Vietnam.
E)
We have several "bombs" lined up like the Defense Budget
Analysis, the Welfare Analysis, the Connally Speech we need more
major "events" or "attacks" at high levels, which can frame the
debate in our termus, not theirs. We must keep the country thinking
of McGovern ahd his idiotic schemes, his ineptitude and his radicalism --
if we are going to hold onto our existing lead.
F)
The time is approaching I would think, when we would want
to move the issue further by calling for a "vote against extremism"
and get prominent Democrats and Union Leaders to start talking
publicly, and calling for the "repudiation" of the Radical Left that
has seized our party.
"2"
G)
Perhaps we need once again to go back through all our
anti-McGovern material -- pick out only the harshest and toughest
material we have -- and feed that to the press for one more round.
In brief conclusion, the next ten days are crucial to breaking the
back of the McGovern campaign; we ought not to be holding back
material now -- but pouring out everything we have. We should
be getting as much of this anti-materi al into the record as possible;
if McGovern has made no progress by two weeks before the election,
the stampede might begin, and that may be it.
Buchanan
October 9, 1972
POLITICAL MEMORANDUM
MEMORANDUM TO THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
With four weeks to go the political situation seems to have stabilized.
With McGovern not moving as dramatically as necessary; indeed hardly
moving at all, according to Harris.
The following are what I see as potential problemsareas for us politically,
which could cause a rapid dissipation of the present lead.
1)
Sam Ervin & the Watergate. Should a Congressional hearing be
called the focus of the campaign could be turned off of the "negatives" of
McGovern onto our "negatives." Given the present disposition of the
national media -- the major domos are disappointed in the lack of a contest
and enraged and frustrated by RN's above-the-battle tactics -- the hearings
would be the most celebrated since Army-McCarthy.
2)
The McGovern anti-Nixon Commercials. McGovern's people
seem finallyto have come to the conclusion that their best hope lies not so
much in resurrecting their candidate's image -- they don't have the time --
but in tearing down our man. My guess is that they will be extremely rough,
and if they are not overdone, fairly effective.
My personal view is that we ought to, now, go on a crash program for some
more anti-McGovern commericals to keep in stock.
Beyond that, the latest poll is certain to put pressure on McGovern; and
given the fact that his three most sensitive points seem to be Vietnam,
(he is proud of his "consistency) Eagleton and "credibility," maybe we ought
to begin moving, with some of our surrogates, in a more direct way.
If we can get him talking and afguing about these -- we do well. Frankly,
I would like to see the entire Eagleton business, which is such a loser for
McGovern, re-elevated by some of our people.
-6-
Back to the commercials momentarily -- HHH's anti-Nixon commercials
were brutal in my judgment, but effective and we should expect that
McGovern's will go after the "scandal", "corrupt" issues -- and if they
are smart they will not use their principal, McGovern, as they have
mistakenly in the past, to act as the Prosecutor.
3)
A sharp McGovern movement upward in the polls could conceivably
cause a reverse leverage on the "analyses" and "polls" and "local statements"
which are right now so damaging to him. Every time a newspaper or survey
goes out they come in with startling negative returns for McGovern. And
every time a local pol speaks off the record it seems, he raps George.
This has to hurt in community after community -- if McGovern starts up,
however, this will reverse and one will find poll after poll saying "McGovern
closing the gap." While the possibility recedes with each week, the
possibility remains of the "comeback" theme catching with the press and
public.
4)
The apathetic electorate and the low turnout. Though the liberal
press has egg on its face now, for its earlier discussion of aroused and
alienated electorate looking for McGovern's Hind of politics, there seems to
be some truth in the possibility of a low turnout, over-confident Republicans,
and a McGovern-hard-core maximizing his vote, while we minimize ours.
We ought to be giving this problem serious consideration -- although I do
not believe it at all calls for RN to hit the stump at this point in time.
5)
The media hostility. One has to have seen Agronsky & Co. to
visualize it. Since the Broder column there has been piece after piece,
taking up the theme that RN has "outwitted" the press, that he is using the
enormous resources of the White House to such effect that it is no contest;
that McGovenn is at an unfair disadvantage; that the President is ignoring the
i ssues, playing above-the-battle, refusing to "engage" in campaign debate,
even by long distance, and -- to top it all -- appears headed for a landslide
which the press can do nothing about. If one took a poll of the press corps,
I would guess that ninety-five to one hundred percent want to see the gap
closed.
Recognizing that they are negatively disposed to our campaign at this point,
and anxious to leap on any embarrassment -- perhaps we should give
consideration to an offensive media strategy to geed the animals, so they
aren't chewing on us the rest of the campaign.
Dont' know what we have of substance coming down the pike but the more
of that the better. One notes that RN's Texas visit which had some substance
to it was played extremely well and the NY to LA jaunt was played equally
badly. We should be thinking of something to give these fellows to write and
talk about -- rather than bemoaning our "lack" of a campaign.
-3-
THOUGHTS & SUGGESTIONS:
A)
We ought to have adopted in advance a strategy for the McGovern
ads, whether to ignore them or attack them as "smear" -- hppefully
they will be so bad that they will indict themselves. But it would be serious
for us, I think, if McGovern's ads succeeded in moving the focus off of
McGovern's screw-ups and incompetence and his radicalism -- which should
be the last four weeks of this campaign.
B)
We should be planning now -- not locking in, however -- some
election eve, Saturday, Sunday, Monday type drills, which are certain to
C reate massive national interest and participation in the election -- by our
folks. We do need to have our troops excited more out there -- they do need
to get stirred up and given the Presidential podium, one can get the
national attention with relative ease.
C)
In two weeks or perhaps three, the time may be ripe to be calling --
not for a mandate for RN but for a repudiation of McGovern by Democrats.-
On thes grounds, we should move out the line that the McGovernites have
given up; they are interested only in a large vote to control the party
machinery -- and a Connally and Meany and Fitzsimmons and other Democrats
can all call for a national "repudiation of extremism" so that the Great
Democratic Party can be sestored to its fightful owners, the American
people. Cast a Vote Against Extremism kind of theme something that
will convince Democrats that if McGovern even comes close their party is
gone from them forever.
D)
If we cqn contain McGovern for twenty more days even, or two
more weeks, assuredly there is a fail-safe point at whihh local Democrats
have to jump off and start pushing out their split-ticket sample ballots; with
sort of an every-man-for-himself philosophy taking over. That almost
but did not happen with Humphrey -- as the unions never deserted him.
But if McGovern is hanging where he was bast two or three weeks from
now it could startwith him.
E)
The President should stay out of the attack business altogether,
as of now. This still looks good. Also, the President of all the People,
standing up for America, is something disgruntled and even anti-Nixon
Democrats can vote for if the rest of us can keep McGovern painted as
an incompetent and opportunistic radical who would do or say anything
to win. With McGovern's recent horrible charges he has diminished the
possibility of his becoming a sympathetic figure, a martyr, which leaves
us some room for toughening the attacks on him.
Buchanan