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 Mazo RE: Israel Newspaper MAARIV Editorial. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Newsletter], 6/27/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: McGovern Welfare Plan. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
From Mazo RE: Israel Newspaper MAARIV editorial. 2 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Newsletter], 6/27/1972
Handwritten note RE: Abortion Quote. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
26146553
label
WHSF: Contested, 48-40
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
26146553
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
WHSF: Contested, 48-40
description
This file contains:
From Mazo RE: Israel Newspaper MAARIV Editorial. 2 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Newsletter], 6/27/1972
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE: McGovern Welfare Plan. 3 pgs. [Subject: Campaign] [Memo], 6/28/1972
From Mazo RE: Israel Newspaper MAARIV editorial. 2 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Newsletter], 6/27/1972
Handwritten note RE: Abortion Quote. 1 pg. [Subject: Campaign] [Other Document], no date
citationUrl
collections
Richard M. Nixon's Returned Materials Collection
Contested Materials Files
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
26146553
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
6567ac98dc1f860e
ocrText
Richard Nixon Presidential Library
Contested Materials Collection
Folder List
Box Number
Folder Number
Document Date
No Date
Subject
Document Type
Document Description
48
40
6/27/1972
Campaign
Newsletter
From Mazo RE: Israel Newspaper MAARIV
Editorial. 2 pgs.
48
40
6/28/1972
Campaign
Memo
From Khachigian to Buchanan RE:
McGovern Welfare Plan. 3 pgs.
48
40
6/27/1972
Campaign
Newsletter
From Mazo RE: Israel Newspaper MAARIV
editorial. 2 pg.
48
40
Campaign
Other Document
Handwritten note RE: Abortion Quote. 1 pg.
Wednesday, June 03, 2015
Page 1 of 1
Leading
pap
says
EARL MAZO
5915 NEBRASKA AVENUE, N. W., WASHINGTON, D. C.
MCG
1972
(Note: "MAARIV", the largest and by far the most influential newspaper in
Israel, had a lead editorial 15 June '72 that (1) upheld Ambassador Rabin's
praise of President Nixon; (2) condemned Senator McGovern as a foe of Israel,
except in campaign "talk"; (3) noted that many Jews who traditionally voted
Democratic are realizing "the situation has changed" and a vote against Nixon
this year "might be a vote against the existence of Israel"; and (4) in effect,
urged Israelis to "enlighten" that is, write to their friends and relatives
in the United States about which candidate is "good for the Jews" and which
is a portent of danger.)
The "MAARIV" editorial, as translated from Hebrew by a friend of mine, follows:
THE AMBASSADOR AND THE ELECTIONS
Even if correct (according to the New York Post) that those close to
Senator McGovern complained to Golda Meir that Rabin is complimentary to
Nixon, and even if incorrect (this complaint was not received in Jerusalem),
one thing is certain: there was never an American president who showed such
1
understanding of the needs of Israel's security as Nixon. And there was never
a candidate who aroused fears, from the Israeli viewpoint, as McGovern.
And if we turn away for the moment from the question of what is proper
and improper for the Ambassador to say in an election year, it is still a fact
that Israel has a vital interest in Nixon's victory; and that of all the Democratic
candidates who aspire to their party's nomination, McGovern has, in the past,
taken the worst anti-Israel positions.
Now, understandably, he makes campaign promises like all the other
politicians who want Jewish votes. Now he complains that everything attributed
to him a year ago was not heard correctly. Now he is not a standard-bearer
for Israeli withdrawal from all territories, Now he does not say that Israel
should be provided with Phantoms provided they are not used. Now he does
not maintain any more that the Arab refugees join in the solution of the Middle
East conflict.
But even what he says now is enough to arouse fears. McGovern is one
of the chief fighters for the withdrawal of American forces from Europe. He
is of the mind that there is no Soviet threat and, as a result, there is no need
for NATO; and because there is no need for NATO, there is no need to strengthen
America's navy in the Mediterranean. It is possible -- it is safe -- to leave
the Mediterranean in the hands of the Soviet fleet.
"MAARIV" editorial
Page 2
These are not, of course, the substance of his speeches when he appears
before Jewish voters. But they are the things for which he votes consistently
and stubbornly in the Senate. It is for this that he wants the votes of the electors:
to withdraw from Vietnam and all of Southeast Asia; to withdraw from Europe
and from all places where the U.S. has military obligations. This is his belief
and hope.
There is no need to say that diplomacy of this kind is isolationism; it
would permit the world to be placed in the hands of the conquering Communists
and it imperils the very existence of Israel. Notwithstanding this, the Senator
has found a number of supporters among American Jews; the liberal philanthropic
sector especially comes up with support. But there are other Jews who are
more dedicated to Israel. They have a tradition of going along with the Democrats
but they silently feel this time that the situation has changed. This time they know
their vote for the Democrats might be a vote against the existence of Israel.
It is only natural, given the dilemma that they find themselves in, to
look for some direction, some indication from Israel. But it is also natural
that Israel, as a sovereign state, cannot extend "official" direction.
Still, every Jewish car is turned to utterances from Ambassador Yitzak
Rabin. He, of course, will not say that this candidate is better for Jews than
this other candidate. But he does speak of the relationship between Israel and
the U.S. which can enlighten perplexed Jews concerned for Israel's welfare.
He is not saying things that he did not say in the past when the American elections
were still far off. But now they are receiving additional significance.
