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 Khachigian to Buchanan RE: plan to 'nail McGovern to the wall on his welfare scheme.' 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: Michael Harrington and Irving Howe. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/20/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: attacking McGovern. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/19/1972
Draft report from Khachigian RE: McGovern. 25 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 6/13/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: the "McGovern Market." 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
From Khachigian to Colson RE: material on the Wallace Convention. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: tarring McGovern terming him an 'extremist' and not a 'radical.' 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/9/1972
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146456
label
WHSF: Contested, 47-36
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146456
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 47-36
description
This file contains:
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: plan to 'nail McGovern to the wall on his welfare scheme.' 8 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: Michael Harrington and Irving Howe. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/20/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: attacking McGovern. 5 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/19/1972
Draft report from Khachigian RE: McGovern. 25 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Report], 6/13/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: the "McGovern Market." 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
From Khachigian to Colson RE: material on the Wallace Convention. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/13/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: tarring McGovern terming him an 'extremist' and not a 'radical.' 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/9/1972
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146456
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
4a84ace78d6718a4
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
47
36
6/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: plan to
'nail McGovern to the wall on his welfare
scheme.' 8 pgs.
47
36
6/20/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: Michael
Harrington and Irving Howe. 2 pgs.
47
36
6/19/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: attacking
McGovern. 5 pgs.
47
36
6/13/1972
Campaign
Report
Draft report from Khachigian RE:
McGovern. 25 pgs.
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Page 1 of 2
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
47
36
6/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: the
"McGovern Market." 1 pg.
47
36
6/13/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Colson RE: material on
the Wallace Convention. 2 pgs.
47
36
6/9/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: tarring
McGovern terming him an 'extremist' and not
a 'radical.' 3 pgs.
Tuesday, April 14, 2015
Page 2 of 2
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
DOCUMENT
DOCUMENT
NUMBER
TYPE
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
DATE
RESTRICTION
N-1
memo
Khochgian to Buchar, re:
6/28/72
((miyn)
[Doc 135]
metoven & & welfare, authorteched
draft copy
N-2
memo
Khosh gia 40 Bucharan me:
6/20/72
[Doc 136]
medical Hangton of kningHaw
N.3
mens
Draft copy of N-2, attached to
6/20/72
[Doc 209]
N-2 case file
N-4
meno
khochigian to Buchana, re:
me Govern hotchet work, with
6/19/72
[Doc 137]
comin)
attached diaft capy
N-5
meno
Bechman/ phachigian to Holderen,
6/18/72
[Doc 138]
re: Response to HRH memor
[Doc 139]
of June 12, 1972
attachments:
[Doc 210]
1) Phemio, Khazhzin &
[Doc 140]
re: Response to NRH meno
of 6/12/72, 6/16/72
2) Inemo 6/16/72 droft of attachent#!
3) memo, gHoldinan to Bechaman, ns:
Bucharan memorifyne 5th,
6/12/72
N-6
article
Is He or Isn't He - Courpage,
6/13/72
can
[Doc 141]
you sou you do..." with
attached draft copy
N-7
meno
phochingian to Bucharan 26:
6/13/72
(af)
[Dos 1427
"mc loven market
FILE GROUP TITLE
BOX NUMBER
KEN KHACHIGAN
6
FOLDER TITLE
June (1972)
RESTRICTION CODES
A. Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy.
E. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
B. National security classified information.
financial information.
C. Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual's
F. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law
rights.
enforcement purposes.
D. Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy
G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.
or a libel of a living person.
H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
NA FORM 1421 (4-85)
DOCUMENT WITHDRAWAL RECORD [NIXON PROJECT]
2
CUMENT
DOCUMENT
TYPE
SUBJECT/TITLE OR CORRESPONDENTS
NUMBER
DATE
RESTRICTION
N-8
Themo
Khachigan tocalson, re: Wallace
6/13/72
[DOC 143]
convention, with attached droft
(coning)
copy
N-9
memo
Hhachigian to Buchanan, al:
[Doc 144]
me Govern + three his issues,
with attached deaft copy
N-10
memo
Khachingia to Buchana, re:
6/9/72
me Govern extremism, with
c(gin)
[Doc 145]
attached deaft copy
N-11
memo
Bushavan to cook, rs: Defense
6/6/72
C (npm)
[Doc 146]
Dent to mc Jonem, with attached
diaft copy
FILE GROUP TITLE
BOX NUMBER
KEN KHACHIGAN
6
FOLDER TITLE
June [1972]
RESTRICTION CODES
A
Release would violate a Federal statute or Agency Policy.
E. Release would disclose trade secrets or confidential commercial or
B National security classified information.
financial information.
C Pending or approved claim that release would violate an individual's
F. Release would disclose investigatory information compiled for law
rights
enforcement purposes.
D
Release would constitute a clearly unwarranted invasion of privacy
G. Withdrawn and return private and personal material.
or a libel of a living person.
H. Withdrawn and returned non-historical material.
NATIONAL ARCHIVES AND RECORDS ADMINISTRATION
NA FORM 1421 (4-85)
Presidential Materials Review Board
Review on Contested Documents
Collection:
Kenneth L. Khachigian
Box Number:
6
Folder:
June [1972]
Document
Disposition
135
Return
Private/Political
136
Return
Private/Political
137
Return
Private/Political
138
Retain
Open
139
Retain
Open
140
Retain
Open
141
Return
Private/Political
142
Return
Private/Political
143
Return
Private/Political
144
Retain
Open
145
Return
Private/Political
146
Retain
Open
209
Return
Private/Political
210
Retain
Open
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 28, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN
It was requested that we come up with a plan between now
and the Democratic National Convention to nail McGovern to
the wall on his welfare scheme. What follows is the outline of
that plan -- specifics will come later.
The important point is that McGovern is going to change his
plan right after the Democratic National Convention. We know he
is planning it, and he has already laid the groundwork. Thus, our
immediate strategy is to tar him every conceivable way on his
$1000 bonus so that his manner of rehabilitation is not in the least
bit comfortable. Moreover, we should also predict that he is
going to change his plan and that he will do so after the convention.
These points should be uppermost in the criticism of the
McGovern proposal:
There is a $1000 cash grant to every man, woman, and
child in the country, regardless of need and with no work incentive
at all.
-- This plan will expand the budget by $210 billion.
-- This plan will put 210 billion people on "welfare. "
-- This plan is an assault on the work ethic and removes from
the American culture the idea that people should work for a living, not
live on the largesse of the taxpayer.
-- This plan will cost exhorbitant sums, will require a massive
increase in taxes (or cause confiscatory taxation), will directly harm
middle income people and will harm the families where man and wife
are each holding jobs to help make ends meet.
Page 2
-- Finally, it should be pointed out that McGovern himself
does not know what his program would cost, has been totally
irresponsible in trying to sell this to the public, and if this
is any indication of a McGovern presidency, then God help us all.
Suggest that Javits be asked to be one of those on the warpath
regarding the McGovern welfare giveaway. He did a good job
during the Joint Economic Committee hearings, and he might
be willing to do so again in a public forum. If he does, we should
make our P.R. facilities available to him at 1701. Javits is also
ranking minority member on Senate Labor and Public Welfare
Committee.
Rockefeller would also be a good one to attack the plan. He
could stick in his speech a classic line: "Ladies and gentlemen,
Nelson Rockefeller appreciates the offer, but I don't think I need
a $1000 bill from George McGovern. "
Richardson would be a credible source as HEW secretary,
but it is thought that he would not receive very much press.
Nevertheless, he should have our materials and be primed for
response at press conferences. A hard-hitting speech insert
should be prepared for him.
Governor Reagan, who is known for his opposition to welfare
waste, would also be a good source. He should have the information
with a Lyn Nofziger speech.
Ehrlichman is supposed to be out on the hustings next week, and
he can be briefed to get out the line. All surrogates should have this
information with appropriate suggested inserts provided for them.
Finally, the Veep should be asked to focus a major section
of one of his speeches on ri diculing the McGovern plan. Emphasis
on the wage-earner being taken to the cleaners to give $1000 to
every breathing person in the country.
Beginning Monday, the whole week must be orchestrated
towards one goal, and that goal is to totally discredit the McGovern
welfare plan. We should not have al 1 our wad shot on one day it
should dribble out each day with each spokesman making some news.
If done correctly, by the end of the week, there will have been
widespread coverage on the plan.
The following points are the ones we have to target in order to
get the press to focus on them:
Page 3
-- The plan means higher taxes for hard-pressed wage-earners.
-- It is a giveaway which will discourage work and create greater
class conflict.
-- McGovern doesn't know how much it will cost and is being
irresponsible in presenting it as he has.
-- In one of the greatest acts of political expediency in our
history, McGovern is going to make a wholesale revision of his
plan to trick the American people into thinking it is some panacea
for their ills. He will do it after the Dem convention as a cynical
gesture to get him out from under a subject that was over his head
to begin with.
Our entire effort next week must be well-coordinated. There
has got to be a press release handed out for every spokesman we
have speaking on the subject. Efforts should be made to get on
network television; radio actualities should be made available; the
wire services should get copies of everything; columns should be
planted.
Other points which can be made. People on Social Security
would get less money than they are getting now because McGovern
has not said what he would do with the present system. McGovern
is going to do away with tax exemptions -- $3,000 for a family of
four -- without proving how this helps the taxpayer. People with
higher incomes are going to suffer confiscatory taxation.
A fact sheet which extracts all the various versions of the
McGovern welfare giveaway is now being prepared and should be
ready by Friday. This will go out as a supplement for this outline,
and will become the basis for our charges. The idea will be to
show that the McGovern plan is so totally confused and misshapen that
it will be the biggest fiscal and social disaster of any program that
has ever come down the chutes. The plan, alternately, should be
held up to derision and alarm. Without doing it explicitly, McGovern
ought to be portrayed as a decent humane, nut.
6/28/72
MEMRRANDUM FOR PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM: EKN KHACHIGIAN
It was requested that we come up with
a plan
butween now and the Democratic National Convention to
his
nail
McGovern to the wall on
welfare
What
follows is the outline of that plan -- specifi
S
will come later.
The
important point is that McGoeen is going to
change his plan
right after the Democratic National
Convetion. We know he is planning it, and he has already
laid the
grouddwork floating steries in Post
and indicating on Southern swing his intent
change
It. Thus, our immediate strategy is to tar him
every conceival way on his $1000 bonus so that his
manner of rehabilit Ration is not in the least bit comfor table.
Moreover, we should also predict that he is going to change
his plan and that
he will do so
after the convention.
c
These points should be uppermost in the critigism
of
the McGovern proposal:
-- There is a $1000 cash grant to every man, women, and
child in the
country, regardless of need and with no
work incentive at all.
-- This plan will expand the budget by $210 billion.
-- This plan will put 210 billion people on "welfare."
=
page 2
-- This plan is an assault on the
work ethic and
removes from the American culture the idea that people should
work for a living, not live
on the largesse of the taxpayer.
-- This plan will cost exhorbitatn sums, will require
a massive increase in taxes (or cause confiscatory taxation)
will directly harm middle income people will harm the families
where man and wife are
each
tholding jobs to
help
make ends meet.
-- Finally, it should be
pointed out that
McGovern himself does
not
know what his program
would cost, has been totally irresponsible in trying
to
sell this to the
public, and if
this
is any indication of a McGovern presidency, then God help
us all.
aggest that Javits be asked to be one of those
on the warpath
regarding the McGovern welfare giveaway.
He
did a good job during the
Joint Economic
Committee hearings, and he might be willing to do so again
in a public forum. If he does, we should make our
P.R. facilities avaialable to him at
1701.
Javits
is also ranking minority member on Senatize Labor and Public
Welfare Committee.
page 3
to attack
Rockefeeler would also be a good one and should
the plan. issue. He could stick in his speech a
classic line: "Ladies and genelemen, Nelson Rockefeller
appreciation the offer, but I don't think I need a
$1000 bill from George McGovern."
Richardson would be a credible sourse as HEW secretary,
but it shall is thought that he
would not receive a great deal coverage
very much press.
argelyn
because he is
a
romewhat bland figure.
Nevertheless, he
should have our materials and be
primed for response at press conferance a hard-
htting 4 speech insert should be repared for him
^
Gevernor Reagan, who is known for his oppostion to
welfare waste, would also be a good source. He should have
the information with a Lyn Nofziger speech.
lichman
is supposed to be out on the
hustings next week, and he can be briefed to get out the
line. All
surrogates should have this information
inserts
with appropriate suggested
provided for them.
Finally, the Jeep should be asked to
focus a major section of one of his
speeches on ridiculing the Govern
plan. Gmphasis on the wage-earner
being taken to the cleaners 40 give
$1000 toevery breathing person in the country.
page 4
Beginning Monday, the whole week must be orchestrated
towards one goal,
and that goal is to
totally
discredit the
McGovern welfare plan. We should
not have all our wad shot on one day -- it should
dribble out each day with each spokesman making some news.
If done correctly, by the
end of the week, there
will
have been widespread coverage on the plan.
