Another Perspective
The Fire This Time
The liberal hate John McCain faces is nothing new — look at what they did to his Senate predecessor, Barry Goldwater.
(Page 2 of 2)
At the same time, the press, the guardians of the sacred First Amendment, has been silent while Obama’s truth squads have pressured federal and state legal agencies to squash dissent about or criticism of their candidate, while intimidating reporters who dare investigate Obama’s hazy background and alarming associations.
The Obama campaign and the media have colluded to sell the American people a product without giving them the whole story. Voters seem eager to buy the fabricated image of the Democratic candidate as a wholesome moderate from Middle America and reject the Republican as a senile grinch.
The country did not get the whole story in 1964 either. Americans enthusiastically retained Johnson’s services, giving him a landslide victory over Goldwater. However, four short years later, Johnson’s Great Society was a failure — to the tune of a trillion dollars, thousands were dead in Vietnam, American cities were going up in smoke, and still lingering questions of patriotism and American greatness blossomed.
Looking towards Election Day and beyond, Democrats and their allies in the media have many reasons to be happy; we may see a repeat of 1964. However, they should keep this in mind: just as elections sometimes have striking historical synchronicities, their aftermaths often do as well.
About the Author
Ryan L. Cole writes from Indiana.
Letter to the Editor View all comments (10) | Leave a comment
Related Articles
More Articles by Ryan L. Cole
More Articles From Another Perspective
http://spectator.org/archives/2008/10/23/the-fire-this-time
Follow us:
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
FLASHBACK TO: 1995
-
Pope Culture
A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
-
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck
Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
-
Dames at Sea
-
In the Absence of Guns
In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
-
The Metaphysical Martini
-
Counting the Costs of Clintonism
The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
-
Chuck McHagel
It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
-
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted
-
It’s the Best Time of the Year
The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
-
The Bush Crack-Up
Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?
Clip of the Day
ADVERTISEMENT
ernie | 10.23.08 @ 9:53AM
Yes, Ryan Cole is correct when he points out that all political campaigns descend into unkind and untrue hyperbole. But the McCain campaign (and in particular Sarah Palin) have used sinister innuendo to slander the character and patriotism of Obama in ways which ARE reminiscent of how George Wallace or the John Birch Society attempted to accomplish the same objective.
I voted twice for Ronald Reagan as Governor of California and twice for President. I voted twice for George Bush. I fully intended to vote for McCain. I have long admired and respected him. He is NOT (thankfully) George Bush. But once his campaign commenced its obsession over Bill Ayers "relationship" to Obama and what it supposedly betokened, I decided to vote for Obama. I hope Obama wins by a landslide in order to convey an unmistakalbe message to our political class i.e. that such a resounding defeat is, and will always be, the consequence of waging such a despicable fear-based campaign based, primarily, upon sinister innuendo. Give us back Ronald Reagan!
Howard| 10.23.08 @ 12:34PM
I was only a kid in 1964, but I remember Goldwater was treated as a lunatic by the mainstream moron media. However, LBJ was not liked by the MMM either. He was a rude, crude, oaf from Texas, totally different from the godlike JFK. So once Vietnam turned sour, the MMM turned on LBJ like a scorned wife. Ernie who plans on voting for Obama may wish to reconsider. Ronald Reagan isn't coming back. Normally I do not mind when a different party takes control , after all it is a 2 party system. But I believe in the very dangerous world we live in, the prospect of an inexperienced, weak, president such as Obama, may not just be bad, it may be fatal. I'm not wild about McCain, but I trust him vastly more than Obama/Biden.
OCIndependent| 10.23.08 @ 12:37PM
Here's a robocall from Barack Obama. Disgusting, isn't it?
"Hello, I'm calling for Barack Obama and the DNC because you need to know that John McCain has gone on joint vacations with convicted felon Charles Keating, whose Lincoln Savings scammed thousands out of their savings, and held a fund-raiser in the living room of another convicted felon, G. Gordon Liddy, who advocated killing people and was part of the Watergate break-in. And Republicans will enact an extreme right-wing agenda if they take control of Washington. Sarah Palin and her Republican allies lack the judgment to lead our country. This call was paid for by Obama-Biden 2008 and the Democratic National Committee at 202-863-8500."
Oops, just kidding. Here, however, is the real robocall actually being used:
"Hello. I'm calling for John McCain and the RNC because you need to know that Barack Obama has worked closely with domestic terrorist Bill Ayers, whose organization bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon, a judge's home and killed Americans. And Democrats will enact an extreme leftist agenda if they take control of Washington. Barack Obama and his allies lack the judgment to lead our country. This call was paid for by McCain-Palin 2008 and the Republican National Committee at 202-863-8500."
Which do you like better?
Robert| 10.23.08 @ 12:47PM
Ernie, you're a textbook case of projection! I seriously doubt your bona fides - that you EVER voted for a conservative in any election. That you would project blame on John McCain, a certified patriot, for the scurrilous filth Obama, his minions within his campaign and his MSM lackeys have heaped upon him says all I need to hear to confirm your mendacity.
Go ahead and vote for Barack Hussein. You never intended anything but!
Bill| 10.23.08 @ 2:13PM
Ernie You are a liar
megapotamus| 10.23.08 @ 2:59PM
Ernie is a moby operator. These guys need to work on their script. OC, I don't have a problem with either call on 1st Amm grounds. We can choose between them on grounds of relative truth though and Barry's long professional and philosophical association with this Stalinist POS is documented in the public record and demonstrated in his proposed policies. Even if we take every item in each at face value I think we can safely prefer the graft-hungry politician from the totalitarian socialist if these are the choices on offer especially since we know that the totalitarian socialist is also a MUCH WORSE practitioner of graft than his opponent just on the knowns. Then when we look at the McCain record we see much countering evidence to your characterization, like that he has never asked for an earmark in a long, long career. But unlike the Left, we actually believe in free speech around here and are happy to let the electorate decide in a legal and uncoerced election of living, eligible and single voting voters, as long as that is a fairly informed opinion.
Dr Risk| 10.23.08 @ 8:02PM
Ernie
I broke myself of the habit of referring to people like you as idiots. Being and idiot is a genetic defect over which one has no power. Being an ignoramus is a voluntary choice. Sorry you choose so poorly.
Philip| 10.24.08 @ 12:19AM
Bill is right. Ernie, you're a liar.
A man like you who voted twice for Ronald Reagan, twice again for GWB and now you'll vote for a unreconstructed
marxist rabble rouser ?! What a liar you are !
"I seriously doubt your bona fides - that you EVER voted for a conservative in any election."
I couldn't agree with Robert more.
ninguem| 10.25.08 @ 5:48PM
There was litigation over the coverage of Barry Goldwater, and he won a substantial judgement, with actual damages and punitive damages. Physicians were involved, and medical commentary of public figures is still affected by the "Goldwater rule". Google the term for more detail, or see these articles.
http://pn.psychiatryonline.org/cgi/content/full/42/10/2
"We are reminded of the 1964 Goldwater-Johnson election, when 1,189 American psychiatrists responded to an inquiry for their opinions of the candidates by a now defunct magazine [Fact magazine]. The bulk of the political responses, couched in psychiatric terminology, were so unfair and so outrageous to Goldwater that he sued and won a substantial settlement. APA issued public statements decrying such analyses and in 1973, when The Principles of Medical Ethics With Annotations Especially Applicable to Psychiatry were drafted, Section 7.3 stated”
Also, see this commentary:
Richard A. Friedman “Role of Physicians and Mental Health Professionals in Discussions of Public Figures”
JAMA, September 17, 2008; 300: 1348 - 1350.