Comments on: George McGovern Moves On

By: Dave Kirby

Dave Kirby — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 23:59:56 +0000

I don’t know who remembers that McGovern first came to national attention when he was selected to represent Bobby Kennedy’s delegates at the 68 convention. Humphfrey had remained loyal to Johnson and refused to take an anti Nam war position which Bobby had come around to. In 68 I worked for Eugene McCarthy and we saw Bobby as a late stage opportunist and our favorite label for him was “a ruthless little prick”. Needless to say it never occurred to Kennedy’s people to support McCarthy who had some delegates of his own.

In 72 I worked for McGovern in a conservative congressional district. We all remember Watergate was the act of a devious paranoid but I can tell you that the anti McGovern dirty tricks went all the way to the local level. We had campaign materials disappear enroute to headquarters and vandalism to vehicles and property displaying McGovern signs. Given the results of the election it was massive overkill on Nixons behalf

McGovern was a man of honor and compassion and a philosophy ahead of his time.

By: moviedad

moviedad — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 20:14:03 +0000

At 15yrs old I plastered cars and buildings with flyers and bumperstickers for McGovern. I was too young to really know what was at stake. I was a teenager wanting to be older. I remember talking like I knew what was going on. Back then there really was a generational divide. I trusted no one over thirty. That I knew personally anyway.
Funny that no matter what happens, Pentagon Papers, Assassinations, Watergate…nothing ever changes. I thought things were changing with Carter, my only president; but then the fascists pushed back and we got Reagan.
Sucks.

By: Eric Kirk

Eric Kirk — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:05:44 +0000

Didn’t he want to make all school lunches free across the country? I remember my conservative history teacher in high school saying that the proposal didn’t go over well with the public because it “reeked of socialism.”

As to his campaigning, probably touring the company with Tom Hayden and Jane Fonda wasn’t the best idea. I only know about it because it found its way into Holly Near’s song – a stanza about an old radical MCing a campaign event.

He introduced Tom Hayden
He welcomed George and Jane
Said he’d spoken out against the war
Over the radio back in 1954

That his advisors didn’t vent Eagleton and that he had no clue that his identification with the counter culture was going to hurt him with just about everyone else seems pretty amateur even for the times. But he was principled – probably the most honest major party candidate in history.

I just wish they held debates back then. I don’t think it would have altered the results much, but those debates would have been great for American political legacy. In policy discourse, McGovern was actually very sharp. No way would Nixon have agreed to debates after 1960 however.

By: Mitch

Mitch — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:04:06 +0000

And Erasmus, I’m confident that McGovern and his entire campaign staff is pro-labeling of GMOs. Congratulations, though, on claiming a dead man as an endorser of YOUR position.

By: Mitch

Mitch — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 17:02:43 +0000

Watch it and weep… it’s a fantastic documentary: http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/one_bright_shining_moment/

By: Erasmus

Erasmus — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:57:38 +0000

I voted for McGovern in 1972, but I certainly wasn’t surprised by the outcome of the election, nor did I ascribe it to the American people’s fondness for “war-mongering and corrupt ways and beliefs.” Parts of McGovern’s agenda went well beyond what one would find in Sweden or France. He proposed that the tax on inheritance or gifts above $500, 000 be …….. 100%. It’s astounding that he got the nomination — not that he lost in a landslide.

By: Joe Blow

Joe Blow — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:31:25 +0000

Eric, his ability to campaign had nothing to do with the vote. He didn’t get the kind of media coverage he was entitled to get. They were all controlled even then, Half the democratic party, run by “Bosses” like Romney, were out to stop him even at the cost of helping the Republicans elect Nixon. Plus the American people voted their for war-mongering and corrupt ways and beliefs. They thought they were going to stop the progressives and win the war when they had already lost that war. They did stop the progressive movement though. The American people established before the world who and what they were as a people just like they did when they re-elected George Bush for a second term. That vote made this country legally liable; a price we’re all paying now. 1972 was a life-changing year for me too.

By: Eric Kirk

Eric Kirk — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:09:07 +0000

Well that’s fine Fred, because the book was written in 1972. Hunter Thompson is also dead.

By: Fred Mangels

Fred Mangels — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:42:32 +0000

…they seem almost frivolous compared to the things Richard Nixon does every day of his life, on purpose….

Nixon died in 1994.

By: splinterhed

splinterhed — Mon, 22 Oct 2012 15:34:45 +0000

I don’t know how else to get this to you or your readers other than this. Daniel Ellsberg makes it clear what is at stake in this crucial election. Read it here:
Source URL: http://www.alternet.org/news-amp-politics/ellsberg-lets-not-have-illusions-about-which-two-major-
candidates-would-better