With support from the University of Richmond

History News Network

History News Network puts current events into historical perspective. Subscribe to our newsletter for new perspectives on the ways history continues to resonate in the present. Explore our archive of thousands of original op-eds and curated stories from around the web. Join us to learn more about the past, now.

James Pinkerton: Doves could destroy Hillary's '08 hopes

Could Hillary Clinton's presumed presidential aspirations be derailed by dovish fellow Democrats? It's happened before to Democratic hawks.

In 1966, during the Vietnam War, a group of Democratic doves, including the economist John Kenneth Galbraith and the historian Arthur Schlesinger, gathered to oppose the hawkishness of their fellow Democrat, President Lyndon B. Johnson. Galbraith, Schlesinger and Co. were not street-protester types out to trash "the establishment." Instead, they sought to transform the establishment; one tool was the encouragement of new candidates to get into Democratic politics pushing an anti-war agenda.

Within two years, these Democratic doves had managed to derail the presidential re-election ambitions of Johnson, and also the White House hopes of Hubert Humphrey.

Today, another Texas president is overseeing another unpopular war, and so history might be repeating itself. Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) finds herself uncomfortably close to George W. Bush on Iraq. She supported Bush's war resolution in 2002, and although her words have wavered since, her basic support has not.

Clinton made her bed, and now she has to lie in it. Knowing that much of the country regarded her as a scary liberal in the '90s, she resolved, once she got to the Senate, to position herself as a moderate-conservative on issues such as video game violence and the Iraq war. No doubt she's correct in her overall strategy: She can never hope to win the White House without winning over some red states.

But in pursuing this plan, she has taken her blue-state base for granted, and the blues have noticed. A sign that it's 1966 all over again came in a Nov. 22 blog item by Jeff Cohen, which appeared in The Huffington Post, entitled "Hillary, You're Not Listening." Cohen, a well-known media critic, wrote that although Clinton claims to be a "good listener," the truth is that she "simply doesn't want to hear about one of the biggest issues dividing our country, draining the federal budget, destabilizing the Middle East, undermining international law and institutions, and spreading fear and hatred of our country."

In a subsequent interview, Cohen recalled that the posting generated "one of the biggest Internet reactions I've ever received." It was rated "most forwarded article of the week." That's activism in action. Cohen adds: "If most Americans think the Iraq war is a mistake and half want a quick withdrawal of troops, imagine how big those numbers are among New York Democrats."

Eight days later, columnist Jimmy Breslin launched an even fiercer broadside in the pages of Newsday. He accused Clinton of "fakery" on the war, adding that if she wants the war to continue, "she should send her own daughter to fight in Iraq." Back in the '60s, Breslin was inspired to put aside journalism for a while so that he could run for elective office - the presidency of the New York City Council - on a lefty anti-war platform.

And now two anti-war New Yorkers, Steven Greenfield of New Paltz and Jonathan Tasini of Manhattan, have emerged to challenge Clinton in the Democratic Senatorial primary next year....