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 RN RE: renconciling younger conservatives with White House figures. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 3 pgs. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 5/7/1971
Copy of a memo from Buchanan to RN RE: attempts to improve the White House's image. 4 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 5/3/1971
From Buchanan to RN RE: attempts to improve the White House's image. 4 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 5/3/1971
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26145041
label
WHSF: Contested, 7-3
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26145041
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 7-3
description
This file contains:
From Buchanan to RN RE: renconciling younger conservatives with White House figures. Handwritten notes added by unknown. 3 pgs. [Subject: White House Staff] [Memo], 5/7/1971
Copy of a memo from Buchanan to RN RE: attempts to improve the White House's image. 4 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 5/3/1971
From Buchanan to RN RE: attempts to improve the White House's image. 4 pgs. [Subject: Domestic Policy] [Memo], 5/3/1971
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26145041
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
2f38d357c15ebf68
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
7
3
5/7/1971
White House Staff
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: renconciling
younger conservatives with White House
figures. Handwritten notes added by
unknown. 3 pgs.
7
3
5/3/1971
Domestic Policy
Memo
Copy of a memo from Buchanan to RN RE:
attempts to improve the White House's
image. 4 pgs.
7
3
5/3/1971
Domestic Policy
Memo
From Buchanan to RN RE: attempts to
improve the White House's image. 4 pgs.
Friday, June 18, 2010
Page 1 of 1
THE WHITE HOUSE
file
WASHINGTON
May 7, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
SUBJECT:
Political Memorandum
Evident from the attached, there is a new strain of
bitterness, frustration and alienation among younger conser-
vatives, toward the Administration. Increasingly, it has
focused on the White House Staff -- especially in attacks
directed at John Ehrlichman and his staff.
Basically, these are the reasons for it:
First, younger conservatives, more True Believer than
the older National Review columnists crowd, are distressed at
the departure from the White House staff of conservatives Burns,
Harlow, Freeman, Anderson, Allen, Nofziger, Huston, Mollen-
hoff, efc. They do not see anyone replacing the departing
conservative voices.
Second, they are convinced that the White House staff has been
structured to systematically exclude "conservative" input in domestic
policy - thus, the recent attacks on John Ehrlichman from the Right
in recent months.
Third, they believe that the President makes his decisions,
not on the basis of who he sees, but what he reads; and they contend
there is no conservative view presented in the day-to-day paper
going in and out of the President's office. They feel that the
President's instincts are basically conservative, but he just does
not get enough conservative proposals, and conservative views; and
they feel this is the reason for what they see as the mistakes
(i. e. FAP) of the Administration. As for conservative ideas
news
2
(i. e. special revenue sharing) these seem to them to be dying
without any major Administration concern.
Fourth, they believe that the golden opportunity to build
a "new Republican majority" of conservative Democrats, and
regular Republicans, is being lost -- because of the Administration's
domestic policies, which they see as by and large extensions and
refinements of the Great Society, only more so.
Fifth, they are all Nixonites -- but they contend that if the
President is re-elected with his existing staff structure without
conservative representation -- then, they will have totally lost
their leverage with the President and Administration -- the dream
of the New Republican Majority will be gone forever, "we will
be out of the ball game completely. "
In shoft, they are convinced with Richard Goodwin that
"structure is policy, 11 and with those Congressmen who believe
that the "White House Staff" is responsible for the leftward
direction of an Administration whose President has basically
conservative instincts.
What they have in mind, if they don't see some changes, is
to try to co-ordinate a conservative attack on the White House staff,
to persuade some of the older columnists to join it; in the hope that
the attacks will bring about some changes in the present staff
structure, perhaps force the addition of political conservatives
to the President's top staff.
While the number of individuals involved in the effort is
not great, they do have at least one columnist among them -- and
they are determined to win as many Congressmen and columnists and
poblications to their effort as possible. Some of the far right anti-
Nixon conservatives would probably join the effort.
The whole effort has been building for months. We have
managed to stave it off -- arguing that the exercise would be
counter-productive, that you cannot attack the Presi dent's staff
without striking the President; and that any damage done to the
3
President only enhances the possibility that a Muskie or Kennedy
will be sitting in the White House in two years; and if that
happens, the Western World can close up shop.
All of those involved, incidentally, were to my knowledge
Nixon Conservatives in 1968, not Reagan conservatives.
1e who are
I have passed this along, as these fellows consider me
they?
their "conduit" to the President; and as I think their present
spirit, mood and plans could present us with some serious
problems in the months ahead.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 3, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
SUBJECT:
POLITICAL MEMORANDUM
THE PR CAMPAIGN
We face an increasingly serious political problem in the
rising crescendo of news stories about the "image makers" in
the White House: It reached a new level this weekend, when
Bob Pierpoint went on network television news for the first time
with his theme of "twenty-two image makers" now on the White
House staff, following the three additions, whoare allegedly the
ones counseling the President to make the recent spate of
public appearances. Others are certain to pick up the line,
using the arrivals of Scali and Moore as their take-off point.
