The ghost of Richard Nixon wants to be President again.
And it is about to be nominated–again–by the Republican party.
For those who didn’t live through 1968, or those who’ve forgotten what it was like, here’s a brief summary:
- America was mired in Vietnam, with more than 500,000 troops fighting or dying to prop up a corrupt regime.
- Antiwar demonstrations shut down college campuses throughout the nation.
- Civil rights activist Martin Luther King and Senator Robert F. Kennedy were assassinated.
- Nationwide racial riots broke out in the wake of King’s murder–including in Washington, D.C.
- The Democratic Convention was marred by a brutal crackdown by Chicago police on antiwar protesters.
And offering himself as the country’s savior: Richard M. Nixon, the Republican nominee for President.
But he was careful to limit his appearances to carefully-screened “test audiences”–making it look, in his TV ads, as though he was facing up to tough questions.
And continuing his longstanding feud against the press, Nixon shut out reporters from the inner workings of his campaign.
Above all, Nixon promised a solution to Vietnam. He repeatedly claimed that he had “a plan” to end the war “with peace and honor.” At times he would touch his suit pocket–as though he had a copy of The Plan right there.
But, he added, he couldn’t share that plan until after he became President. After all, the North Vietnamese would be listening in with the American people.
So the nation–by the narrowest of margins–elected Nixon. And four more years of bitter, senseless war followed.
So here it is 2012, and Nixon’s spirit is once again running for President.
Like Nixon, Mitt Romney:
- Has given interviews only in controlled settings–in his case, almost entirely to right-wing Fox News Network.
- Has promised to “restore American greatness”–but has refused to say publicly which government programs he would cut.
- Has refused to say which tax laws he would change–despite the fact that, as a multimillionaire with offshore tax havens, he stands to gain by such changes.
- Has refused to fully answer reporters’ questions about his financial background–such as refusing to release more than two years’ tax returns.
Romney’s penchant for secrecy was most recently demonstrated during his visit to Israel. He barred reporters from a fundraiser at Jerusalem’s King David Hotel and refused to say why.
Romney’s traveling press secretary Rick Gorka, asked to comment, simply said, “Closed press, closed press, closed press,” as he walked down the aisle of the candidate’s campaign plane during the flight from London to Tel Aviv.
It’s hard to imagine a more blatant example of arrogant disrespect for freedom of the press–and the right of Americans to learn the truth about their would-be leaders. Unless you cite Nazi Germany or the Soviet Union.
And it offers a dramatic–and useful–insight into the arrogance and secrecy Americans can expect from Romney should he become President.
Planning to raise campaign money while in Israel, Romney was willing to tell his wealthy American supporters abroad what he would not tell voters at home.
Among these is Sheldon Adelson, an international casino magnate, who’s donated millions to a group–Restore Our Future–backing Romney.
By preying on the gambling habits of millions, he has amassed a fortune estimated by Forbes at $24.9 billion. This makes Adelson the eighth richest person in the United States.
Donors at the fundraising event–which was expected to raise more than $1 million–were asked to contribute $50,000 or to raise $100,000.
In fact, Romney has been far more candid with his private donors about what he intends to do as President than he has in his public appearances.
At a fundraiser this spring in Florida, he outlined how he might cut government and which deductions he might eliminate as part of his tax plan. The event was overheard by reporters standing on a public sidewalk.
This harkens back to the administration of George W. Bush–when Vice President Dick Cheney invited oil company lobbyists to rewrite “environmental protection” regulations.
Naturally, the workings of Cheney’s “energy task force” were classified as secret from both the press and public.
In April, 2010, an explosion on a BP oil rig in the Gulf of Mexico sent millions of gallons of oil pouring into the Pacific ocean. It was only then that Americans began to learn the true costs of allowing greed-fueled corporations to “protect” the fragile environment.
Similarly, Romney expects Americans to wholeheartedly trust him to create jobs for millions–while his own experience has been in creating only millions of dollars for himself and other wealthy investors.
Meanwhile, he clearly refuses to trust Americans generally with his plans for “restoring American greatness.”
There is a time-tested recipe for determining when a public figure has forfeited trust: It’s when he refuses to answer hard, specific questions.
There can be times–such as in war–when a public official is justified in telling less than the whole truth.
But, short of such an extreme occasion, the rule stands: Don’t trust anyone who won’t give candid answers to candid questions.

ABC NEWS, AFGHANISTAN, ARAB SPRING, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CHINA, CLASS WARFARE, CNN, CONFRONT AND CONCEAL, CYBER WARFARE, DAVID SANGER, DRONES, EGYPT, HOSNI MUBARAK, INCOME INEQUALITY, IRAN, KOREA, MITT ROMNEY, MUSLIM BROTHERHOOD, NBC NEWS, PAKISTAN, POVERTY, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE TODAY SHOW, THE WASHINGTON POST, WALL STREET, WEALTH
CLASS WARFARE: A LESSON FOR MITT ROMNEY
In History, Politics, Social commentary on July 31, 2012 at 8:30 amA new book sheds unprecedented light on President Barack Obama’s “secret wars and surprising use of American power.”
It’s Confront and Conceal, by David E. Sanger, the chief Washington correspondent for The New York Times.
Divided into five sections, it dramatically covers the following subjects:
Part 1: Afghanistan and Pakistan – How Obama has sought to disengage from the former while readying plans to occupy the latter should its growing nuclear arsenal pose a threat to America.
Part 2: Iran – To prevent the Iranians from building nuclear weapons, Obama authorized a malevolent virus to be inserted into that nation’s computer system.
Part 3: Drones and Cyber – American drone attacks have wiped out much of Al Qaeda’s leadership–but increasingly strained U.S. relations with Pakistan. And while America has launched cyber attacks on Iran, it remains vulnerable to similar attacks–especially by China.
Part 4: Arab Spring – America was totally surprised by the popular revolts sweeping the Arab world. And Obama had to balance showing support for the revolutionaries against jeopardizing America’s longtime Arab–and dictatorial–allies.
Part 5: China and North Korea – With the United States financially strained to meet its worldwide military commitments, Obama had to use a combination of persuasion and containment against both these potential adversaries.
Concentrating on America’s foreign policy in the age of Obama, the book says nothing about the 2012 Presidential race. Yet, in its section on the Arab Spring, there is an unintended warning to Mitt Romney and his right-wing followers.
Sanger analyzes why the vast majority of Egyptians felt no solidarity with Hosni Mubarak, the general/dictator who ruled Egypt since October, 1981. He came to power after fundamentalists assassinated President Anwar Sadat during a military review.
Mubarack often warned Washington that only he could prevent Egypt from being dominated by fundamentalist, anti-American groups such as the Muslim Brotherhood.
But, writes Sanger, he achieved the very opposite:
“By leaving his citizens without a social safety net, by failing to invest in the country’s crumbling infastructure…he paved the way for the Brotherhood’s success….
“In a land where the state delivers so little, even the smallest [medical] clinic” as provided by the Brotherhood “will win respect and loyalty.
“So when it came time to vote, most Egyptians decided to cast their ballots for candidates they knew could provide something–Islamist or not, it almost didn’t matter….”
One such Brotherhood supporter, who grew up in the poor, agricultural region of Beni Suef, was quoted as saying:
“The Muslim Brotherhood came into my village, and brought lorries of fruits and vegetables,” selling them at discounted prices. “They supported medical clinics”–and thus won the hearts of the people they served.
Fast forward to Mitt Romney, the presumed Republican Presidential nominee, and his vision for America.
As Romney sees it, questions about Wall Street scandals and income inequality are driven only by “envy.”
On January 11–after winning the New Hampshire primary–Romney appeared on NBC’s “The Today Show.” Host Matt Lauer noted that many Americans were concerned “about the distribution of wealth and power in this country.”
“I think it’s about envy,” replied Romney, whose own fortune has been conservatively estimated at $250 million. “I think it’s about class warfare.
“I think when you have a president encouraging the idea of dividing America based on 99 percent versus one percent… you’ve opened up a whole new wave of approach in this country which is entirely inconsistent with the concept of ‘one nation under God.’”
Romney added that it wasn’t necessary to have a public debate about the inequality of wealth distribution in this country.
“I think it’s fine to talk about those things in quiet rooms and discussions about tax policy and the like,” Romney said. “But the president has made this part of his campaign rally.
“Everywhere he goes we hear him talking about millionaires and billionaires and executives and Wall Street. It’s a very envy-oriented, attack-oriented approach and I think it’ll fail.”
Romney did not mention that, in 2007, the richest 1% of the American populace–of which he is a member–owned 34.6% of the country’s total wealth, and the next 19% owned 50.5%.
Thus, the top 20% of Americans owned 85% of the country’s wealth and the bottom 80% of the population owned 15%.
Romney claimed that Obama’s focus on this issue was just “part of his campaign rally.”
Clearly, now-ousted rulers like Mubarak and Muammar Quaddaffi believed “it’s fine to talk about these things” like vast differences in wealth “in quiet rooms.” That is, so long as they and their 1% rich supporters were doing the talking.
But over time their remoteness from the vast majority of their impoverished fellow citizens sealed their doom. When enough people broke into open revolt, even the military decided to change sides.
Mubarack was forced to resign, and Quaddaffi–after waging war against his own people–was captured and murdered.
If Romney’s vision of “everything for the 1%” is allowed to prevail, he and his ultra-privileged supporters may truly learn the lessons of class warfare.
Share this:
Like this: