Holding onto a bygone era

In the debate for Republican presidential candidates the other day, John McCain had a canned, prepackaged zinger that garnered a standing ovation.

“In case you missed it, a few days ago, Senator Clinton tried to spend $1 million on the Woodstock Concert Museum. Now, my friends, I wasn’t there. I’m sure it was a cultural and pharmaceutical event. I was tied up at the time.

“But the fact is, my friends, no one can be president of the United States that supports projects such as these.”

The McCain campaign was apparently so pleased with the reception the zinger received that it created an entire TV ad out of it. It features the exact quote from the debate, interspersed with images from Woodstock and a young McCain on a recovery bed.

One gets the sense that Team McCain feels like it’s struck the jackpot — this quip includes an attack on Hillary, criticism of earmarks, and reference to McCain’s Vietnam heroism. For that matter, there’s a cultural undertone, connecting Clinton to those wacky hippies and the drug culture of the 1960s.

But is that necessarily the message McCain wants to send? Does the candidate who, if elected, would be the oldest president ever to take office really want to score points by beating on a bygone era?

As Matt Stoller explained very well, “The Republicans at the last debate cheered when McCain attacked Clinton over Woodstock. Woodstock. That was 40 years ago. The GOP has lived off of the fumes of the civil rights backlash for a decade or so, and their whole mythology is built around fighting a liberal establishment that transparently doesn’t exist. The notion that drug use is some sort of cultural marker is sort of hilarious and ridiculous all at once.”

It reminded me of Thomas Friedman’s recent column, in which he complained that today’s youth isn’t as vocal and mobilized as the 20-somethings of the 1960s. He called the current generation “too quiet, too online, for its own good, and for the country’s own good.”

Today, Atrios has a helpful suggestion about putting the previous generation to rest.

I’m getting emails from various 60s era types which roughly suggest that it makes sense that people who lived through that era see everything through the prism of that era because lots of stuff happened. I don’t deny that the 60s were a significant historical and cultural time for the US for a variety of reasons, I just don’t understand why 40 years later some people can’t seem to comprehend any political issue without shoe horning it into some template stamped out back then.

So, yes, 60s was time of important change. Political battles had profound impact on many individuals then. I understand all that.

But whether it’s conservatives trying to relive the “glory days” of the cold war, real liberals expecting that political activism in the 21st century should look 60s era activism, or fake liberals like Joe Klein desperately battling the dirty fucking hippies who apparently live under his bed, I just don’t get it. Move on. Times have changed. And, yes, of course, lessons to be learned from the past, blah blah blah, but we don’t live in the past.

Getting back to McCain’s ad, it’s why I thought the canned zinger made for a nice little soundbite, but I find it hard to believe it moved many votes. Even among the Republicans in the audience, it’s easy to imagine them giving McCain a standing ovation for his sacrifice four decades ago, but I don’t think anyone’s suggesting those voters would actually base their votes on it.

I think that McCain’s ad would be effective among the Republicans that I know around here, Remember the faked picture of John Kerry and “Hanoi” Jane Fonda supposedly together at a peace rally in the 1970’s? It was an attempt to appeal to the same emotions that McCain is trying to tap.

Wingnuts love that stuff – beat up on the dirty hippies, worship the warrior. It’s not reality-based, but when did that ever matter to them?

If the Republican faithful were deep thinkers, they wouldn’t be Republicans.

  • The Repubs are probably hard at work photoshopping Hillary’s face onto that pic of Fonda sitting on the North Vietnamese AA gun.

  • Doesn’t like 60% of America wish they were at Woodstock?

    (Woodstock II is an extremely poor substitute, if you can call it that)

  • The GOP will run against the “Dirty Fucking Hippies” for as long as it works. It doesn’t matter that the Dirty Hippies that they’re running against now own multi-million dollar corporations that sell everything from software to ice cream – it doesn’t matter. They use DFHs the way that they use ‘terrarists’ to scare the moderate voters (most of whom have never seen a real DFH, a real ‘terrarist’ OR a real liberal in their lifetimes) into voting for GOP candidates.

    In fact, the DFH boogeyman is one of the oldest scare tactics in the GOP bag of fear. Be afraid of the Dirty Hippies! Be afraid of the Commies! Be afraid of the Uppity Negroes! Be afraid of the Mexican Reconquistas! Be afraid of the Scary Mooslims Who Live In Caves Half a World Away! Be afraid of the Yellow Peril From China! Be afraid of Socialized Medicine! Be afraid of Feminists! Be afraid of Bill Clinton’s Magic Penis!

    As far as I can tell, “be afraid of this strawman we’re telling you to fear this year” has been a winning strategy for them. Year after year after year. Why should they quit now? They’ll stop trying to scare people with the Dirty Hippies sometime a few decades after the last of the people who ever really knew a real Dirty Hippie are dead and buried.

    And yes, this fetishization of the 60’s is getting tiring. When I’m 60 do I get to make a fetish out of the 80s too? Oh joy! Rubick’s cubes and invasions of Grenada for everyone!

  • Seems like the GOP contenders are all trying to out-quip each other, which would be fine if they were looking for a slot on Last Comic Standing, but I don’t have a sense that very many people are amused.

    The 60’s were a watershed period in the political activism movement, and despite being portrayed as anti-American, those involved in political protest then probably never felt more American then than they did when speaking out on issues like civil rights, women’s equality and the Vietnam war.

    Yeah, it was pretty pharmaceutical, the music was freer and social restraints less confining; it was not such a bad thing. My daughters are still blown away by the fact that, when I was a freshman in college in Virginia, way back in 1971, women students had only just won the right to wear pants/jeans in “town” and smoke a cigarette while walking across the campus. Seriously – 1971. I felt like I was on the crest of a tidal wave of change, and that’s a very powerful – and empowering – feeling. We haven’t forgotten it, and I, at least feel like that experience should no more be mocked or belittled than should McCain’s ordeal as a POW.

    McCain, I guess, had to find a way to remind people of his POW sacrifice and tie Hillary to those dirty, f’ing hippies, and, well – you could tell he was thrilled that he’d gotten the opportunity. I suppose he is old enough to resent the changes that started in that time period, that are probably responsible for there being a woman among those vying for the presidency. You can tell he hates it – another uppity woman trying to take a man’s job.

    That McCain chose to make a joke out of the Woodstock generation is probably just one more indication that he’s way too old for the job.

  • Any truth to the claim that Sen. Clinton tried to spend $1 million on a Woodstock museum? Would that be federal money?

  • Say John, what about your involvement in the Keating Five? You know, giving hundreds of millions of tax dollars (when it was worth something) to a known crook who ruined a bank for his own personal benefit?

  • Let’s face it: a major blunder by Hillary.

    The right wing has been very successful in their assault against liberalism, and a major component has been equating it with the hippie/drug culture of the 1960s. They’ve got a lot of mileage out of that, and Hillary fell right into the trap.

    It was all over the cable talk show circuit and McCain scored big with it. I don’t think it will cost the Dems many votes in the end, but it was stupid, stupid, stupid.

    It simply reinforces the popular right wing portrait of liberals as being no damn good in every way humanly possible. We’re commies, godless, traitors, pacifists, hippies and drug addicts, and everything else bad like snips and snails and puppy dog tails.

    I could have strangled her for that suggestion. And on top of it all, it’s pork, too.

  • I could have strangled her for that suggestion. And on top of it all, it’s pork, too.

    And on top of that, no one who was actually there remembers what happened.

  • It’s interesting that the reliving of the sixties is still so personal. We’re all stuck in the forties, too, reliving World War II, but we’re completely divorced from the down-and-dirty politics of that time. We’ve faced the fact that our treatment of Japanese Americans was shockingly racist and probably criminal. No one refers to Dirty Zoot Suiters hiding under their beds, or the Traitorous Commies at American Peace Mobilization. Those political currents are done, gone, over. But here we are, forty years later, still getting our hackles up over Woodstock and the anti-war movement. It’s crazy.

    Of course, it’s mostly the guys whose views were proved dead wrong who are still whinging and complaining. The cool kids, they suspect, were at Woodstock, dancing in the nude and getting high. The cool kids were marching against the war and making love; the coolest of the cool kids fought in the war and marched afterwards. People like John Kerry got the best of both worlds: medals and flowers, heroism and principles – all the best stuff!

    It’s the losers – the hawkish dead-enders who are bitter. Still whining: we were right. No, really. We were. Wah. The history books are wrong! And all those cool guys are mean to us!

    Gah.

  • Yeah, it wasa nice zinger and a nice ad concept, but i disagree some with hark @ 8 (not on HRC joining the museum effort – i agree that was dumb) on the damage. I think it preaches almost exclusively to the choir.

    McCain’s team would do well to review the history of the 1996 national party conventions. RNC went first. Dole — alluding to Bill Clinton being a dirty draft-dodging, dope smoking hippie who fled to Europe and is all about free love — harkened back to a Golden Era of Ward and June Cleaver, where shows were in black and white and married couples slept in separate beds. He described himself (in third person, no doubt) as “A Bridge to America’s Past,” to its glory days and its Greatest Generation. He smugly seemed to like how it went.

    Next up was the DNC, however, and Clinton took the fight directly to the heart of Dole’s speech, contrasting himself and claiming to be “A Bridge to America’s Future.” He stressed moving the country forward, and that “Our greatest days are ahead of us.”

    The speech kicked ass, and literally overnight the Clinton advantage in the polls grew.

    So McCain should be cautioned, and HRC and the other Dems advised on how to respond to the Rethug nostalgia plays.

