George Carty wrote as a comment on another post: "I almost wonder if Obama could do good by nicking LBJ's "Daisy Girl" attack ad. :)" My response: Excellent idea! Seriously, in this presidential election, is there any real difference between Goldwater in 1964 vs. McCain today? I think not!
2 comments:
I think in some ways Goldwater in 1964 was unfairly maligned (maybe that's why the US right turned so vicious in later years). He was a conservative libertarian who would probably have little time for today's neocon semi-fascists.
IMHO the "Daisy Girl" ad is actually more appropriate against McCain than it was against Goldwater.
I don't necessarily know that Goldwater was unfairly maligned in '64; considering that I was almost three years old at the time. ;) His attitudes certainly changed in the last decade or two of his life; he took a lot of grief in the early 90s when he crossed party lines and endorsed a woman named Karen English for Congress (she served one term). But how close his attitudes were in the 60s vs. what they were like in the 80s-90s (when I lived in Arizona and could follow his career more closely), I'm not sure. I'm quite sure he'd have no truck with the neocons today.
I don't think the US right turned vicious due to Goldwater's treatment. I think that was due to the combination of the neocons coming to power (you didn't see the viciousness with Ford, Reagan or the elder Bush, although you did with Nixon) and the poisoning of the American conservatives' psyches through talk radio, which really exploded as a potent force in the early 90s.
I do completely agree, though: "Daisy" is very much more appropriate for McCain than for Goldwater.
Post a Comment