The following points are the
ones we have to target
in order to get the press to focus on them:
-- The plan means higher taxes for
hard-pressed
wage-earners.
discourage work
-- It is a giveaway which will
fumilies
and
and create greater class conflict
McGovearn doesn't know how much it will cost and
is being irresponsible in presenting it as he has.
-- In one of the greatest acts of poliita 1 expediency
in our history, McGovern is going to make a wholesale revision
of his plan to trick the American
people into thinking
it is some panacea for their ills. He will do it after
the Dem convention as a cynical gesture to get him out from
under a subject that was over his head to begin with.
Our entire effort next week must be well-coordinated.
There has got to be a press release handed out for every
spokesman we have speaking on the subject. Efforts should be
made to get on
network television; radio actualities should
page 5
be
made available, the wine services should set copies
of
everything; columns should be planted.
Other points which can be made. People on
Social Security would get less money than they are getting
now because McGovern har not said what he would do with
the present system. McGovern is going to do away with
tax
exemptions -- $3,000 for a family of four -- without
proving how this helps the
taxpayer. People with
higher
incomes are going to suffer confiscatory taxation.
A fact sheet which extracts all the various versions
of the McGovern welfare giveaway is now being prepared and
should be ready by Friday. This will go out as a supplement
this
for
outline, and will become the basis for our
charges. The idea will be to show that the McGovern plan
is so totally confused and misshapen that it will be the
biggest fiscal and social disaster of any program that
has
come down the chutes.
The
ever
plan, alternetely, should be held up
to derision and alam. Without
doing it explicitly, mc Govern
ought to be portrayed as a decent,
humane, nut,
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 20, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PAT BUCHANAN
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN Q
You might not have seen this letter in the New York Times
from the pre-eminent Socialist Michael Harrington and his fellow
traveler Irving Howe. Though they make clear that McGovern
is not a socialist, they go on to express great pleasure at
"a significant extension of the welfare state. 11 And, "That is
where McGovern has taken a series of excellent, if sometimes
not sufficiently precise, stands
"
"That is why we,
support his candidacy. "
Come this fall, it will be nice to send out the headlines --
"Socialist Leaders Endorse McGovern -- Believe his Plans for
"Significant Extension" of Welfare State "Excellent. " If McGovern
is making the socialists happy, he must be doing something wrong.
6/20/72
MEMORANDUM FOR PAT BUCHANAN
FROM: KEN KHACHGGIAN
You might not have seen this letter in the New York
Times from the pre-eminent Socialist Michael Harrington
and his fellow traveler Irving Howe. Though they
make
clear that McGovern is not a socialist, they go on to
express great pleasure at "a significant extension of the
welfare state." And, "That is where McGovern
has taken
a series of excellent, if sometimes not sufficiently
precise, stands:
"
"Thase is why we,
support his candidacy."
Come this fall, it will be nice to send out the
headlines -- "Socialist Leaders Endorse McGovern --- Believe his
Plans For "Significant Extension" of Welfare State "Excellent."
If McGovern is making the socialists happy, he must be doing
something wrong.
P.
Keep original of MCG article Ext. for
+
our files mens - attabled chain on
- also
a PJB file.
K.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 19, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN
McGovern knows damn good and well that we have enough
material on him to sink a battleship. He also knows that we
won't be afraid to use this information, and that it will damage
him highly. Thus, his strategy will be, among other things, to
obfuscate the issues around personality. To wit, he and his
people will try to shrug off the attacks by yelling "smear,"
"hatchet job, 11 "Tricky Dick" -- the works.
This has already been promised by Mankiewicz and the
first evidence of it came over the weekend. After Herb Stein's
low-keyed assault on the McGovern tax and welfare schemes,
McGovern released a statement saying the following about the
Stein appraisal:
"He called the attack 'the opening shot of this
year's campaign against me, 1 and said: 'Nixon obviously
realizes that this year's Presidential campaign is going
to be waged primarily over the rampant unemployment,
inflation, economic uncertainty and favoritism which
now burden this country. I
"The attack, he said, 'tipped his (Nixon's) hand that
he is going to try to cover up with the kind of political
hatchet work which has characterized every campaign
he has ever run. I 11 New York Times 6/19/72
This has been an enormously successful tool of the Democrats,
and they will use it with gusto. I have some suggestions to counter it.
-- We have to start, very soon, using the very same tactic. I.e.,
we need to have our people accuse McGovern of doing hatchet work,
accuse him of divisiveness, of polarization -- and we have the quotes
to back it up. Our use of this should be relentless in order not to let
McGovern get away with using it first. There is no reason why we
shouldn't be the "hurt" party. It didn't do RN any damage in 1966.
Page 2
-- As soon as things begin in earnest, any time McGovern
makes national news with such accusations, we ought to be right
on top of it and have Scott, Rockefeller, and others try to get
on t.v. immediately refuting it -- backed up with some well-
documented examples of McGovern demagogy.
-- This whole business reinforces the necessity that our
attacks be not at all strident, but simply factual. The only thing
McGovern will be smeared with is hard fact.
-- Finally, let's hold in reserve to the very end of the
campaign the possibility of a major speech by RN -- only if the
election appears to be close and only if the smear argument seems
to be catching. That speech would be a point by point refutation
(Checkers style) of the McGovern argument -- one which catalogues
the whole series of smears against the President (this is being
compiled by Research, as you know). Let's not jump the gun on
this one, but let's hold the idea in reserve if needed.
6/19/72
MEMBRANDUM FOR PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM: KEN KHACHIGIAN
McGovern knows damn good and
well that we have
enough material on him to
sink a battleship. He also
knows that we won't be afraid to use this information,
and that it will damage him highly. Thus, his strategy
will be, among other things, to obfustate the issues
around personality. To wit he and his people will try
to shrug the attacks by yelling "smear," "hatchet job,"
"Tricky Dick" -- the works.
This has already been promised by Mankiewicz and the
first evidence of it came over the weekend. After Herb
Stein's low-keyed assault on the
McGovern
tax and
welfare schemes, McGovern released a statement saying
the following about the Stein
appraisal:
"He called the attack 'the
opening shot of
this year's campaign against me,' and said: 'Nixon
obviously realizes that this year's Presidential
campaign is going to be waged primarily over the
rampant unemployment, inflation, economic uncertainty
and favoritism which now burden this country.'
"The attack, he said, 'tipped his (Nixon' 5) hand
that he is going to try to cover up with the kind of
political hatchet work which has characterized every
campaign he
has
ever
run.'"
