Fear, Loathing and Gumbo on the Campaign Trail '72

Status
Not open for further replies.
Talking about which...

It's the Book of Revelation, singular. I've never listened to Pat Robertson, but I hope he wouldn't refer to it as "Revelations," plural.

You never know; PR has a tendency to re-write scripture to suit his own purposes, but I will correct it.
 
Fascinating. The ever-changing mood of the Nixon-Agnew conversation is the best dialogue you've written yet.

Wait, what happened to Khalid in 1977 and why didn't Fahd succeed him?
And what's with the blue?

Nixon gets to see just how far into the dark woods Agnew has gone since he became a TV celebrity.

As I recall I had Khalid die some time in late 1977 or early 1978 as a result of bad health and added stress from the pressure to execute more princes.

Fahd was assassinated some years back by a rebel among his bodyguards.

The blue = the board did that, I don't know why. I tired to change the font back to black, but it didn't all work.
 

John Farson

Banned
February 10 – February 16, 1979

Elvis’ first rock-and-roll evangelical crusade with the Rev. Pat Robertson as guest speaker appears on ABC Television.

Robertson: “Christians the world over are in a rapturous joy today, for they know that soon the Lord will be among them, and Jesus shall lift them up unto the Kingdom of the Father. Only the sinner and the heathen need look on the Middle East and despair in anxiety; for indeed their false world is coming to an end in a wave of fire and judgment. The war long foretold in the Book of Revelations has come. The Anti-Christ stands under the banner of Muslim, and he walks on the sands of Arabia. Soon the judgement shall come, and all will be judged before the Father. But fear not my friends, for this is a happy time for Christians, for soon we shall be free and glorified. Let us, therefore, pray with joy for the coming conflict, and let us rejoice in the hour of judgement and salvation.”

ABC receives a lot of complaints about this sermon by Robertson.

Elvis: “I don’t endorse what Dr. Robertson said. I think he needs to look hard at what he’s saying, and maybe chill on it a little. I’m not for war; I’m doing the work of the Prince of Peace and all I want is Peace and Christian enlightenment, man. That’s not war; I say no to war.”
Elvis' repudiation of Pat Robertson's rant is interesting. It suggests that though he is now a born-again Christian (with premusably a more healthy lifestyle than before), he is not of the "purge the heretic" variety. Rather, his outlook seems to be more of a "love-thy-neighbour", world peace kind. Despite their different backgrounds and lifestyles, I think this kind of thinking would be pretty similar to John Lennon's. I'd be interested in seeing the two of them together on a panel of some kind.

I think Robertson and his ilk wouldn't dare say anything negative in public in response to Elvis' repudiation, since he would be beloved by both his religious and secular fans, though in private Robertson, Falwell and others would probably think that the King is too squeamish and soft-hearted to do the Lord's "real work". I also don't think that Elvis is gonna repudiate any of his earlier music despite his new-found faith, since though some fundies might consider some of his songs to be "sinful", Elvis could reply that none of them are, for he got his gift from Jesus.
 
Will we see the Reagan kids trying to get into politics and/or entertainment?

Ron and Patti are just coming of age at this point, so they could -- it might depend on what happens to their father's future. Michael and Maureen are probably doing much as what they did OTL at this point, and might have some involvement in their father's campaigns.
 
Elvis' repudiation of Pat Robertson's rant is interesting. It suggests that though he is now a born-again Christian (with premusably a more healthy lifestyle than before), he is not of the "purge the heretic" variety. Rather, his outlook seems to be more of a "love-thy-neighbour", world peace kind. Despite their different backgrounds and lifestyles, I think this kind of thinking would be pretty similar to John Lennon's. I'd be interested in seeing the two of them together on a panel of some kind.

I think Robertson and his ilk wouldn't dare say anything negative in public in response to Elvis' repudiation, since he would be beloved by both his religious and secular fans, though in private Robertson, Falwell and others would probably think that the King is too squeamish and soft-hearted to do the Lord's "real work". I also don't think that Elvis is gonna repudiate any of his earlier music despite his new-found faith, since though some fundies might consider some of his songs to be "sinful", Elvis could reply that none of them are, for he got his gift from Jesus.

Elvis sees himself as having been saved from a life of depravity that was killing him in order to do the Lord's work. This Robertson-Falwell stuff does not fit his view of the matter, which is redemptive religion not necessarily fundamentalism.

He might have some things to say about the corruptions that lead him to a life of drugs and amorality prior to 1977, mostly in the context of his weakness and re-awakening. He would see his music as a gift, but would some of the more "worldly music" into the terms of that which took him off the right path.

Now he has been saved and sees the light, so his fall and redemption is central theme to his ministry, less one about the anger of God at the world's sinners -- more about his example as the way for others.

I don't think he will be asking Robertson to do any more specials with him, though.

But he might resist their efforts to take over the CVM....
 
Someone wrote that I encouraged a Palin-O'Donnell ticket?

Never!

I think it has come-up a couple of times as a joke or an aside, but I would never seriously encourage such a thing, in part because I can come-up with even more dangerous pairings that could get elected and really put all life on Earth in peril, but otherwise, no.
 
Why would the Chileans need to warn Ecuador? Not only is it not a neighboring country, its traditional rival is Peru. If anything, Pinochet might use it to keep the Peruvians in check. I expect he held secret talks with Brazil, Paraguay and Ecuador before those with Bolivia and Peru. Also, just what are the terms of the peace treaty with Argentina?

I think he laid down the law before hand, to avoid having to deal with any second front issues, and if there were any doubts about who is the power, those have been removed.

Wait a minute... You're having us cheer for Pinochet and Saddam, aren't you?

In a Snidely Whiplash, Sympathy for The Devil sort of way. :)
 
I'm wondering but with China's very pro han policy, what is the status of the Uighur, Mongol, and Tibetan minorities?

Most unpleasant -- think of the Karen people in Myanmar, or the Kurds in Turkey. Actually, the Indians and Soviets might make mischief out of this.
 
With the election of 1980 looming, I'd like to offer a few suggestions on local politics. Reagan lost in 1976 and may be a front runner, but never has a presidential candidate lost his first election and, four years later, managed to win. Personally, it seems as if you are building George H.W. Bush up to take the presidency (which would be a great choice. Although a loyal Democrat, I have a lot of respect for H.W.)
In any case, if the moderates of the Republican Party manage to win the day, might I suggest two candidates for the Senate from Wisconsin? Both of them were popular moderates who, with some political presssure from the party, might have agreed to run and beat Gaylord Nelson (not that I want to see Nelson lose, mind you. And, even in the OTL Reagan landslide, his loss to Kasten was razor thin.)