When Ambassador Rabin, last Saturday in a radio interview, said that
"No American president made such a public declaration for Israel as Nixon"-
and added that one must be grateful to those who do for Israel, as (compared with)
those
who
only
"speak"
for
Israel
he was not, in the formal sense, taking a
position with respect to the elections in the U.S.
(The complaints expressed by the McGovern supporters could have
been seen beforehand
)
But it is proper for the Ambassador to be more careful of his public
words in this emotional period and not give cause to have Israel's enemies
charge that Israel is meddling in the elections of another country. At the same
time it is also necessary for every person who has the opportunity (and is not
an official representative of Israel) to do what he can to enlighten his friends
and family in the U.S. as to which candidate is "good for the Jewe" and which
is a portent for danger.
its
letters To {
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 $100.0 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 oppo ition 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 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:
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.
T 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.
Leading
paper
Maan
says
EARL MAZO
5915 NEBRASKA AVENUE, N. W., WASHINGTON, D. C.
1972
(Note: "MAARIV", the largest and by far the most influential newspaper in
Israel, had a lead editorial 15 June '72 that (1) upheld Ambassador Rabin's
praise of President Nixon; (2) condemned Senator McGovern as a foe of Israel,
except in campaign "talk"; (3) noted that many Jews who traditionally voted
Democratic are realizing "the situation has changed" and a vote against Nixon
this year "might be a vote against the existence of Israel"; and (4) in effect,
urged Israelis to "enlighten" that is, write to their friends and relatives
in the United States about which candidate is "good for the Jews" and which
is a portent of danger.)
The "MAARIV" editorial, as translated from Hebrew by a friend of mine, follows:
THE AMBASSADOR AND THE ELECTIONS
Even if correct (according to the New York Post) that those close to
Senator McGovern complained to Golda Meir that Rabin. is complimentary to
Nixon, and even if incorrect (this complaint was not received in Jerusalem),
one thing is certain: there was never an American president who showed such
understanding of the needs of Israel's security as Nixon. And there was never
a candidate who aroused fears, from the Israeli viewpoint, as McGovern.
And if we turn away for the moment from the question of what is proper
and improper for the Ambassador to say in an election year, it is still a fact
that Israel has a vital interest in Nixon's victory; and that of all the Democratic
candidates who aspire to their party's nomination, McGovern has, in the past,
taken the worst anti-Israel positions.
Now, understandably, he makes campaign promises like all the other
politicians who want Jewish votes. Now he complains that everything attributed:
to him a year ago was not heard correctly. Now he is not a standard-bearer
for Israeli withdrawal from all territories. Now he does not say that Israel
should be provided with Phantoms provided they are not used. Now he does
not maintain any more that the Arab refugees join in the solution of the Middle
East conflict.
But even what he says now is enough to arouse fears. McGovern is one
of the chief fighters for the withdrawal of American forces from Europe. He
is of the mind that there is no Soviet threat and, as a result, there is no need
for NATO; and because there is no need for NATO, there is no need to strengthen
America's navy in the Mediterranean. It is possible it is safe -- to leave
the Mediterranean in the hands of the Soviet fleet.
"MAARIV" editorial
Page 2
These are not, of course, the substance of his speeches when he appears
before Jewish voters. But they are the things for which he votes consistently
and stubbornly in the Senate. It is for this that he wants the votes of the electors:
to withdraw from Vietnam and all of Southeast Asia; to withdraw from Europe
and from all places where the U.S. has military obligations. This is his belief
and hope.
There is no need to say that diplomacy of this kind is isolationism; it
would permit the world to be placed in the hands of the conquering Communists
and it imperils the very existence of Israel. Notwithstanding this, the Senator
has found a number of supporters among American Jews; the liberal philanthropic
sector especially comes up with support. But there are other Jews who are
more dedicated to Israel. They have a tradition of going along with the Democrats
but they silently feel this time that the situation has changed. This time they know
their vote for the Democrats might be a vote against the existence of Israel.
It is only natural, given the dilemma that they find themselves in, to
look for some direction, some indication from Israel. But it is also natural
that Israel, as a sovereign state, cannot extend "official" direction.
Still, every Jewish ear is turned to utterances from Ambassador Yitzak
Rabin. He, of course, will not say that this candidate is better for Jews than
this other candidate. But he does speak of the relationship between Israel and
the U.S. which can enlighten perplexed Jews concerned for Israel's welfare.
He is not saying things that he did not say in the past when the American elections
were still far off. But now they are receiving additional significance.
When Ambassador Rabin, last Saturday in a radio interview, said that
"No American president made such a public declaration for Israel as Nixon"-
and added that one must be grateful to those who do for Israel, as (compared with)
those who only "speak" for Israel he was not, in the formal sense, taking a
position with respect to the elections in the U.S.
(The complaints expressed by the McGovern supporters could have
been seen beforehand
)
But it is proper for the Ambassador to be more careful of his public
words in this emotional period and not give cause to have Israel's enemies
charge that Israel is meddling in the elections of another country. At the same
time it is also necessary for every person who has the opportunity (and is not
an official representative of Israel) to do what he can to enlighten his friends
and family in the U.S. as to which candidate is "good for the Jews" and which
is a portent for danger.
it
"Code" letters { TO
THE WHITE HOUSE
WASHINGTON
MCG. Hdfts. called
Fasteau about about
worned about it.
quote -they were
MC6 adminted:
1-) matter for states
2) liberal. N.Y's law was too
Bonnie sobel
255-2721