N.Y. Times 6/19/72
page 2
Ras been an
This
enormously successful tool of the Democrats,
and they will use it with gusto. I have some suggestions
to counter it:
using
-- We have to start, very soon,Ahe very same tactic. :I.e.,
we need to have our people accuse McGovern of doing hatchet
e
work, accus
him of
divisiveness, of polarization --
and we have the quotes to back it up. Our use of this
should be relentless in order not to let McGovern get away
with using it first. There is no reason why we shouldn't be
the "hurt" party. It didn't do RN any damage in 1966.
-- As soon as things begin in earnest, any time McGovern
makes
national news with such accusations, we ought
to be right on top of it and have Scott, Rockefeller, and
others try to get on t.v. immediately refuting it
--
backed
up with some well-documented examples of
McGovern demagogy.
-- This whole business reinforces the necessity that
our attacks be not at all strident, but simply factual. The
only thing McGovern will be smeared with is
hard fact.
-- Finally, let's hold in reserve to the very end of
the campaing the possibility of a major speech by RN -- only
if
the election appears to be close and only if the smear
argument seems to be catching. That speech would be a point
by point refutation (Checkers style) of the McGovern argument --
page 3
one which
catalogues the
whole series of smears
against the President (this is being
compiled by
Research, as you know) . Let's not jump the gun on this
one, but
let's hold the idea in reserve if needed.
"First you say you do, and then you don't;
Then you say you will, and then you won't.
11
.
From the lyrics of "Undecided"
draft, Khachigian
6/13/72
IS HE OR ISN'T HE?
It is clear by now that many of the major media in America
are going to give George McGovern a free ride in his quest for the
Presidency of the United States. Not only will George McGovern race
as rapidly as he can from the left to the middle, but a sympathetic
press is already leading interference for him.
In one of the most candid appraisals ever made by a newspaperman,
the respected political reporter Godfrey Sperling, Jr., said in the
Christian Science Monitor:
"Reader beware. A love affair between a number of
newsmen and George McGovern is bursting into full bloom
and even though we are talking -- by and large -- about tough-
minded, professional observers, this congenial relationship
is bound to affect their copy.
"In fact, in this reporter's judgment, it already has. "
Sperling's observation is documented by the thousands of words
that are now being written about Senator McGovern to the effect that
he is not so radical as he appears or that he is not really as extreme
as he sounds.
In May, before the "McGovern Phenomonon" had struck responsive
chords in the liberal establishment, the New York Times was raising
storm warnings against McGovern's extreme economic proposals
saying:
Page 2
11
too sudden and drastic a shift to income redis-
tribution might actually intensify other problems such as
unemployment and lagging productivity. The link between
corporate profits, investments and jobs is vital.
"Similarly, his welfare proposals.
would be
extremely costly.
11
And Senator McGovern must be prepared to
demonstrate how cutting the defense budget by $32 billion
in three years -- virtually 40 percent -- can be carried
through without endangering national security. "
Twenty-four hours after the final votes from California were
tabulated, the Times was less certain about how it perceived
McGovern's positions, referring to them merely as "hazy" and
"controversial. 11 Never mind that giving every man, woman, and child
in the United States one thousand dollars is far from "hazy" and much
worse than "controversial. 11
Finally, after realizing that Senator McGovern may be its only
hope of sending the President into early retirement, three days later
the Times was positively excited about letting McGovern slide away
from his extremist positions toward wh at it referred to as the
"vital center. 11 Said the Times:
Page 3
"It implies no surrender of principles for realistic
leadership to recognize that compromise is at the heart
of politics, especially in such a vast, heterogeneous
society as the United States. If Senator McGovern is to
become his party's nominee, and prove himself a viable
candidate in the fall, his task is to show that he wo uld be
sensitive and responsive to the diverse elements in the national
community in shaping the inevitable legislative compromises. "
The Times had come full circle. The signal to George was
essentially that it would "allow" him to move away from his
extremist positions and not accuse him (as it with relish often
does of President Nixon) of political expediency.
And if the New York Times be there, can the Washington Post
be far behind? The Post allowed as though McGovern would be
forgiven if his far-out defensè, welfare and tax schemes underwent
"reconsideration and rearrangement. 11 Mr. McGovern "would be the
first to concede that he should not be wedded to programs that do not
squarely address the conditions they purport to. 11 The Post further
observed that those political commentators who critized McGovern
for "trimming and expediency" were just engaging in "gloating
wiseacre remarks. " Those are clear code words of warning that the
press dare not hold the South Dakota Senator up to his own pious
standards of honesty and candor.
Page 4
Much of what the media has done in relation to George McGovern
is subtle -- obviously avoiding overt expressions of their preference
for the left-liberal line of McGovern. In Sperling's words "they are
slow to give him the same kind of 'hard time' on his programs that
they would give almost any other candidate. " This subtlety is in full
operation at Newsweek where McGovern's scrambling is referred to
as "a practical politician's game of nuance and emphasis. "
Newsweek also said of the Senator: "He is clearly permodic
permissive on the issues of marijuana and abortion but has not come
out for full legalization of either. 11 But in fact McGovern has come
out for the full legalization of both, but in both instances he has taken
contrary positions after the fact without publicly acknowleding his
more permissive statements (which have certainly not hurt him among
radical campus and women's lib groups). McGovern may not now ad-
vocate legal pot and open abortion, but he sure did a few short months
ago. The media's refusal to clearly delineate the candidate's thinking
is more proof of their inclination to give him a helpful boost.
After the California primary, Newsweek devoted a front page story
to Mr. McGovern one basic purpose of which was to knock down the idea
that he is a radical. In the days when the McGovern juggernaut was
only a gleam in the New Left's eye, Newsweek had this to say: "An
open liberal-leftist since his days as a South Dakota history professor,
Page 5
McGovern is perhaps the closest thing to an ideological radical
in the U.S. Senate. 11 Only two months later in a sympathetic assess-
ment, Newsweek was saying that McGovern's campaign was "hardly
the mark of a radical candidate. 11
In that same June 19, 1972 issue of Newsweek, the magazine
suggested McGovern's far-out share-the-wealth welfare scheme
was not very different - - except in dollar amounts -- from the
President's welfare reform program. This nonsense was passed
off as the truth. Yet Mr. McGovern's plan is to give everyone
$1000 with no questions asked and no work requirement -- $4000 for
a family of four. President Nixon's is $2600 for a family of four --
and only to those families who have proved their need and only with
stiff work requirements which encourage people to get off welfare,
not stay on. Congressman Mills suggests that the McGovern proposal
would cost nearly $70 billion while the Family Assistance Plan would
cost a mere fraction of that. Yet here is Newsweek trying to draw
the comparison to make George McGovern look more like Richard
Nixon and less like Karl Marx.
Newsweek also refers to McGovern in the most glowing terms
as a man who came back from the war "nursing an idealistic sense
of social injustice and the need for international reconciliation;" as
a man who only "flirted" with the Communist-infiltrated Progressive
Party of Henry Wallace (when McGovern was
actually an ardent supporter and attended its convention); as a man
Page 6
whose values -- "candor integrity, hard work -- are old-
fashioned and Biblical, a heritage from his Methodist-minister
father. 11 Why old George isn't a radical after all -- he only seems
like one! What's more (and please understand the implicit
comparison) his "rhetorical style is uninflammatory. 11 Is this the
same man who said: "I think the re -election of Richard Nixon in
1972 would be an open hunting right for this man to give in to all
his impulses for a major war against the people of Indochina. 11 Or
the man who said: "Every Senator in this Chamber (the U.S. Senate)
is partly responsible for sending 50, 000 young Americans to an
early grave. This Chamber reeks of blood. 11 Or the man who said
(in 1964): "I regard Mr. Goldwater as the most unstable radical and
extremist ever to run for the Presidency in either political party. 11
This is the same McGovern who boasts: "I have sought not to whip
up emotions but to appeal to humanity and reason. 11
In what appears to be a contest, Time magazine has also
done its share of covering up the stale extremist tracks of
George McGovern. Time refers to the Senator's "sometime
endorsement of the $6,500 income guarantee for a family of four"
which would cost $72 billion and put 104 million people on welfare.
Of course it is not a "sometime" endorsement -- it is a flat endorse- -
ment, and McGovern has twice endorsed this proposal while also
introducing it in the Senate of the United States. But Time's effort
is to make it appear to be a half-hearted embrace.
Page 7
In the Christian Science Monitor, one of Mr. Sperling's
colleagues writes a front page article which would have profited
from Mr. Sperling's warnings. The author, Richard L. Strout,
who is also the "TRB" of the left-wing New Republic, admits
that Mr. McGovern's "economic proposals are perhaps as radical
as any made by a leading contender for the presidency since
William Jennings Bryan. 11 But later he observes that "Mr. McGovern
does not look like a radical. His simple, cool and almost dull
delivery makes proposals that are essentially startling seem almost
commonplace. 11 Mr. Strout's observation is of course S.O.P. for
what will come in the next few months; i. , "this guy is just too
nice a guy to turn the country upside down. 11
Other columnists and pundits are playing the same game.
Tom Wicker of the New York Times is now telling Hubert Humphrey
to get out of the race: "So the path of real statesmanship for
Hubert Humphrey -- as well as for Edmund Muskie and Edward
Kennedy,
may well be withdrawal from the race and a solid
endorsement for Mr. McGovern. " Wicker also points out that
because Mr. McGovern "has shown himself nothing if not an
astute politician" he can allay the fears of radicalism if his fellow
Democrats can get behind him. We can hide anything behind unity,
can't we Tom?
Page 8
Joseph Kraft, who falls not far behind Tom Wicker in his
obeisance to the liberal establishment line is also pounding the
keys in order to assist McGovern cover up his extremist positions.
On the day of the California primary, Kraft was saying: "He is
calm, well-spoken and sure of himself. He does not evoke old
themes or past glories or tired rhetoric. Right or wrong, he has
specific programs to meet concrete difficulties. 11
Two days later, Kraft knew he might be speaking about the
next Democratic party nominee for President, and so he set
out to help him. After confessing that the Senator's tax proposals
were "insufficiently sensitive to the delicate nature of confidence
in the American economy" and that McGovern's approach to foreign
policy and defense problems "seems to me to want a certain dis-
crimination, 11 he then delivered the saying grace:
"Still, these are details. The critical point is to
get the United States moving in the right direction, and the
right direction is not much in doubt. "
11
His tax proposals may not be perfect, but they
will certainly set in motion a redistribution of income. 11
Thus, Kraft counsels, we need not worry about the minor
"details" of what McGovern says. The direction is "right. 11 Later,
Kraft continued his counsel in another column, asking: "
by
what right would they (McGovern's opponents). or any dark dark
Page 9
horse, take the nomination away from Senator McGovern?' The
nomination "cannot fairly be denied him by just a snapping of
fingers. 11 And as if to make sure McGovern won't be tarnished
by a radical image, Kraft advises that his "rough edges" can be
"planed away by a more centrist platform and running mate. 11
Kraft has made clear that he is there to help McGovern rehabilitate
himself.
McGovern gets help from other sources as well. The "love
affair" of which Mr. Sperling speaks is more than apparent in the
writings of a rhapsodic Mary McGrory, who suggests that George
McGovern is "the master of a new Camelot. 11 She feels that with
McGovern "the government might become rational and human again,
as it was in John Kennedy's day. 11
McGovern will continue to get these breaks from the members
of the press because it is apparent that they agree with much of what
he is saying. But knowing that his extremist positions will get him
in trouble with an electorate which does not find itself comfortable
with welfare giveaways, tax confiscation, and unconditional amnesty,
these reporters are going to do what they can to engage in the
biggest political cover-up in history. There will be little of the
honest assessment which the Wall Street Journal gave to George
McGovern's intentions to escape unpopular positions:
Page 10
11
it really would be nice if we could be
spared all that talk so dear to those devoted partisans --
all the stuff about how other politicians are slippery but
Senator McGovern is consistent, about how all the rest
are deceivers and only he is truthful. "
There is not much question that the media are going to do their
best to help George McGovern hide those postures on the left-wing
fringe of American politics. Few members of the opinion-making
community will say anything to hurt the so-called "Prairie Populist. 11
Thus far, no major television network, with the ability the networks
have to reach nightly into millions of homes, has laid bare the facts
on McGovern's extremism. They would prefer, it seems, to save
up all their investigative reporting for the Nixon Administration.
As Sperling put it:
11
McGovern has pretty much been given a
'free ride' from the press" on his radical proposals and that there
is a "new political reality: George McGovern has become the new
'sweetheart' of the liberals. "
Concluding this rare and honest appraisal, Sperling writes:
"But, as of now, I would say that many of those
newsmen who accompany McGovern along the campaign
trail have already let their bias show through - - not so
much by what they have written about McGovern but by what
they have not written about him and his programs. Their
omisions tell a great deal. "
Page 11
This bias will continue in all likelihood with McGovern
getting a fresh break to get him over each crisis. And finally,
most sadly, we may have in 1972 the same unfortunate situation
of 1960 where reporters wore their emotions on their sleeves and
did little to hide their preference for one candidate over another.
Theodore White recorded this phenomonon in his book, "The Making
of the President -- 1960:"
"By the last weeks of the campaign, those forty
or fifty national correspondents who had followed Kennedy
since the beginning of his electoral exertions into the
November days had become more than a press corps --
they had become his friends, and, some of them,
his most devoted admirers. When the bus or the plane
rolled or flew through the night, they sang songs of their
own composition about Mr. Nixon and the Republicans
in chorus with the Kennedy staff and felt that they, too,
were marching like soldiers of the Lord to the New Frontier. 11
"First you say you do, and then you don't;
Then you say you will, and then you won't
"
From the lyrics of "Undecided"
draft - Khachigian
6/13/72
IS HE OR ISN'T HE?
meny
It is clear by now that goodly portion of the
major media in America going to give George McGovern
a free ride X in his quest for the Presidency of the
United States. Not only will George McGovern race as
rapidly as he can from the left to the middle, but
a sympathetic press is already leading interference for
him A though few will admit it.
In one of the most candid appraisals ever made by
reporter
a newspaperman, the respected political
Godfrey Sperling Jr., said in the Christian Science Monitor:
"Reader beware. A love affair between a number of
newsmen and George McGosenn is bursting into full bloom
and even though we are talking -- by and large -- about
tough-minded, professional observers, this congenial
relationship is bound to affect their copy.
!In fact, in this reporter's judgment, it already
has. "
Sperling's observation is documented by the thousands
of words that are now being written about Senator McGovern
to the effect ak that he is not so radical as he appears or
that he is not really as as extremi as he sounds.
page 2
In
May, before the "McGovern Phenomonon"
had
struc
responsive chords in the liberal establ omenti
the New York Times was raising storm warnings against
McGovern's extreme economic proposals saying:
"
too sudden and drastic a shift to income
redistribution might actually
intensify
other problems such as unemployment and lagging
productivity
The
line between corporate profits,
investments and
jobs is vital.
"Similarly, his welfare proposals.
would be
extremely costly
"
And Senator McGovern must be prepared
to demonstrate how cutting the defense budget by
$32 billion in three years -- virtually 40 perscent
can be carried through without langering national
security."
Twenty-four hours after the final votes from "California
were
tabulated, the Times was less certain about
how
perceived McGovern's
positions, referring
to them merely as "hazy" and "controversial." Never mind
that giving every mans, woman, and child in the United States
one thousand dollars is far from"hazy"and much worse than
"controversial."
Finally, after realizing that Senator McGovern may
page 3
be its only
hope of sending the President into early
three days later
retirement,/the Times was positively excited about letting
McGovern slide away from his extremist positions
toward
what
referred to as the "vital center." Said the
Times:
"It implies no surrender of principles for
realistic leadership to recomgnize that compromise
is at the heart of politics, especially in such a
vast, heterogeneous society as the United States. If
Senator McGosern
is to become
his party's nominee,
and prove himself a viable candidate in the fall, his task
is to show that he would be sensitive and responsive
to the diverse elements in the national community in
shaping
the inevitable legislative compromises."
The Times had come full circle. The signal to George
was essentially that
would "allow" him to move away
from his extremist positions and not accuse him (as
with relish often do President Nixon) of political
expediency.
And if the
New York Times be there, can the
Washington Post be far behind? The Post allowed as though
McGovern would be forgiven if his far-out
defense,
welfare and tax schemes underwent "recondideration and
rearrangement." Mr. McGovern
"would be the
first to concede that he should not be wedded to programs
page 5 4
that do not squarely address the conditions they
further observed
pur port to." The Post that those political commentators
who criticized
McGovern for
"trimming and expediency"
were just engaging in "gloating wiseacre remarks." Those
are clear code
words of warning that the press dare
not hold the South
Dakota Senator up to his own
pious standards of honesty and candor.
Much of what the media has done in relation to
George McGovern is subtle -- obviously
avoiding
overt expressions of their preference for the left-liberal
line of McGovern. In Sperling's words "they are slow to
give him the same kind of 'hard time' on his programs
that they would give almost any other
candidate."
This
subtlety is in full operation at Newsweek
where McGoverpr.s
scrambling is referred to as "a
practical politician's game of nuance and emphasis."
Newsweek also said of the Senator: "He is clearly
permissive on the issues of marijuana and abortion but
has not come out for
full legalization of either." But
in
fact McGovern has come
out for the full legalization
of both, but in both instances he has taken contrary positions
after the fact without publicly acknowledging his more
permissive statements (which have certainly not hurt him
among radical campus and women's lib groups). McGovern
open
may not now advocate legal pot and abortion, but he sure did
page 5
a few short months ago. The media's refusl to clearly
delineate the candidate's thinking is more
proof
of
their inclination to give him a
helpful boost
After the Californaa primary, Newsweek devoted a
basic
front page story to Mr. McGovern one
purpose
of which
was to knock down the idea that he
is
a radical. In the days
when the McGovern Juggernaut
was only a gleam in the New Left's
eye, Newsweek had
this to say:
"An open liberal-leftist
since his days as a South Dakota history professor, McGovern
is perhaps the closest thing to an ideological radical in
the U.S. Senate." Only two months later in a sympathetic
assessment, Newsweek was saying that McGovern's campaign
was "hardly the mark of a
radical
candidate."
dn that same June 19, 1972 issue of Newsweek, the
magazine suggested McGovern's far-out sha re-the-wealth
welfare scheme was not
very different -- except in
dollar amounts -- from the President's welfare reform program.
This nonsense was passed off as the truth. Yet Mr. McGovern's
plan is to give everyone
$1000 with no questions asked
and no work requirement -- $4000 for a family of four.
President Nixon's is $2600 for a family of four -- and only
to those families who have proved their need and only with
stiff work requirements which encourage people to get off
welfare, not stay on.
-Congressman Mills suggests that
page 6
the
would cost nearly $70 billion while the Tamily
Assistance Plan would a mere fraction of that. Yet here
is Newsweek trying to draw the comparison to make George
McGovern look more like Richard Nixon and less like
Karb Marx.
Newsweek also refer to McGovern in the most glowing
terms as a man who came back from the war "nursing an
idealistic sense of social injustice and the need for
international reconciliation; as a man who only "flirted"
with the
Communist-infiltrated Progressive Party of
ImcGovem)
Henry Wallace (when
was an ardent supporter and attende
convention) as a man whose values -- "candor integrity,
hard work -- are old-fashioned and Biblical, a heritage
from his Methodist-minister father." Why old George isn't
a radical after all -- he only
/like one
What's more
seems
(and please understand the implicit comparison) his
rhetorical style is uninflammatory." Is this the same
man who said: : "I think the re-election of Richard Nixon
in 1972 would be an open hunting right for this man to give
in to all his impusses for a major war against the
people of Indochina." Or the man who said: "Eveary Senator
in this Chamber (the
U.S. Senate) is partly responsible
for sending 50,000 young Americans to an early grave. This
Chamber reeks of blood." Or the man who said (in 1964) : "I
regard Mr. Goldwater as the most unstable radical and extremist
page 7
ever to run for the Presidency in either political party."
This is the same McGovern who boast
:
"I have sought
not to whip up emotions but to appeal to humanity and
reason."
In what appears to be a contest, Time magazine has
also done its share of covering up the stale extremist
tracks of Georea McGovern. Time refere to the Senator's
"sometime endorsement of the $6,500 income guarantee for
a family of four" which would cost $72 billion and put
104 million people on welfare. Of course it is not a
"sometime"
endorsement -- it is a flat endorsement, and
McGovern has twice endorsed this proposal while also intro-
ducing it in the Senate of the United States. But Time's
effort is to make it appear to be a half-hearted embrace.
at
In a period of five days in June the Christian Science
editorially three imes
Maxx Monitor EYEM SHEP succumbed, to the temptation to ease
up ON McGovern.
In the Christian Science Monitor, one of Mr. Sperling's
colleagues writes a front page article which would
have
profited
/from Mr. Speraling's warnings.
The author,
Richard L. Strout, who is also the "TRB" of the left-wing
New Republic, admits that Mr. McGovern's "economic proposals
are perhaps as radical as any made by a leading contender
for the presidency since Willima Jennings Bryan." But later
he observes that "Mr. McGovern does not look like a radical 1.
page 8
His simple , cool and almost dull delivery makes proposals
that are
essentially startling seem almost
commonplace. = Mr. Strout's observation is of course
S.O.P. for what will come in the next few months; i.e.,
This guy is just too nice a guy to turn the country upside
down.
"
The
Other columnists and pundits are
playing the
same
game. Tom Wicker of the New York Times is
now telling Hubert Humphrey to get out of the race:
"So the path of real statesmenship for Hubert
Humphrey as well as for Edmund Muskie and Edward
Kennedy,
may well be withdmawal
from the race and a solid endorsement for Mr. McGovern."
Wicket also points out that because Mr. McGovern
"has shown himself nothing if not an astute politician" he
can allay the fears of radicalism if his fello Democrats
can get behind him. We can hide anything behind unity, can't
we Toma?
Joseph Kraft, who falls not far behind Tom Wicker in
ment
his obeisance to the liberal establ
sh
line is also
pounding the keys in order to assist McGovern
cover
up his extremist positions. On the day of the California
primary, Kraft was saying: "He is calm, well-spoken and
sure of himself. He does not
evoke old themes or
past glories or tired
rhetoric. Right or wrong, he has
page 9
specific programs to meet concrete difficulties.
=
GJTWO
days later, Kraft knew he might be speaking about the
next Demooratic party nominee for President, and so he
set out to help him. After confessing that the
Senator's tax proposals were "insufficiently sensitive
to the deligate nature of confidence
in the American
economy" and that McGovern's approach to foreign
policy and defense
problems "seems to me to want a
certain discrimination," he then delivered the saving
grace:
"Still, these are details. The critical point
is to get the United States moving in the right
direction, and the right direction is not much
in doubt.
II
.His tax proposals may not be perfect, but they
will certainly set in motion a redistribution of/income.
Thus, Kraft counsels, we need not worry about the
minor "deaails' of what McGovern says. The direction is "right."
Later, Kraft continued his counsel in another column, asking:
by what right would they (McGovern's opponents), or
any dark dark horse, take the nomination away from Senator
McGovern?" The
nomination "cannot fairly
be
denied him by just
a snapping of fingers. " And as if
to make sure
McGovern won't be tarnished
by a radical image, Kraft advises that his "rough edges"
page 10
can be "planed away by a more centrist platform and running
mate. " Kraft has made clear that he is there to help McGovern
rehabilitate himself.
McGovern gets help from other sources as well. The
"love affair of which Mr. Sperling speaks is more than
apparent in the writings of a rhapsodic Mary McGrory, who
suggests that George McGovern is "the master of a new
Camelot."
She feels that with McGovern "the government
might become rational and human again, as it was in
John Kennedy's day."
McGovern will continue to get these breaks
from
the members of the press because it is apparent that they
agree with much of what he is saying.
But knowing
that his extremist positions will get him in
trouble
with an electorate which does not find itself comfortable
with welfare giveaways, tax confiscation, and unconditional
amnesty, these reporters are going to do what they can
to engage in the
biggest political
cover-up in
history. There will be little of the honest assessment
which the Wall Street Journal gave to George McGovern's
intentions to escape unpopular positions:
"
it really would be nice if we could be
spared all that talk so dear to those devoted partisans --
all the stuff about how other politicians are slippery
but Senator Mc Govern is consistent, about how all the
page 11
rest are deceivers and only he is truthful."
There is not
much question
that the media are
going to do the
best
to help George McGovern hide
those postures on the left-wing fringe of American politics.
Few
members of the
opinion-making community will
hurt the
so-called
"Prairie Populist."
Trus
far, no
major television network, with the
ability
the networks have to
reach nightly into millions of
homes, has laid bare the
facts on McGovern's extremism.
They would prefer, it seems, to save up all their
investigative reporting for the Nixon Administration.
As Sperling put it: " McGovern has pretty much been
given a 'free ride' from the press" on his radical
proposals and that there is a
"new political reality:
George ME McGovern has become the new 'sweetheart' of
the liberals."
Concluding this rare honest appraisal, Sperling writes:
"But, as of now, I would say that many of those
newsmen who accompany McGovern along the campaign
trail have already let their bias show through -- not
so much by what they have
written about McGovern
but by what they have not written abouthim and his
programs. Their
omis ions tell a great deal."
page 12
This bias will continue in all likelihood with
McGovern getting a fresh break to
get
him over each
crisis. And finally, most sadly, we may have in 1972 the
same unfortunate situation of 1960 where reporters wore
their emotions on their sleeves and did little to hide
their preference for one candidate over another.
