Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter 2 Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend (2 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Stats   9 comments

OpEdNews Op Eds

The Price of Political Purity

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 8 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

Funny 1  
View Ratings | Rate It Headlined to H2 6/27/12

Become a Fan
  (53 fans)
- Advertisement -
This article cross-psosted from Consortium News

Vice President Hubert Humphrey, President Lyndon Johnson and General Creighton Abrams in a Cabinet Room meeting on March 27, 1968. (Photo credit: National Archive)

In 1968, Sam Brown, like many of his youthful contemporaries, was disgusted by the Vietnam War which had already claimed more than 30,000 American lives and killed countless Vietnamese. So, he poured his energy into Eugene McCarthy's anti-war campaign for the Democratic nomination, serving as McCarthy's Youth Coordinator.

Then, after McCarthy lost to Hubert Humphrey at the tumultuous Chicago convention, the 25-year-old Brown faced a tough choice: whether to sit out the general election in protest of Humphrey's support for President Lyndon Johnson's war policies or accept Humphrey as superior to his Republican rival, Richard Nixon.

I contacted Brown about that old dilemma in the context of my recent reporting about Johnson's desperate bid to negotiate an end to the Vietnam War in 1968 and the now-declassified evidence that Nixon's campaign sabotaged those efforts through back-channel contacts, encouraging the South Vietnamese government to boycott Johnson's peace talks.

Of course, in 1968, Brown was unaware of what Johnson privately called Nixon's "treason," in part, because Johnson chose to keep the evidence secret, rather than risk releasing it before the election only to have Nixon still win and start off with a deeply marred presidency.

Brown's 1968 dilemma also has recurred periodically for Democrats as some on the Left prefer to cast votes for third parties or simply not vote to protest some shortcoming of the Democratic nominee -- even if the Republican alternative is likely to pursue more warlike policies and roll back programs aimed at helping the poor and the middle class.

In 1980, many on the Left abandoned Jimmy Carter because of his tacking to the political center, thus clearing the way for Ronald Reagan. In 2000, nearly three million voters cast ballots for Ralph Nader (who dubbed Al Gore "Tweedle-Dum" to George W. Bush's "Tweedle-Dee"), thus helping Bush get close enough in Florida to steal the White House (with further help from five Republican partisans on the U.S. Supreme Court). Today, some on the Left are turning their backs on Barack Obama because he has disappointed them on health-care reform, the Afghan War and other policies.

- Advertisement -

It seems that on the Left -- even more than on the Right -- there is this quadrennial debate over whether one should withhold support from the Democratic nominee out of a sense of moral purity or hold one's nose and accept the "lesser evil," i.e., the major-party candidate who will inflict the least damage on Americans and the world.

Yet, as intensely as some on the Left disdain President Obama's actions and inaction today, the cause for anger in 1968 was much greater. After running as the "peace" candidate in 1964, President Johnson had sharply escalated the U.S. involvement in Vietnam with Vice President Humphrey loyally at his side.

Then, in 1968, the bloody Tet offensive shattered U.S. assurances of impending victory; Johnson confronted a surprisingly strong challenge from Sen. Eugene McCarthy and decided not to seek reelection; Sen. Robert F. Kennedy entered the race, but was assassinated (as was civil rights leader Martin Luther King Jr.); and the Democratic convention in Chicago descended into chaos as police clashed with anti-war protesters on the streets.

Appeal to the McCarthy Youth

It was in that maelstrom of tragedy and anger that Sam Brown, like other McCarthy (and Kennedy) supporters had to decide whether to line up behind Humphrey, who was admired for his support for social and economic justice (even if he was condemned for his loyalty to Johnson), or to stay on the sidelines (and risk Nixon's victory).

- Advertisement -

In a recent interview, Brown told me that he was on the fence about which way to go, saying his decision depended on Humphrey making a clean break with Johnson on the war. There was a widely held view at the time that Johnson was so psychologically "owned by the war" -- and his responsibility for the terrible bloodshed -- that he couldn't take the necessary steps to make peace, Brown said.

Humphrey did not want to betray Johnson but understood that his campaign depended on his reuniting the shattered Democratic Party. So, Humphrey sent emissaries to approach Brown and other anti-war activists.

"The campaign in a formal way reached out to those who had supported McCarthy," Brown recalled. The campaign's emissary to about a dozen activists was Vermont Gov. Philip Hoff, who had "cred" because he was an early opponent of the Vietnam War, Brown said.

But Hoff faced a hard sell. "We were so bitter about Johnson that we weren't going to listen to Humphrey," Brown said about himself and some of the other activists. "It can't be just, 'he's a good guy, trust us.' You had to give us something to believe in. ... There needed to be some lifeline thrown."

Next Page  1  |  2  |  3  |  4  |  5  |  6  |  7  |  8

Robert Parry broke many of the Iran-Contra stories in the 1980s for the Associated Press and Newsweek. His latest book, Secrecy & Privilege: Rise of the Bush Dynasty from Watergate to Iraq, can be ordered at It's also available at

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

Go To Commenting

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Writers Guidelines

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles
- Advertisement -

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

The CIA/Likud Sinking of Jimmy Carter

What Did US Spy Satellites See in Ukraine?

Ron Paul's Appalling World View

Ronald Reagan: Worst President Ever?

The Disappearance of Keith Olbermann

A Perjurer on the US Supreme Court


The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
8 people are discussing this page, with 9 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)

first page where you stated, "Today, some on the L... by Nick van Nes on Wednesday, Jun 27, 2012 at 6:43:09 PM
Voting for either of the two major parties is thro... by John Rachel on Wednesday, Jun 27, 2012 at 7:57:06 PM
I like Robert Parry and respect his work but one o... by Dennis Loo on Wednesday, Jun 27, 2012 at 8:38:38 PM
but he ultimately came to some sort of justice, al... by John Sanchez Jr. on Thursday, Jun 28, 2012 at 7:37:17 AM
You dont vote for the lesser of two evils, esspica... by brian scott on Thursday, Jun 28, 2012 at 9:10:54 AM
as it is currently constituted, even when there ar... by John Sanchez Jr. on Thursday, Jun 28, 2012 at 12:34:29 PM
"Today, some on the Left are turning their backs ... by Kristine Hoggatt on Thursday, Jun 28, 2012 at 2:58:18 PM
exactly how is Obama 100 times  better.  ... by margie ghiz-gillies on Sunday, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:24:50 PM
 It is easy to attack the 'left' Number one -... by Mark Sashine on Sunday, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:52:19 PM