Mr. Bell Jar pointed me to this blog entry about whether or not Bush is demogoguing the war in an unseemly and unprecedented fashion with his latest batch of 9/11-related campaign ads (none of which I’ve seen yet: Bless you, TiVo). My own pulled quote from the David Broder article (which is hidden behind the Washington Post’s new super-annoying required registration) about the 1944 presidential election:
Item: FDR did not go to the Democratic convention in Chicago where he was nominated for a fourth term. A few days before it opened, he sent a letter to the chairman of the Democratic Party explaining his availability for the nomination. And what an explanation!
"All that is within me cries out to go back to my home on the Hudson River, to avoid public responsibilities and to avoid also the publicity which in our democracy follows every step of the nation's chief executive."
But, he wrote, "every one of our sons serving in this war has officers from whom he takes his orders. Such officers have superior officers. The President is the Commander in Chief, and he, too, has his superior officer -- the people of the United States. . . . If the people command me to continue in this office and in this war, I have as little right to withdraw as the soldier has to leave his post in the line."
Item: Roosevelt delivered his acceptance speech to the convention by radio from where? From the San Diego Naval Station, because, he said, "The war waits for no elections. Decisions must be made, plans must be laid, strategy must be carried out."
Item: If FDR's politicizing of his wartime role seems blatant, what does one say of the main speakers at the convention? Keynoter Robert Kerr, then governor of Oklahoma, declared that "the Republican Party . . . had no program, in the dangerous years preceding Pearl Harbor, to prevent war or to meet it if it came. Most of the Republican members of the national Congress fought every constructive move designed to prepare our country in case of war." So much for bipartisanship!
Item: Kerr was restraint personified compared with the convention's permanent chairman, Sen. Samuel Jackson of Indiana. As he contemplated the possibility of a Republican victory, he was moved to ask: "How many battleships would a Democratic defeat be worth to Tojo? How many Nazi legions would it be worth to Hitler? . . . We must not allow the American ballot box to be made Hitler's secret weapon."
As Mr. Bell Jar explains: "Thomas Dewey had a little mustache, Hitler had a little mustache. You do the math!
G. said: I wonder whether there was any real partisan split in war-fighting strategy in '44. Surely the opposition Republicans were not calling for the League of Nations to impose sanctions on Hitler instead of all this divisive combat.
I replied: It almost has to be a "don't change horses in midstream" argument on FDR's part, doesn't it? It's my impression that dissent was suppressed (for real) during WWII effectively enough that the Republican presidential candidate couldn't have been any kind of an anti-war candidate. On the other hand, what I actually know about Thomas Dewey couldn't fill a thimble.