    10 years ago, the future beat the past. it should win even easier today as that past becomes more distant and known to a smaller and smaller segment of the voting public.

  • Jesus was a dirty fucking hippy. Wonder what the hellfire and brimstone brown-shirters would say about that.

    Kind of makes me feel a tad bit sorry for those on the right that live their daily lives in fear of the straw man… nah, not sorry for them, just ashamed for them and their petty little scaredy cat lives.

    On this same token, have conservatives ever really lived in reality? It seems to me that the whole thrust of Republicanism is to take us back to the Rockwellian glory days, the late 40’s and 50’s, whcih in their minds represents what America SHOULD be like.

    You remember the glory days, don’t you? Where the KKK ruled the south? Women and people of color were second class citizens?

  • Hooray for John McCain! After dropping into the second or third tier of Republican candidates he finds away to fight back at Giuliani’ s 9/11 Tourette’s Syndrome and Romney’s “I’m So Conservative” Tourette’s by starting to fire back with his own version of POW Tourrette’s.

    Colbert’s on to something: this nation no longer wants an actor for president, it wants a comedian.

  • In a way I admire McCain’s service, but I also think if people like him had to face the people they dropped bombs on, to see what they actually did from way up in their jet aircraft, they might not be so ready to crow about how they fought wars while the DFHs protested it at Woodstock.

    And since the war criminals who sent him into action knew the Vietnam war was unwinnable, what exactly does John McCain actually think he was supposed to accomplish, besides sending more taxpayer money to weapons manufacturers and more people home in body bags?

    But here’s an interesting anecdote:

    If today McCain is obtuse about Vietnam, a telling incident from the summer of 1967 indicates that for a fleeting moment, at least, he came face to face with his conscience over Vietnam–and blinked.

    Like many potentially life-altering experiences, McCain’s came as the result of a brush with death. On July 29, 1967, while preparing for his sixth bombing run over North Vietnam in his A-4 Skyhawk aboard the deck of the USS Forrestal, an accidentally fired Zuni missile ripped into his plane’s fuel tank. Within moments, a chain reaction swept the deck of the carrier, triggering fires and explosions, setting off 1,000-pound bombs and engulfing planes, killing 134 men. McCain, slightly wounded, saw body parts fly and watched blistered comrades die before his eyes.

    A few months later, sipping Scotch in a Saigon villa with Johnny Apple of the New York Times, McCain reflected on the trauma. “It’s a difficult thing to say,” he said, “but now that I’ve seen what the bombs and the napalm did to the people on our ship, I’m not so sure that I want to drop any more of that stuff on North Vietnam.

    http://www.thenation.com/doc/20000103/dreyfuss/2

    How about that. But he gets over it, and soon he’s back to the McCain we all know, the one who says insane shit like “I do believe that had we taken the war to the North and made full, consistent use of air power in the North, we ultimately would have prevailed.”

    Right, John. You’re. Fucking. Crazy.

    Wanna know how I can be so sure of that? Because McCain thinks we should have killed and injured more than a million people a year. Operation Rolling Thunder, which unloaded 800 tons of bombs a day over North Vietnam, caused more than a million deaths and injuries in Vietnam each year from 1965 to 1968.

    But we should have bombed them even more, according to John McCain. Then they would have given up. Do we want someone who believes that myth to be the guy who leads us as we try to find our way out of today’s quagmire?

  • NonyNony@4
    It’s already being done. Reagan worship is Back-to-the-Future Part II

    Another thought:
    Team McCain feels like it’s struck the jackpot — this quip includes an attack on Hillary, criticism of earmarks, and reference to McCain’s Vietnam heroism.

    “Does the candidate who, if elected, would be the oldest president ever to take office really want to score points by beating on a bygone era?”

    How ’bout this? Does the candidate want to score points against a senator who shills for frivolous earmarks? He’s been in office HOW LONG? Anyone wanna check for bullshit expenditures McCain has voted for / sponsored / signed off on?

    The Dems tried at
    http://www.democrats.org/a/2007/03/mccain_helps_to.php
    but there’s got to be something a lot closer to the level of idiocy as the Woodstock museum.
    That’s just plain embarrassing. The best we got on him is a law center???? HRC, don’t do that again, okay? The voters have 12 months to forget if, G’d ferbid….

  • Wow, why not just accuse Hillary of masterminding the kidnapping of Patty Hearst?

    Or for being a founding member of the Weathermen?

    It would make about as much sense.

  • Unfortunately obsessing over the past just shows you have nothing for the future. Of course the 24% that still support Bush and a good bit of those on the right that don’t are likely to fall for this crap…. again and again and again.

  • And there’s an easy answer why people don’t stand up and protest: The press won’t even cover hundreds of thousands marching in the street.

    Won’t even cover.

    And what about arrested for coming too close to the president – you know, within a mile or so – or tazed for shouting too much.

    So, tell me exactly why acting out is the way we should do anything?

  • Comments are closed.