Theodore Whiee
recorded
this phenomonon in
his book, "The Making of the President -- 1960:"
"By the last weeks of the campaign, those forty
or
fifty national corresponsdents who had followed
Kennedy since the beginning of his electoral exertions
into the November days had become more than a press
corps -- they had become his friends, and, some of them,
his most devoted admirer. s When the bus or the plane
rolled or flew through the night, they sang songs of their
own composition about Mr. ixon and the Republicans
in chorus with the Kennedy staff and felt that they, too,
were marching like soldiers of the Lord to the New
Foontier."
chron.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 13, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PAT BUCHANAN
KEN KHACHIGIAN the
FROM:
Herewith a minor sample of the apprehension over the
"McGovern Market. 11 The stock market downturn of the week of
the California primary has been attributed directly to McGovern
in many quarters. It is likely that, should McGovern be nom-
inated on July 12, the market is going to drop on July 13.
Your idea about getting Pierre Rinfret to allude to this in one
of his newsletters is one approach. Also, as you suggested, the
Kiplinger letter ought to pick this thing up. We should have 1701
watch for all these kinds of newsletters coming out of Wall Street,
and at the appropriate time we should paste them up (with a classic
Frank Leonard job) and get them out to the entire financial community
in a direct mail operation. I would think that Maurice Stans would
love to have this in his hand when he goes out looking for contributors.
The idea of stock market crash should McGovern be elected is
something that should be freely talked about. Millions of voters are
investors, directly or indirectly, and nothing would scare them more
than the thought of a financial community collapse should George get in.
Attachment
Chron
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 13, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
CHUCK COLSON
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN Dr
Here is some of the material on the Wallace Convention.
No proceedings were drawn up for the public record, and if
they were, the Library of Congress doesn't have them. Other
inquiries are now being made by Fred Fielding in order to see
if McGovern made a speech at the convention.
The platform is attached plus the speeches given by Wallace
and his runningmate. The relevant parts are marked up for those
who want to extract the information.
Also attached is an analysis done by the Americans for
Democratic Action (!) accusing Wallace of having Communists
or Communist sympathizers in his camp. I would use it this way:
The organization which endorsed McGovern in 1972 is as left-wing as
they come. Yet, in 1948, when McGovern was ardently supporting
Henry Wallace, even the ADA could not stomach the source of
Wallace's support. There's a great deal of irony here. Maybe the
ADA ought to be asked to rescind its support of McGovern inasmuch
as he was in bed with the fellow the ADA had so much trouble with
in 1948.
Attachment
6/13/72
MEMORANDUM FOR
CHUCK COLSON
FROM: KEN KHACHIGIAN
Here is some of the material on the
Wallace
Convention. No prodeddings were
drawn up for
the public record, and if they
were, the Library
of Congress doesn't have them. Other inquiries are
now being made by Fred Fielding in order to see if
McGovern made \a speech appearans e at the convention.
The platform is attached plus the speeches given by
Wallace and his
runningmane.
The relevant parts are
marked up for those who want to extract the information.
Also attached is an analysis done by the Americans for
Democratic Action (!) accusing Wallace of having Communists
or Communist
sympathizers in his camp. I would use it
this way: The organization
which endorsed McGovern in
1972
is as left-wing as they come. Yet, in 1948,
when McGovern was ardently supporting Henry Wallace,
even the ADA could not
stomach the source of Wallace's
support. There's a great deal of irony here. Maybe the
ADA ought to be asked to rescind its support of McGovern
inasmuch as he was in bed with the fellow the ADA had so
much rrouble with in 1948.
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
June 9, 1972
MEMORANDUM FOR:
PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM:
KEN KHACHIGIAN
Der
At the risk of being repetitive, let me be a bit more explicit
concerning my thinking that the word to tar McGovern is "extremist"
and not "radical." "
"Radical" seems to be losing its connotation. It didn't help us
a whole lot in 1970, and it has become somewhat fashionable to be
"radical. " Look at it this way; McGovern is asked if he is radical.
He responds: "If it's radical to get poor people a fair share of the
enormous economic wealth in America, then I plead guilty to being
a radical.' 11
McGovern doesn't look like a radical -- with his $200 suits,
his modish styling, his Gucci ties, sideburns no longer than most,
relatively short hair -- this coupled with the fact that his tone is
rarely anarchic but more like the New York Life agent. He looks
like a Paul Harvey without the silver tongue.
Finally, the "extremist" label is much better because it can't
be turned around to his advantage. "If cutting bloated defense budgets
is extremism, I plead guilty. 11 That wouldn't fly at all. Barry tried
to reverse the extremism thing, but it got him further into the
quicksand. The same will happen to McGovern -- to deny the
"extremist" label is to give it credibility. Moreover, one doesn't
have to look like an extremist to be one. Goldwater was the most
solid-looking guy you could think of -- a square-jawed all-American --
yet it stuck with him; the same for George. And with apologies to
Barry, the extremist tag is not cold to the memory of 1964 and giving
it to McGovern as good as he gave it to Barry is going to have somewhat
the same effect -- though perhaps not as well.
In short, can we eventually get the word to higher ups that "radical
is thru in '72" and that "extremism has clout to keep George out?"
6/9/72
MEMORANDUM FOR PATRICK J. BUCHANAN
FROM: KEN KHACHIGI:A
At
the
risk of being repetitive, let me be a
bit more explicit concerning my thinking that the word
to tar McGovern is "extremist" and not "radical."
"Radical" seems to be losing its
connotation.
It
didn't help us a whole lot in 1970, and it has become
somewhat fashionable to be "radical." Look at
it hhis
way; McGovern is asked if he is radical. He repponds:
"If it's
radical to get poor people a
fair share of
the enormous economic wealth in America, then I plead
guildy to being a
radical
"
Mc
G
rn doesn't look like a radical -- with his
$200 suits, his modish styling his Gucci ties, sideburns
no longer than most, relat ively short hair
:
this coupled
with the fact that
his
tone is
rarely
anarchic but more like the New York Life agent. He looks
like a Paul Harvey without
silver
tongue.
Finally, the"extremist" label is much better because
it can't be turned around to his advantage. "If cutting
bloated defense budgest is extremism, I plead guilty." " That
wouldn't fly at all. Barry tried to reverse the extremism
thing, but it got him further into the quicksand. The same
will happen to McGovern -- to deny the "extremist" label
is to give it credibility. Moreover, one doesn't
have
page 2
to look like an extremist to be one. Goldwater
was
the most solid-looking guy you could think of -- a square-jawed
all-American -- yet it stuck
with him;
the same for
George. And with
apologies to Barry,
the extremist
tag is not cold to the memory of 1964 and giving it to
McGovern as good as he gave it to Barry is going to have
somewhat the same effect -- though perhaps not as
well).
In short, can we eventaally get the
word to
higher ups that "radical is thru in
'72" and that "extremism
has cloub to keep George out?"