« Is Rome Burning? | Main | Who's Your Mommy? »

August 24, 2005

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83455aa0369e200d8345affd769e2

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Paul Begala Rewrites History, But Nobody Is Reading.:

» Paul Begala's (Dumb) Historical Error from The Moderate Voice
Yep. It's a biggie. Read it here. [Read More]

» Did Paul Begala Fail History? from UNCoRRELATED
Paul Begala gets some basic facts wrong. [Read More]

Comments

Elrod

I think Begala is referring to the latter part of the war, especially as the 1972 election season came around. While Democratic Presidents launched the Vietnam War (actually Eisenhower was the first to back Ngo Dinh Diem with advisors in 1955, but only a handful) the Democratic rank and file no longer supported the war by 1967. When Eugene McCarthy launched his anti-war Presidential bid in 1968 it was clear that the Democratic base disagreed vehemently with Johnson and Humphrey. Nixon was vague about the war, promising only "peace with honor". Only Wallace supported further escalation. By 1972 the Democratic Party had become entirely anti-war, with Humphrey and Wallace defeated in the 1972 primaries by McGovern. The anti-war movement grew stronger during the Nixon Administration, especially when it was revealed in 1970 that he secretly bombed Cambodia. By that point, it was "Nixon's War" in the anti-war mindset, and among Democrats generally.

When Begala says the Democrats opposed the war (and was right to do so), he means after 1968. And though many Republicans also opposed the war (Mark Hatfield, for example) Democrats carried the anti-war flag.

Daniel

Elrod,

I've heard all this before, and many times. As you said, the whole "Mr. Nixon's War" meme was from the anti-war movement, but even then was fundamentally wrong. The problem with people like Begala is they throw around phrases like this, knwing that not many people will either care or remember. So in the mind of the stupid or lazy or young (not all the same thing--our young don't actually get taught history any more) they see someone of some stature pretending that only Richard Nixon was involved in that war and they say "Oh yea, those evil Republicans again."

Also, as McGovern was trounced in the general election, just how many mainstream Democrats supported him? I just find this sloppy and intellectually dishonest.

Michael Heinz

Elrod,

A minority of the democratic rank and file may not have supported the war, but it was Nixon who was elected in 1968 by promising "peace with honor."

Remember that it wasn't the Republican convention that protesters attacked in 1968.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Search

November 2008

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
            1
2 3 4 5 6 7 8
9 10 11 12 13 14 15
16 17 18 19 20 21 22
23 24 25 26 27 28 29
30            
Blog powered by TypePad

Copyright


  • Creative Commons License