Further,
oth Humphrey and Muskie have touched on the
matter, (HHH accusing us of "public relations gimmickry) and if
pressed, it could present a seri ous problem for if there is anything
that turns off Middle America, it is Madison Avenue.
Secondly, for every minor color item we have moved
into the media, there has probably been one major story on the
"new effort to humanize the President." This latter theme coursing
through the national media is decidedly not to our advantage.
One wonders if the trade-off was worth it between the Barbara
Walters Show/Potomac Nine Interview on the one hand -- and all
the news stories about what we were actually up to on the other.
While I do not have any complete answers to this problem,
I think it is a serious one, which could become quite serious in the
1972 campaign; and herewith some thoughts:
2
First, we should de-escalate the time and energy and thought
spent on pushing little "color anecdotes about the President and
shift our emphasis on associating the President with "accomplishments"
of his Administration. The President did not get here by being warm
and human and witty and charming -- he got here by being capable
and tough and qualified and politically courageous. And if we stay
here, it will be because of those latter virtues and accomplishments
not the former. I do not recommend that we eschew altogether
telling the press and media anecdotes and stores which flesh out
the President's personality. But if we are relying on that, ware
in
trouble. And further the efforts to push these to the press
becomes at once counter-productive, as Ziegler tells me; for the
press room quickly buzzes with the story that we are "pushing" these
materials. And they insert in future stories that the " PR campaign"
is geared up again.
Again, in speeches and interviews and backgrounders, the
colorful anecdote is useful, and should be utilized but this
effort should not call forth the present institutionalized effort.
More than one friendly reporter has told me we "are turning people
off, " with these efforts.
Frankly, the one in the best position to drop the "anecdotes"
about a meeting is Ron Ziegler, or some official who has "reason" to
be in the meeting -- where it occurs -- a reason other than there to
write up the color. Example: PJB attends the Congressional leadership
meetings; it is an easy and natural thing to do when asked about that
meeting to relay the anecdotes. But unless it's an extraordinary
incident, a phone call from me to Time to "tell" them the anecdote
will produce an entry in the "Time File" to the effect that we are out
pushing anecdotes.
The McGimis Book leaves us far vulnerable than we
might
otherwise
be
to
this
type
of
political
attack.
One concern about press conferences is that invariably the
media zeroes in on "Vietnam, 11 an issue on which every American
has probably made up his mind, and every American is tired of
hearing debated and discussed. Thus, the President's decision
to hold the second conference -- Saturday and to focus it on
domestic affairs, was the right one. For once, the President
could swing out a little, hit the marijuana thing, hit those who
create "hysteria" in this country by raising the spectre of police
3
state. He could talk about unemployment in Southern California; could
put the needle to Humphrey "who I am glad is going to support us. "
In short the range of opportunities for the President to expand on what
we have done, and what positions we take was a golden one. It is
time the President was associated with his popular political positions,
more often in the press, time we were more closely identified with
what we have done in the area of environment, etc. All those things
that give the President the "activist" problem-solving image which
the liberal press has made the sine qua non of the successful
President.
We ought to find out the major concerns of the American
people, "their issues" and wed the President's public appearances
to those concerns. Surely, the President's appearance at Pendleton
was directly consistent with this. We ought not to make the mistake
of thinking "our" issues, i.e. revenue sharing and reorganization,
are the concerns of the public: we should find out for sure the
concerns of those national communities, ethnic, racial, political
and associate ourselves with them. Again, this does not argue for
abandoning our "six great goals" at all -- these have given us the
stamp of an activist progressive administration; but if we are to
rally great enthusiasm for the President, then we must closely
identify with issues where their enthusiasm resides. One
example: As of this point (9 a.m. Monday) certainly the capital
city and perhaps the country's point of concern is the hell-raisers
in Washington. As of now, the President should be given the credit
for sweeping out that park; the President might well make a
public gesture to the Washington Police and the troops who have
done a first-rate job of police work. was done)
Just a guess but we ought to be prepared for some in-
d epth pieces on the President's public relations men. 1 The press has
been sniffing around this story for some time; and my guess is that,
with Pierpoint's piece and recent arrivals, we can expect some along
these lines.
Finally, I think that what we have to sell is competence, not
personality, a strong capable successful President, not Mr. Nice
Guy. We should make every effort to destroy the myths about the
President that have been created over twenty-five years but
we should not depend upon this to see us through. We should recognize
that the people have an impression about the President built up over
years and decades of time and twelve months is not going to change
that impression perceptibly.
4
Attached is a clipping by a normally hostile John Pierson,
a fellow who generally finds it next to impossible to write well
of us -- yet, he has something here.
