Which Republican of the past has inspired Republicans of the present like no one else ever could? Though you'll often hear names like Abraham Lincoln, Theodore Roosevelt and Ronald Reagan, the correct answer is-whether Republicans know it or not-the name of the president who was forced to resign from office 30 years ago this year: Richard M. Nixon. The hateful tone of this year's presidential race can be directly attributed to Nixon's ruthless \win at all costs"" political philosophy that returned the Republican Party to national prominence and, at the same time, poisoned the country's political discourse.
Think of Nixon's 1972 campaign. Instead of honestly laying out his policy positions and differences with his opponent, as he did against John F. Kennedy in 1960, he proceeded to slash his opponents one by one. Decorated veteran George McGovern was soft on defense and a hippie peacenik. Tom Eagleton was a basket case for receiving treatment for depression. Ed Muskie was a crybaby for tearing up after enduring vicious personal attacks against his wife. And of course, just to make sure nothing and no one escaped unscathed, Nixon ordered his henchmen to break into the headquarters of the Democratic National Committee in the Watergate office building.
Though his tactics eventually brought him down, his strategy has lived on in the electoral playbooks of Republicans ever since. Election after election, we see Republicans smearing their opponents with unfair and untrue personal attacks. Election after election, questions about jobs, health care, and education are suppressed in favor of redundant debates over abortion, flag burning, and reciting the Pledge of Allegiance in schools. Election after election, Republicans get away with repeating lies and distortions on TV so often that people start believing them (Case in point: 50 percent of the country still believes that Saddam helped orchestrate the Sept. 11 attacks). From time to time, as in 1992, reality catches up with them, but they stick with mudslinging because it works more frequently than not.
Not even the most honorable candidates are immune to the onslaught. In 2002, Georgia Democratic Sen. Max Cleland, a man who lost three limbs in Vietnam, was defeated by Rep. Saxby Chambliss, who had dodged the draft but whose TV commercials showed Cleland alongside Osama bin Laden and labeled the senator ""unpatriotic"" because he favored union protection for workers in the new Department of Homeland Security.
Here in 2004, however, the rapid growth of hateful negativity on the part of the Bush/Cheney campaign is an indication that reality is definitely creeping up on them. The America portrayed last week at the Republican convention is not quite so rosy to the 3 million people whose jobs have been sent overseas, or to the 45 million people without health insurance, or to the families of over 10,000 soldiers who have been wounded or killed in Iraq.
But how are these issues being addressed by the Bush/Cheney campaign? Are the lost jobs being explained as an unfortunate but necessary by-product of a free market system in which prosperity will eventually trickle down to everyone in the long-run? Are the casualties in Iraq simply a necessary sacrifice for a nation's freedom?
Apparently, the Republicans have given up even on these feeble attempts to explain their policies, because I don't hear any explanation other than slamming the alternative. According to Vice President Cheney, John Kerry is not only wrong on the issues but is ""an auctioneer selling off our national security."" According to the Republican National Committee, not only does John Edwards have different policy ideas, but he is ""a disingenuous liberal."" According to House Speaker Dennis Hastert, Senate Democratic leader Tom Daschle is ""coming mighty close to giving aid and comfort to the enemy."" Not a word on how to bring back jobs; not a word on why they've gone four years without a health care plan; not even a word of acknowledgment that Iraq was bungled.
This kind of slander has got to stop, and the only way it will stop is if voters reject the people who practice it. Democrats must start pushing harder for the truth. Instead of allowing themselves to be lured into Republicans' divisive games, they need to take over the debate and start asking the hard questions about the missing jobs, the missing weapons of mass destruction, and the missing money for education in the federal budget.
Republicans, for their part, should be honest with the American people about their ideas. If they truly believe that cutting taxes for the wealthy leads to greater prosperity for all, they should just say that, put their plan on the table next to the Democrats' plan, and let the voters decide.
If they can explain their policy views without deception, if they can disagree with their opponents without calling them unpatriotic or morally unfit, if they can appeal to voters' intellects and not their prejudices, then and only then will they be able to escape the ghost of Richard Nixon and the dirty politics he promoted.
Nick Barbash is a sophomore majoring in political science and international relations. His column runs every Thursday in The Daily Cardinal..