Lee S. Dreyfus http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lee_S._Dreyfus

Dreyfus was the Chancelor of the University of Wisconsin - Stevens Point. In OTL he decided to run for Governor and wasn't sure which party to seek an alliance with. He eventually chose the Republicans because he feared that, in the post-Watergate environment, that Wisconsi nwas becoming a one-party state under the Democrats.
He was an independent who ran against his own party and eventually won. He served a single term before deciding not to run for re-election because he thought he had completed his program, despite being very popular.
A maverick in every sense of the word, and a popular governor, he might be a strong candidate for the Senate if he chose to run for the position

Clifford 'Tiny" Krueger http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Clifford_Krueger

A much more unknown choice, but just as interesting (to me own mind). A former circus fat-man, Krueger ran for the State Senate as a member of Wisconsin's Progressive party in 1942, and lost. In 1946 he ran again as a Republican and managed to unseat the incumbant. The party bosses, lead by Tom Coleman, ran his defeated opponent as an independent, but Krueger beat him again. (Krueger once claimed that all of the good Progressives returned to the Republican party; only the "commies" went to the Democrats)
From that point onward, he served in the Wisconsin State Senate until 1980, before retiring. in the post-Watergate politicla climate, he became State Senate Minority Leader, and defeated a strong challange from the right to be return to that position in 1978. He was known for being bipartisan, and working with the Democrats to get important legisaltion across, and was immensly popular and both sides of the isle. He was a staunch ally of Dreyfus until he became convinced of the Governor's ... naivety. In OTL one of his last act was endorsing Anderson for the Republican nomination.
I just defended my Master's thesis and Krueger played heavily in it. He was a salty old SOB, and would be a very interesting figure to introduce into the nation scene, however briefly.

Interesting suggestions, I'll take a look.
 
Well, thought I'd review what is known about OTL's future Presidents, Vice Presidents, and major candidates for both offices.

Geraldine Ferraro: Status unknown. - Lost to a Republican in a narrow race for New York's 9th in 1978. Status of district was under review during the Federal District of the Hudson controversy.

Michael Dukakis: Status unknown (though we do know he couldn't have been elected to his first term as Massachusetts Governor in 1974, as Tip O'Neill won that). - Was Lt. Gov after 1974 elections, became Governor when Tip O'Neill made himself a Senator, lost his re-election bid in 1978.

Dan Quayle: Got in some trouble with the military for essentially mutinying when he was in 'Nam. Political career doubtful (unless he, ironically, goes far left). - Wrote a book about his experiences, is a prominent peace activist now.

Ross Perot: Status unknown. (teeheehee) - Rich and getting richer.

Bob Dole: Lost reelection in the Democratic landslide that was the 1974 midterms, but returned to the Senate after the 1978 elections. - Couldn't afford to lose Dole for good, he has more to give.

Jack Kemp: Narrowly lost the 1978 New York gubernatorial election. - Very narrow loss, he's not out yet.

Joe Lieberman: Status unknown. - Minority Leader, Connecticut State Senate - likely to lose his leadership status after Democratic loss of Majority in 1978.

Ralph Nader: Status unknown. (teheeheeheeheeheehee) - Consumer advocate and activist, likely ally for Ron Dellums.

John Edwards: Status unknown. - Associate in a Nashville Law firm.

Joe Biden: Has become the Harold Stassen of Delaware politics. - Good one. He just can't win an election. :D

John McCain: Had some Not Fun times in a Chinese prison. - Wrote a book, still in the Navy, but who knows?

Sarah Palin: Drew gave us a huge spoiler early on when he told us that he's drawn toward a Sarah Palin/Christine O'Donnell ticket. Make of that what you will. :D - Oh it was you.:eek:
 
Breaking news...

Kennedy Blasts Wallace

(AP) New York, NY --- Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-MA) offered a lengthy, at times scathing, criticism of President George Wallace’s Administration during his recent remarks at New York’s Cooper Union. During a policy address to students, faculty, business and political figures at gathered in the Great Hall of the officially named (The) Cooper Union for the Advancement of Science and Art, the senior Senator from Massachusetts referred to the incumbent President as “wrong-headed” and “obstructionist.” Kennedy also indicated that the current President has “taken this country down the wrong path, one which can only end in harder times for all our citizens.”

“Rather than working with the Congressional leadership to craft legislation which will bring aid and relief to our cities and to working Americans, President Wallace has chosen to a confrontational stance which leaves little room for discussion or debate. Instead of a solid opportunity to work together on programs which will bring relief to all Americans, we are faced with a ‘my-way-or-the-highway’ approach to governing. Regressive forces have taken control of the House of Representatives under Speaker Lott, and this will make our job even harder.

“I blame the President for creating the level of political tension which has allowed this to occur. Had he shown an the maturity to work together with the last Congress, rather than demanding his own way, we might have achieved significant legislative progress that might have prevented a take-over of one House of Congress by the representatives of the very big business interests the President so ardently claims to oppose. Either this stance is a lie – and the President, despite his rhetoric, is a friend of the special interests and Wall Street – or the result of the last election must clearly be seen as a colossal blunder on his part, one which we can clearly lay at his door, and which could have been prevented by George Wallace. Today, only the Senate remains as the last bastion of progressive thought against this force for regression and exploitation, and the President, he sits in the White House and growls about our supposed inadequacy, all the while he creates the barriers to any solutions himself.

“During the 1976 campaign I recall then Governor George Wallace visiting an urban church in a poor neighbourhood in Newark, New Jersey. There, among the downtrodden and the disenfranchised, he swore a commitment to bring them opportunity and hope. George Wallace told the people of that church, and the people of America that he would lift them up and throw the fat cats from the people’s temples. What has he done over these past two years in office? Little enough for the people and he has opened the door wider to the very fat cats he once decried. This is the record of the Wallace Presidency.

“Further, not content with domestic discord, this President has embroiled us in a foreign war in Nicaragua, by using the resources of our military and our government to attack a revolution against a tyrannical dictator. Now, I agree that there are Communist elements and other undesirables in the Sandinista movement, but I find no benefit to the American people or the Nicaraguan people in propping-up a dictator who regularly tortures and imprisons his own people. This is the course that opens doors to our Communist adversaries and leads to disaster for everyone, yet this is the very policy our President chooses to inflict on the Nicaraguan people, and to what end? Will a Nicaragua made ripe of revolution – as Cuba was under Batista or Portugal under Salazar – will such a situation help us or hurt us?

“What is more, this President has chosen to break the law in order to push forward this reckless goal. The evidence is increasing every day that American laws have been broken at the direction of this President, with little or no regard to the sanctity of law. This President once stood in a school house door to defy a just federal authority so that a man of color could not register for school. Having said he renounces this past, this same man now in the Presidency, flaunts the law and roils with contempt at the principles of Constitutional government. Even though he is the Chief Executive of the government, he still snipes at Federal authority as if he were still standing in that schoolhouse door.

“At this time of challenge at home and abroad, this country can ill afford such a man in the highest office of the land with these attitudes. “

In reply to Senator Kennedy’s comments White House Press Secretary Joseph Schuster commented:

“Senator Kennedy is entitled to his opinions, but he should be careful about what he says about the leader of our party, and as a United States Senator he should be circumspect about what he says about a sitting President. When Mr. Kennedy speaks-out in public like this, he only plays into the hands of our adversaries who see division as weakness, and an opening to act against our interests. ... Mr. Kennedy should better acquaint himself with the situation in Nicaragua. The President is working to keep the Communists out of Central America; what Senator Kennedy has said, and the tone with which he delivered it, can only give the Communists comfort.”

The Senator’s remarks at the Cooper Union have revived speculation that he may be preparing to challenge the President for next year’s Democratic Party Presidential nomination. Earlier in the day the Senator paid a visit to New York Governor Hugh Carey, also a Democrat, who was also in New York City today, but did not attend the Cooper Union speech. Governor Carey commands substantial influence within the New York State Democratic Party and is known to be at odds with the President on several issues. He could prove to be a powerful ally in any effort to unseat the President. Present in the audience at the speech was New Jersey Governor Brendan Byrne, also a Democrat and New York’s Democratic Secretary of State Mario Cuomo.

The Cooper Union Hall is the venue where Abraham Lincoln first gained national attention when he made a speech there at the beginning of the 1860 Presidential campaign.
---------------------------------------------------------

George Wallace: “Goddamn Kennedys! Where’s a nut with a gun when you need him?”
--------------------------------------------------------

The Curious Case of the Radio Shack MIG

(AP) Indian Lake, Texas ---- Investigators have recently been pouring over the wreckage of a Cuban MIG-21 jet which crash landed in an isolated farm field near the secluded, rural community of Indian Lake, Texas, which is close to the U.S.-Mexico border, last Thursday night. The Cuban air force fighter is reported to have flown in over the Gulf of Mexico and crossed over the southern U.S. border, possibly to test air defences at the Naval Air Station in Corpus Christi, which is located on the Gulf coast one hundred and sixty-two miles from the crash site.

The Corpus Christi Naval Air Station could, according to military experts, be used as one of the launching points for any military action against Cuba by the United States. Tensions over Cuba have recently increased since a recent state visit there by Soviet Communist Party General Secretary Mikhail Suslov.

The pilot of the jet fighter reportedly bailed out before the crash, and local and Federal law enforcement are currently on high alert as they attempt to track him down. A special alert has been raised at the Southern border, as authorities feel the fugitive pilot may try to slip across the border into Mexico. It would be easier for the Cubans to recover him from there.

Cuban authorities have denied that the downed aircraft is theirs. “The Cuban Air Force can account for all our aircraft and personnel,” a spokesman in Havana told reporters. “This incident is a hoax being perpetrated by hostile Yankee militarist authorities as a false pretext for aggression against the peace-loving, free Cuban people.”

Air Force investigators, assisted by local police and the Texas Department of Law Enforcement, have closed-off the crash site from access by news media. A press spokesman will only confirm that the aircraft is a Cuban Air Force MIG-21 which crashed due to some cause other than hostile fire. A spokesperson for the Department of Defense was adamant that the aircraft was not shot down by either U.S. aircraft or ground based weapons.

“We don’t know why the Cuban military plane violated our airspace, but it is our belief that its mission was primarily one of espionage,” Capt. John Price USN, a Pentagon spokesman said. When asked about how it could violate American air space, by-passing our air defense network, Capt. Price said, “Our defense installations were tracking this aircraft long before it entered Mexican airspace, let alone U.S. airspace.”

The Mexican government has so far not commented on this incident which involved the violation of their airspace.

Local farmers were showing reporters parts they claim they took from the wreckage before it was sealed off by authorities. Several of the electronic components given to reporters bore the trade mark of Radio Shack, a large American retailer of electronics. Confronted with this fact the farmers vehemently repeated their contention that the components came from the downed aircraft.

If true, this leaves open the question of whether the Cuban Air Force is buying its aircraft parts at Radio Shack, or if this aircraft did in fact originate in Cuba. Capt. Price had no comment when confronted with questions about the components stamped with the logo of a U.S. retailer. “I will have to check with commanders closer to the scene,” Capt. Price said.

In a press statement Tandy Corporation, which owns the Radio Shack brand, denied “absolutely” that it sold electronic components to Cuba. Such sales would be illegal under U.S. law. An embargo against the sale of strategic goods to Cuba has been in place since 1961.
-------------------------------------------------------------------

Reporter: “Will you run for President in 1980?”

Ronald Reagan: “I haven’t made any decisions yet, but as I have said on a number of occasions, I am moved by what I see out there. I’m troubled by the dismal track record of President Wallace in managing our economy. What America needs for the 1980’s is strong leadership dedicated to reducing government and releasing the entrepreneurial spirit of the American people. The President’s approach over the last two years has done the opposite.”
---------------------------------

Rumsfeld for President?

(AP) Springfield, IL --- Will Governor Donald Rumsfeld be running for President next year? He denies it.

“The press is always speculating about who will run in the next Presidential election,” the Governor replied, when asked about his intentions at a recent news conference. “Why don’t you focus on the here and now? The people of Illinois elected me to manage the affairs of our state, and that’s what I’m dedicated to doing right now.”

Rumsfeld’s comments aside, rumours have circulated in the Illinois State Capitol that friends of the Governor have set-up an exploratory committee to determine if there is sufficient interest for Rumsfeld to enter the 1980 Republican Party nominating contest.

If he decides to run, the Governor will be running on the strength of his record over the past three years as chief executive of Illinois. Governor Rumsfeld has managed to reduce the state deficit while at the same time cutting taxes. One of the principle means of achieving this has been through outsourcing to private contractors a number of state government services. While this downsizing of government has been popular with conservatives, and could form the basis of a Rumsfeld for President policy platform, his approach has also garnered intense criticism from Democrats and public sector unions. The Governor has had to face down one disruptive public service strike in his effort to pass his agenda.

“Personally, I don’t think it is so great that the Governor is laying-off State workers in the middle of the second Great Depression,” Peter Yalkovich, Director of the Illinois Public Sector Union commented. “That’s not a solution, that’s just trimming the numbers with the blood and tears of ordinary working folks.”

Many expect that former California Governor Ronald Reagan will carry the conservative banner into next year’s Republican nominating contest. Most of his supporters expect the 1980 election to be a re-match of his 1976 contest against President George Wallace.

“Reagan will win and challenge Wallace, only this time we’ll have four years of Wallace’s slip-shod, self-aggrandizing administration to run against, and Governor Reagan will beat him – as he should have in 1976,” California Republicans for Reagan chairman George Deukmejian recently commented at a conservative symposium.

“I’m not sure Reagan is the future,” commented one Republican Congressman who asked that his identity be withheld. The Congressman described himself as a staunch conservative who voted for Reagan in 1976, but he added, “Reagan, for all his good points, had his turn. Many younger conservatives, especially those elected in the 1976 and 1978 election cycles, are looking for a new dynamic, one that looks to the future. Look, we all love Goldwater and Reagan, they are our teachers, but maybe we need to look at moving out from under our teachers’ shadows.”

If these comments are representative of a larger body of younger conservative Republicans, then Governor Rumsfeld with his track record in Illinois could well step into Sen. Barry Goldwater and Ronald Reagan’s shoes. Rumsfeld will be 48 in 1980, while Reagan will mark his 69th birthday next February. The oldest man elected President was William Henry Harrison, who was elected in 1840 at the age of 68. He died within one month of taking office.

For now, though, Governor Rumsfeld is keeping his intentions to himself.

Governor Rumsfeld was re-elected in 1978 after completing a shortened first term; he was first elected Governor of Illinois in 1976. Prior to that Donald Rumsfeld represented Illinois in the House of Representatives for six years, and served in various administrative posts in the Nixon Administration. He was White House Chief of Staff during the ten months of Spiro Agnew’s presidential tenure in 1973. Between 1974 and 1976 he was a senior advisor at A.G. Becker and Co., a Chicago based investment bank, and he briefly sat on the management board of the Hughes Network during its start-up.
-----------------------------------------------

CBS Reports with Ed Bradley

Ed Bradley: “Aren’t you worried that if you run as a third party candidate, you’ll split the Democrats’ support, and in effect elect a Republican?”

Ron Dellums: “That’s a possibility; it would be foolish to deny it. But I have to take a wider view as well, and that is that people of color and those living in the inner cities – of any race – aren’t being served well by the existing Democratic power structure. I mean there was a moment, back in 1972, when the McGovern Committee rules looked as if they were going to open-up the door to a broader party driven by the grassroots, instead of more of the same kind of boss politics that ruled the party in the past. But a couple of crackers – McKeithen and then Wallace – slammed them shut on us. We need to pry them back open, and if using a third party as a wedge to do it will work, so be it.”

EB: “Even so, there are going to be those in the Democratic Party, and among progressives, who will feel that your movement will only help the Republicans. If you look at who the likely nominees of that party are – Ronald Reagan, Illinois Governor Donald Rumsfeld, maybe Speaker Trent Lott – none of these people are friendly to the progressive polices you represent, or to the people you are trying to help.”

RD: “As far as I know the last Republican progressive in the White House was Teddy Roosevelt, so I’m not surprised by the Republican field. But you have to remember, they have challenges of their own. The Libertarians in particular aren’t happy with some of their fiscal policies and the social conservatism in the G.O.P. But we can’t let fear of those people and their policies cow us into taking a back seat. If we do that, progressives will never get anywhere. Since the Democratic party is wary of giving us a platform – at least under its present leadership – we have to find a way to make our voice heard, and to show that our support can’t be taken for granted. That’s why we need our own permanent structure, and to put like-minded candidates on the ballot across the country, to challenge the old orthodoxy.”

EB: “Will you be running for President then, as a progressive?”

RD: “I’m giving it serious thought, yes.”

EB: “Recently, you tried to achieve a meeting of the minds with California Governor Pete McCloskey, who is an independent, and outspokenly opposed to the conservative direction that the G.O.P. has been taking. That didn’t work out too well. Could that be a bad omen for the future of your effort?”

RD:”I don’t think Governor McCloskey is progressive minded, so I’m not surprised that we were unable to find common ground. Still, his direction is a vast improvement over the former Governor. Whether that’s a bad omen, I’d have to say no. It’s part of the challenge we face, to make mainstream politicians recognize that they will have to court us and negotiate.”
--------

McCloskey Denies White House Ambitions

(AP) Sacramento, CA --- Supporters of California’s Independent Governor Peter “Pete” McCloskey are said to be encouraging him to throw his hat into the ring for the coming 1980 Presidential race, probably as an independent or third party candidate. Governor McCloskey himself has recently been throwing cold water on the idea.

“I just took office three months ago with a pledge to clean-up the mess left here after four years of mismanagement,” the Governor told Sacramento’s KDND Radio. “I made a pledge to the voters of California, and on that basis they gave me their support. Now I owe it to them to do the job.”

Pete McCloskey is no stranger to Presidential politics. In 1972, then a Republican Congressman for San Mateo County, he challenged President Richard Nixon in the Republican primaries, running as an anti-Vietnam War candidate, and receiving one delegate vote at the Republican National Convention. In the fall campaign McCloskey was former Senator, and current Agriculture Secretary, George McGovern’s running mate on a third party Peace ticket, which carried the District of Columbia in the election.

In the years since McCloskey has written of his bitter experience as a member of the peace ticket.

“It was supposed to be a bi-partisan effort to end the war and get Nixon to address the issues of inner city decay,” McCloskey wrote in an article originally published in Newsweek. “Instead McGovern brought in all of these left-wing types and the campaign took a sharp turn into radical cloud coo-koo land. Basically, McGovern became a shill so that (Governor John J.) McKeithen (the 1972 Democratic candidate for President) could purge his ranks of all the radical left-wingers and bomb throwers, and in effect deprive Nixon of the opportunity to brand the Democrats as wild-eyed radicals. With us to take that label, McKeithen was able to appeal to the respectable types who formed the soft-core of Nixon’s moderate support. I really don’t believe we achieved anything of value, and I lost my House seat in the process.” In fact, McCloskey stopped campaigning for the ticket in October 1972.

McCloskey was expelled from the California Republican Party over his third party candidacy.

After the 1972 election McCloskey practiced law and provided media commentary on state and national politics, which kept him in the public spotlight. He became closely associated with the Jefferson State project in Northern California, where he now lives. This is an initiative by residents of Northern California and Southern Oregon to separate from their respective states and form their own mid-Pacific coast state. Prior to his run for Governor, McCloskey was a prominent spokesman for the group of former and current legislators trying to create political momentum behind this idea.

He entered last year’s California gubernatorial race as an independent candidate, describing himself as a “moderate”, appealing to “moderates from all parties and independents, coming together to provide California with non-ideological government that works.” McCloskey ran against the “party orthodoxies of the left and right” in order to “bring a rational, policy oriented approach to governing the Golden State.” During his campaign McCloskey decried what he termed “twelve years of ideologically stilted right-wing government (in the Governor’s office) which is aimed more at promoting the ideological credentials of the office holder than serving the interests of the people of California.” This was a direct broadside at both then incumbent Republican Governor Barry Goldwater junior, as well as his Republican predecessor Ronald Reagan.

During the campaign McCloskey also blasted the Democratic party challenger, former Senator John Tunney, for “substituting one ideologically driven set of utopian non-ideas for another.” McCloskey squeezed out a narrow win in the three way contest, in which none of the three major candidates received thirty percent of the popular vote.

Since his inauguration Governor McCloskey has been fighting a three sided battle with Assembly Democrats and Republicans, none of whom consider his mandate to be convincing.

Supporters of an independent McCloskey for President campaign in 1980 believe that he could win a national vote running as a pragmatic candidate in what is expected will be an ideological contest between President George Wallace and likely Republican nominee Ronald Reagan.

“Both parties have been taken over by ideologues,” McCloskey recently told KDND radio, “which makes what is going on in Washington more an exercise of who can shout the loudest and level the most insults rather than about governing, which is what elected officials are supposed to be doing.”

Asked about the President, McCloskey said, “When he was first elected, I thought he was serious about making changes, but these days it seems he’s making it into some kind of ego trip; he’s more about promoting George Wallace than being President.”

“As far as I can tell, he (President Wallace) doesn’t seem to have any bedrock principles and much of his ‘for the little man’ talk during the campaign has evaporated once he entered the White House. Take for instance this oil profits bill; there are a dozen ways to go about what he’s trying to achieve – not that I necessarily agree with using the power of government to arbitrarily tax corporate profits, but be that as it may, the President has made this into a confrontation between himself and the oil companies, largely so he can continue to sell his populist credentials in the next election – not because he hopes to achieve anything substantive with it.”

On the question of Ronald Reagan, McCloskey commented, “he might well win this time, but I’m not sure that would be a good thing. Reagan and Goldwater senior have turned a once great, consensus driven party, into an instrument for an inflexible ideology which sounds great if you want to appeal to a certain narrow segment of the voting public, but is less and less grounded in the reality of governing a modern, complex country.”

“If I were going to run,” the Governor added, “I would want to make it clear that my platform would be to draw from the best ideas available in America to get our economy moving, whether those ideas came from the left, right or center; from academics, economist, businessmen – everyone has something to contribute. But, as I have learned, a Presidential candidacy, especially for an insurgent or a third party, is a hard slog. I’m not sure I’m ready for that – and I have a commitment to the voters of California to keep as well.”

During the campaign McCloskey drew controversy and heat from both the Goldwater and Tunney campaigns as a “separatist” who would break-up California. He won the election in spite of this, though many believe this issue may have held his popular vote below thirty percent.

“I still believe in the Jefferson idea for a number of reasons that I’ve stated in the past,” McCloskey said. “But I was elected by voters across the entire state – in fact my strongest pluralities were in Southern California – so, I owe it to them to fulfill my oath and govern the entire state. If the Jefferson State supporters can get the issue on the ballot, I won’t stand in the way of peaceful, democratic effort to create a separate state in the north. But I won’t use the Governor’s office to promote it either, that’s not what I was elected for. My job is to unite Californians and bring jobs and prosperity back to our state.”

Asked about the fact that he has often courted controversy in his public life McCloskey said, “if you’re not controversial you’re not making a difference.”
-----------------------------------------------------

People’s Liberation Army Camp – near Bainanjiang, China (45 kilometres from the China-North Vietnam border)

Commanding Armed Brother Hong Jue-ji looked out of his office window at the rag-tag troops decamping in his compound after six months of fighting in the jungles of Laos. Their appearance was a disgrace in soiled uniforms, their faces covered in dirt and sores. The haunted expressions on their faces cried out to Hong Jue-ji the sense of men who had walked through Hell and though their bodies might have come back, their spirits might never fully return. According to his reports six had been shot for madness just that morning. They joined the nine thousand of their comrades rotting in Laotian soil. Their equipment was a mess, some of it Korean War vintage. It looked like worn craftsmen’s tools which had seen too much use under bad conditions, and was held together with quick fixes and desperate prayers by equally desperate men who knew they would have to rely on it again for their lives.

This was the state of the once great People’s Liberation Army four years in to the reign of the Great Nephew.

Hong Jue-ji was disgusted, but not at the men or their officers. About them he felt nothing but immeasurable pride, for they had endured and marched into the jaws of death in the name of duty. These pathetic, dishevelled figures in his courtyard were heroes beyond compare to Hong Jue-ji, though he would not necessarily tell them that in quite those words.

Seeing them Hong Jue-ji was reminded of other comrades, from his days in the Long March, the battles against the Japanese and the Kuomintang, the war against the Americans in Korea. Brave young men, the heart and soul of China, laying down their lives for the nation and the revolution. As long as he lived, he felt pale in their presence because he lived while they died.

The Great Helmsman had been a mercurial leader; all too often he had taken the People’s Liberation Army for granted, but at least he had lead them to the higher cause. Hong Jue-ji had risen to high rank serving the elder Mao and the Revolution, only to be purged during the Cultural Revolution. What had been a tragedy at the time proved to be a blessing in disguise. As he was in a labour camp during the whole Lin Biao business, Hong had been quickly rehabilitated afterward, when the Chairman needed experienced officers to replace the ones he was then purging from the PLA for disloyalty. Because it was known he had not served Lin Biao, his past transgressions (whatever they might of been, he himself never believed he was guilty of disloyalty in the first place) were disremembered in the needs of the moment.

But then the Great Helmsman went into his retreat, to contemplate the revolution and the greater good of the people, they said. The rumour had it that the old Chairman was now a screaming madman, descended into the depths of senility, or even dead. Hong Jue-ji wouldn’t put it past the Great Nephew to have killed the old man to get him out of the way, and preserved the notion that the geriatric leader was alive in some secluded retreat merely to anchor his own power. Since the disgusting spectacle of the beheading Hua Goufeng in the Great Hall of the People four years back, Hong Jue-ji – like any senior party members who were prepared to be honest with themselves (and there were precious few of those, their number drastically lessening with every purge) – it had become apparent that the younger Mao was capable of most any depravity. Under the lesser Mao the Revolution had become a reign of terror governing a depraved state. No finer witness could there be to that than these troops who fought and died in their thousands for opium fields and to sustain the drug trade. The once great People’s Liberation Army had become drug bandits.

“Enter,” Hong Jue-ji barked at the sound of knock on his door.

Leading Armed Brother Chou Nan-ji entered and saluted. “Long live the Great Chairman and all his family,” the younger officer shouted out with zealous devotion. The phrase and ardent tone were required from all; any hesitancy was considered a sign of absolute disloyalty, the punishment for which was a labour camp or death. (It was a toss-up as to which fate was worse.) Of course, anyone with half a wit knew exactly who “and all his family” really referred to.

Chou Nan-ji had cleaned himself up, but he still bore the signs of months of hard living in the jungle. Hong Jue-ji could smell him from across the room. Fortunately, he had spent his life around the smell of soldiers in primitive conditions and it didn’t bother him.

“Long live the Great Chairman,” Hong Jue-ji muttered, long convinced he was wishing long life to a corpse. He let the last part hang there. Since Chou Nan-ji made no issue of it, it was a silent code that the two agreed in their views of the nephew.

“How many?” Hong asked his subordinate.

“Nine thousand, sixty-three dead, another four thousand permanently maimed and of no use for further service, Comrade Commanding Brother,” Chou Nan-ji reported.

Hong Jue-ji stoically avoided grimacing at the mention of his rank in the new system. He was old school, and still thought of himself as a Colonel General, which he had been until the nephew introduced the new “brotherhood ranks.” What drivelling nonsense, they were no collection of Communist Party pioneers on a rural labour mission, this was the People’s Liberation Army and it damn well deserved the respect of true military ranks.

“Cigarette,” Hong Jue-ji offered to his subordinate, who should rightly have been a Lieutenant General, not a Leading Armed Brother. To Hong, it made him sound as if he was the head of some village hunting party.

Hong wordlessly passed a pack of American Marlboros to Chou Nan-ji, who eagerly lit one up. Though officially banned, there were ways to get these contraband coffin nails, mostly along smuggling routes from Burma.

Chou Nan-ji savoured the aroma and silky feel of the smoke. After months in the jungles of Laos, this was as close to heaven as he could imagine.

“What happened?” Hong asked his subordinate.

From the red flush on Chou Nan-ji’s face, and the tight expression that looked as if he had just swallowed vinegar, Hong could see that Chou was attempting – very hard – to control his temper, so that his next utterance would not be an insult to his superior or sound like outright treason.

“Our greatest successes came when we were able to fight with captured enemy equipment,” Chou Nan-ji said, making it clear that the state of their equipment was the cause of defeats. “Against the Laos and the North Vietnamese we have a chance. But the Americans are flying bombing sorties, and their Vietnamese mercenaries are well armed. Day and night Hell rains down on the jungle from the skies. Our rockets –“ he checked himself, lest his words go too far “-it is like using pea shooters.”

Indeed, thought Hong as he lit one of the cigarettes for himself. The Great Nephew’s so-called “Revolutionary Agricultural Initiative” was supposed to provide wealth for all. So far, Hong Jue-ji had seen little of that, and his troops even less. “The new weapons were required in the North,” he was told, “to defend against the rapacious Soviet Imperialist Armies lurking beyond the Amur and in Mongolia” -a blood-thirsty Slavic horde just waiting to descend on the People’s Republic and snuff out the Revolution. The Soviets were always a threat, but not enough to explain the dearth of modern weapons and supplies. Hong Jue-ji, who thirty years ago had attended the Frunze Military School in the Soviet Union, knew the Russians well enough to know that if they really did come, it would be because the Great Nephew provoked them to it.

No, that was political bullshit. The Lesser Mao was sending all the new equipment he could buy, mostly from Chile, Israel and South Africa – outlaw states who cared little who their eventual customer was as long as the cash was in American dollars – to his Revolutionary Guards. They used it to shoot ten thousand peasants a day to keep a hundred thousand trembling (he knew that number to be hyperbole, but mass murders were being conducted as a regular control policy). They had cleared out whole cities, moved millions to the countryside in the Great Nephew’s mad vision of a rural empire with industries hidden from phantom American bombers and missiles in the countryside. The peasants were told that the Americans bombed the Motherland every day; missile strikes supplied courtesy of the Revolutionary Guards whom, Hong Jue-ji was certain, were not members of the United States Air Force. The casualties were dead, all the same and the masses in a constant state of terror.

As a military man Hong understood a further dimension of what was going on with the weapons. The Revolutionary Guards were being given modern arms, while the PLA got the worthless shit, so that if it ever came down to a contest between the two, then Mao Juan-jin’s protectors and enforcers would have the advantage.

Of course it was not the well armed Revolutionary Guards who were sent in large numbers into Laos to fight better equipped armies; it was his ill-equipped men. The Guards did send some cadres, so that they might gain combat training, and so that they could enforce discipline. They did the latter with extreme zealousness. A private who ran out of bullets could be shot for desertion; a wounded man hanged for “lacking revolutionary zealousness,” – imagining that a man could charge the enemy on a bleeding stump because the political will said he could.

Hong Jue-ji took a bottle of Japanese scotch – also acquired from his Burmese suppliers – from his desk drawer and poured a healthy portion into two glasses.

Chou Nan-ji eagerly took the contraband elixir and enjoyed the burning as it went down.

“The dragon is very disturbed,” Hong Jue-ji remarked.

“Without question,” Chou Nan-ji replied. “Can he be calmed?”

“Only when harmony is restored.”

“Can this be achieved?” Chou Nan-ji asked.

“There are those who would calm the Dragon, but they must be wary of his sharp claws and hot breath. In his present madness he would burn even those who bear his best good in mind.”

Chou Nan-ji sipped his scotch. “Better to die calming the dragon than to await his bite.”

“Indeed, comrade.”
--------------------------------------------------------------------

“You have allowed your enemy into your country,” Mikhail Andreyevich Suslov said, the accusation in his weak, raspy voice confirmed by the bony finger he pointed at his visitor. “They will destroy your revolution.”

The General Secretary of the Soviet Communist Party’s emaciated body was propped-up by several pillows, so that his yellow eyes, bright flames in a pale, emaciated frame could view his visitor. Despite the fact that the heat in the bedroom of Suslov’s suburban Moscow dacha had been turned-up full blast – so that it was as hot as Hanoi during the summer – the Soviet Party leader was wrapped in heavy blankets and a thick wool sweater.

“I understand the risk, but we were in need of support against the invasion from China,” replied Pham Van Dong, Premier of the Democratic Republic of Vietnam.

“I ordered an alert along our border with the rice – the Chinese, to force them to send the bulk of their troops north. Has this not helped you?” Suslov hissed out in a low raspy voice.

“We are grateful for your fraternal efforts, Comrade General Secretary,” Dong replied. “However, their southern army remains large, and even with the operations in Laos, we were in need of direct combat aid. Our Southern brothers may be puppets of the imperialists, but they respect the national independence of Vietnam from the Chinese. Their help proved useful.”

“And that of their Yankee Imperialist masters?”

The question was the condemning inquiry of a prosecutor, since Suslov already knew the answer.

“The South are their puppets. It was expected that their masters would follow in some form.”

Premier Pham Van Dong had decidedly mixed feelings about the Soviets, none of which were assuaged by the site of the sickly Suslov. The Soviet Union, which for years under Khrushchev and Brezhnev had supported their war for control of Vietnam, had left them in the lurch once it was clear the United States would not withdraw in 1973. Suslov and their fellows had cut their losses in the wake of the Soviet war with Mongolia and the slow loss of power by Mao and the takeover of the government by his lunatic nephew. A lifelong communist, Dong felt solidarity with the Soviet cause, but at the same time felt betrayed by the present leadership, which had essentially left him to stew with little to show after nearly two decades of war and tremendous losses. It had only been through an act of political skill – and his remaining aura as a close personal associate of the venerated Ho Chi Min himself – that Dong had managed to survive and remain in power at all .

“Americans without money,” Le Duc Tho had called the Russians, referring to their arrogant, imperialist nature and parsimonious ways. Dong was beginning to share those feelings.

“Once you controlled their country, now they will dominate yours,” Suslov repeated, beating on the dead horse.

Dong didn’t need to be reminded that a scant decade ago his forces had controlled much of the South Vietnamese countryside and some areas of their largest cities, including the capital of Saigon. Now South Vietnamese troops controlled areas of his country – though in a cordial if formal partnership with their Northern brethren – all aimed at keeping the Chinese out. Soviet aid had been minimal, American and Australian aid more helpful. Suslov’s words were not only salt in the wound, they grated on Dong’s nerves, forcing him to control his famously volcanic temper.

“If they try to take our country we will resist, and I am prepared, even at my advancing age, to take to the hills to preserve our revolution,” the North Vietnamese Premier said through his translator (unlike Ho, he had never learned Russian) “but I will not surrender Vietnam to Chinese domination. Such resistance is rooted in the long history of my people; that is why even the Southern imperialist stooges are quick to make common cause in resisting it.”

“Common cause?” Suslov scoffed. His retort quickly turned into a heavy, spasmodic cough.

Dong, his translator and Suslov’s translator waited as the man who was apparently the Soviet leader’s nurse tended to the General Secretary.

“We require from you twenty thousand of your best cadres; men – and they must all be men – well experienced from your war against the American imperialists,” Suslov commanded in a lordly fashion once he had regained his composure.

I require them to defend my nation you sickly turd! “What for?”

“You will send ten thousand to aid our comrades in the Nicaraguan people’s revolution. With the assistance of our Cuban comrades they will help the Nicaraguan freedom fighters overthrow the Yankee’s puppet dictator there. The other ten thousand you will send to Zambia, to aid the brave revolutionaries of the Zimbabwe People’s Liberation Front. Your experiences fighting the imperialist will help with the liberation of oppressed peoples on two continents.”

Dong was stunned into silence by the request – well, not a request, an order it seemed. Latin America and Africa? His country was under threat from the Chinese – and the South and its American masters could still be a problem – and this dying geriatric wanted him to send his experienced people to places he knew little of to fight in wars he had no real knowledge of? A few advisors in the common cause he could spare, of course, but twenty thousand?

“It is a substantial request,” Dong averred.

“So is the aid the Soviet Union has given to you,” Suslov replied, his yellow eyes burning with an intensity that made Dong nervous. “Perhaps you would like to see the bill?”

So, that’s how you want to play it? Dong made sounds as if he was agreeing – in principle – to the “request”, all the while praying that Suslov died before he had to come through.

Later, on his flight out of Moscow, Pham Van Dong contemplated his options. As a source of aid the Soviet Union was left wanting. Le Duc Tho’s observation had been spot on. While the revolutionary in Dong was in support with Nicaraguan and African revolutionaries, who were after all fighting the same struggle he had been involved with all of his adult life, the practical side of the man who had been Prime Minister of a government for over a quarter century argued against letting the heart win out. Dong was also personally offended by the manner in which Suslov had commanded the support, as if he, the Prime Minister of a sovereign nation, were somehow a subordinate. Suslov didn’t even hold a government post, he was a party figure! The least they could have done was have Pelse or Gromyko make the request. Both men were figureheads, but at least the protocol would have been correct. Then they could negotiate a number Dong could live with, but this – it was an ultimatum. He’d received more respectful treatment from Kissinger and Nixon. He was getting more respect from the South Vietnamese President Truong these days.

The circumstances of his flight – he was on an Air India jet seconded by the Indian government for his use – spoke volumes about Dong’s position. Direct civilian flights out of Hanoi were all but impossible, largely because of the roving Chinese air force. He’d had to take a military flight from Hanoi to Saigon first, from where the Indians had picked him up and provided him with air service to Moscow, via New Delhi. The Saigon government didn’t recognize him, but the diplomatic remit of the Indian Ambassador had been sufficient to smooth over any protocol issues (Dong was officially the Ambassador’s guest during his stopovers at Saigon’s airport). The Indians were eager to burnish their credentials as the most important player in the non-aligned movement, and being the go-between of convenience for various parties in these circumstances helped that along.

The Russians could have done it of course, but Pham Van Dong wasn’t going to make a state visit to Moscow on Aeroflot, arriving like some colonial dependent with hat in hand. India at least gave North Vietnam full respect as a sovereign entity.

On his way back from Moscow, Premier Dong paid an official visit on the Indian Prime Minister, and the two discussed trade and other issues. In private he made one other request, one which an astonished Morarji Desai was happy to grant, and respect the attendant secrecy involved. And it turned out Desai had a surprise for his North Vietnamese counterpart.

Dong had chosen the Canadians for the practical reason that they were relatively low profile, and they were close to the Americans – probably closer than most nations. Canadians had served on the treaty committee established in Geneva in 1954 along with the Indians and the Poles, and overall Dong had been sufficiently impressed by the forthrightness of their representatives to believe that they could reliably carry his message.

Dong’s idea had been to meet the Canadian High Commissioner in New Delhi, but Desai had informed him that the Canadian Foreign Minister, Robert Stanfield, was at that moment in the Indian capital on a diplomatic mission of his own. This Stanfield, the Indian prime minister added helpfully, was a former Canadian prime minister called out of retirement by the current one to serve as foreign minister. Stanfield could be a useful interlocutor.

Accordingly, under conditions of great secrecy, Pham Van Dong met with Robert Stanfield in the cavernous bowels of the Indian Postal Ministry building, a venue well hidden from prying eyes. To Dong, the Canadian looked like a banker or a university professor, an owlish and prim figure.

Dong got down to it. He told Stanfield about Suslov’s demand for experienced troops for Nicaragua, figuring the Canadian would have an interest in Soviet actions in his own hemisphere. (For reasons that went back to his youth as an anti-colonial revolutionary he withheld the part of Suslov’s demand that covered Africa. He knew nothing of Latin America – the one time he had met Fidel Castro the Cuban’s boisterous nature had offended his sensibilities and the Cubans he’d met since had further offended him as a person). Stanfield was floored by the revelation, but he promised to pass it on to the United States. Dong made it clear that he would not participate, he wanted the United States to know and make some sort of a public statement so he would be let off the hook.

Stanfield fulfilled his part in a meeting with Secretary Jackson five days later. Henry Jackson took the news with a stoic nod and a careful curiosity.

“Essentially, he wants to get out from under Moscow’s demand – his word not mine, Henry, - without having to say no to Suslov’s face, which I gather could lead to further problems for him. But he doesn’t want to get involved in Nicaragua,” Stanfield said.

“Is he telling us that if he doesn’t do it, someone else might?” Jackson asked.

“He wasn’t that clear, but he mentioned North Korea as having a debt to the Soviets as well. He also mentioned that Marshall Hyung Ju has a close relationship with Suslov.”

“Then he’s saying if he doesn’t do it, the North Koreans will, but Suslov wants the North Vietnamese because of their experience in jungle warfare,” Jackson mused.

“That could be the meaning. The question is, what can you do with the warning, Henry?”

Henry Jackson didn’t have an immediate answer. Instead he decided to consult the old boys’ network, in this case a private lunch with his predecessor, former Secretary of State Kenneth Rush, and Henry Kissinger, who knew the North Vietnamese leadership better than most Americans.

“I see Dong’s problem clearly,” Kissinger opined over cigars and brandy at the private Cosmos Club in Washington. “He can’t afford to offend Suslov and the Russians directly, but he doesn’t want to get involved in matters in our hemisphere either. He is offering us the fig leaf.”

“So how do we warn-off the Russians without fingering Dong as the source. I mean, if we do that, then he’ll just clam-up and deny the whole thing. The Indians will probably back him up if he denies he met Bob in New Delhi,” Jackson said.

“Ideally, we would want the Soviets to think the leak came from their end,” Kenneth Rush offered, “but we don’t know who in their system is involved, and Dong isn’t going to send anyone for us to catch.”

“We need a pretext to invoke the Monroe Doctrine, and put it squarely in the Russians face, stay the Hell out,” Jackson said.

“Well, perhaps we need to do that from our end,” Kissinger said. “Perhaps we can come-up with a pretext to invoke the Monroe Doctrine, and a lever to get Somoza out and replace him with a transitional government of some kind. That would satisfy some of your domestic critics as well.”

“Fine idea, Henry, but I don’t see how,” Jackson said.

Over the next few minutes Kissinger related an idea which could do just that. Jackson was intrigued.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Jack Richard Williams: “I will be a candidate for the 1980 Republican Presidential nomination. I believe that the voice of true, dedicated conservatives need to be heard, and I will be that voice through the primaries and at the national convention and, if enough of our party members agree with me, I will use that conservative message, one of freedom, entrepreneurial success and one of morality in public and private life, into a defeat of President Wallace in November 1980.”
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
Yes, I know. But who knows, in this TL they might be Supreme Court Justices, appointed by President Bork.:D

Exactly. Their nomination would go through, though, because everyone else is to distracted by the uber-isolationist, neo-Trotskyite selling Kaliningrad and the Kuriles to Germany and Japan, respectively- a revanchist, nationalist united Germany that is occupying the former clerical-fascist Poland with intentions of retaking Stettin other choice bits along the border and setting up a referendum in Austria for "reunification", and an economic and military superpower Japan that is trying to exploit the situation in East Asia after China collapsed to set itself as the hegemon of the region, and therefore is pressuring America to hand over it's bases in (united) Korea, South Vietnam, and Taiwan to them.

(;))
 
Also why are the Soviet leaders calling a Baathist regime ''socialist'' (if only just)? The Baathists were set up in emulation of the Nazis. The Soviets might be willing to use them, but call them socialist! Nah.

Call it wishful thinking or a form of Soviet political correctness. We are giving them arms, since we only support socialists, then they must be socialists.
 
Oh, and an update!

So it's looks like Kennedy and Dellums might jump into the primaries and general, respectively. Bad news for Wallace.

And Jack Williams has joined Ashbrook by jumping into the GOP fray.
 
Well the Vietnamese aspect of that episode was rather positive! Not a total mess up. I mean the North Vietnamese seem mildly happy to be working with the USA and at least do not want to make things worse.
 
Top
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top