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
PR
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
May 3, 1971
MEMORANDUM FOR:
THE PRESIDENT
FROM:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
SUBJECT:
POLITICAL MEMORANDUM
THE PR CAMPAIGN
We face an increasingly serious political problem in the
rising crescendo of news stories about the "image makers" in
the White House. It reached a new level this weekend, when
Bob Pierpoint went on network television news for the first time
with his theme of "twenty-two image makers" now on the White
House staff, following the three additions, whoare allegedly the
ones counseling the President to make the recent spate of
public appearances. Others are certain to pick up the line,
using the arrivals of Scali and Moore as their take-off point.
Further, both Humphrey and Muskie have touched on the
matter, (HHH accusing us of "public relations gimmickry) and if
pressed, it could present a serious problem for if there is anything
that turns off Middle America, it is Madison Avenue.
Secondly, for every minor color item we have moved
into the media, there has probably been one major story on the
"new effort to humanize the President." This latter theme coursing
through the national media is decidedly not to our advantage.
One wonders if the trade off was worth it between the Barbara
Walters Show/Potomac Nine Interview on the one hand -- and all
the news stories about what we were actually up to on the other.
While I do not have any complete answers to this problem,
I think it is a serious one, which could become quite serious in the
1972 campaign; and herewith some thoughts:
2
First, we should de-escalate the time and energy and thought
spent on pushing little "color anecdotes about the President -- and
shift our emphasis on associating the President with "accomplishments"
of his Administration. The President did not get here by being warm
and human and witty and charming -- he got here by being capable
and tough and qualified and politically courageous. And if we stay
here, it will be because of those latter virtues and accomplishments
not the former. I do not recommend that we eschew altogether
telling the press and media anecdotes and stores which flesh out
the President's personality. But if we are relying on that, we are
in trouble. And further the efforts to push these to the press
becomes at once counter-productive, as Ziegler tells me; for the
press room quickly buzzes with the story that we are "pushing" these
materials. And they insert in future stories that the PR campaign"
is geared up again.
Again, in speeches and interviews and backgrounders, the
colorful anecdote is useful, and should be utilized -- but this
effort should not call forth the present institutionalized effort.
More than one friendly reporter has told me we "are turning people
off, 11 with these efforts.
Frankly, the one in the best position to drop the "anecdotes"
about a meeting is Ron Ziegler, or some official who has "reason" to
be in the meeting where it occurs a reason other than there to
write up the color. Example: PJB attends the Congressional leadership
meetings; it is an easy and natural thing to do when asked about that
meeting to relay the anecdotes. But unless it's an extraordinary
incident, a phone call from me to Time to "tell" them the anecdote
will produce an entry in the "Time File" to the effect that we are out
pushing anecdotes.
The McGinnis Book leaves us far more vulnerable than we
might otherwise be to this type of political attack.
One concern about press conferences is that invariably the
media zeroes in on "Vietnam, 11 an issue on which every American
has probably made up his mind, and every American is tired of
hearing debated and discussed. Thus, the President's decision
to hold the second conference -- Saturday -- and to focus it on
domestic affairs, was the right one. For once, the President
could swing out a little, hit the marijuana thing, hit those who
create "hysteria" in this country by raising the spectre of police
3
state. He could talk about unemployment in Southern California; could
put the needle to Humphrey "who I am glad is going to support us. "
In short the range of opportunities for the President to expand on what
we have done, and what positions we take was a golden one. It is
time the President was associated with his popular political positions,
more often in the press, time we were more closely identified with
what we have done in the area of environment, etc. All those things
that give the President the "activist" problem-solving image which
the liberal press has made the sine qua non of the successful
President.
We ought to find out the major concerns of the American
people, "their issues" and wed the President's public appearances
to those concerns. Surely, the President's appearance at Pendleton
was directly consistent with this. We oug not to make the mistake
of thinking "our" issues, i.e. revenue sharing and reorganization,
are the concerns of the public: we should find out for sure the
concerns of those national communities, ethnic, racial, political
and associate ourselves with them. Again, this does not argue for
abandoning our "six great goals" at all -- these have given us the
stamp of an activist progressive administration; but if we are to
rally great enthusiasm for the President, then we must closely
identify with issues where their enthusiasm resides. One
example: As of this point (9 a.m. Monday) certainly the capital
city and perhaps the country's point of concern is the hell-raisers
in Washington. As of now, the President should be given the credit
for sweeping out that park; the President might well make a
public gesture to the Washington Police and the troops who have
done a first-rate job of police work.
Just a guess -- but we ought to be prepared for some in-
d epth pieces on the President's "public relations men. : The press has
been sniffing around this story for some time; and my guess is that,
with Pierpoint's piece and recent arrivals, we can expect some along
these lines.
Finally, I think that what we have to sell is competence, not
personality, a strong capable successful President, not Mr. Nice
Guy. We should make every effort to destroy the myths about the
President that have been created over twenty-five years -- but
we should not depend upon this to see us through. We should recognize
that the people have an impression about the President built up over
years and decades of time -- and twelve months is not going to change
that impression perceptibly.
4
Attached is a clipping by a normally hostile John Pierson,
a fellow who generally finds it next to impossible to write well
of us -- yet, he has something here.
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN