| . |
Asbrook for President
by David Pietrusza
From The Albany Student Press
February 29, 1972
by David Pietrusza
From The Albany Student Press
February 29, 1972
The candidacy of Congressman John Ashbrook of Ohio in the New
Hampshire and Florida primaries is based on a premise that Richard
Milhous Nixon's performance these last three years has not been
conservative enough. Yet this is what John Ashbrook truly believes, and
he is not alone. Behind his seemingly quixotic crusade stand most of the
leaders of intellectual conservatism in America—among them William F.
Buckley of National Review, Thomas S. Winter of Human Events, J.
Daniel Mahoney of the New York State Conservative Party, and
Ronald F. Docksai of Young Americans for Freedom—and the reasons
behind their discontent, and the hopes they have for the Ashbrook
candidacy are not as unrealistic as they first seem.
First, many conservatives (among whom were some of the President's
most enthusiastic backers in 1968) feel that the 1972 model Nixon has
changed greatly from the 1968 Nixon, and that the change has been for
the worse. They sense that they have been had, and basically they are
correct. Few persons of whatever political persuasion would have, in
1968, looked ahead to a Nixon visit to Peking or the ousting of
Nationalist China from the United Nations. Few expected a Republican
president to saddle America's free market economy with wage and price
controls. Few had inklings of a Family Assistance Plan which would
double the number of those on welfare, or of a projected $70 billion
dollar deficit for the upcoming fiscal year.
But besides these errors of commission, conservatives also find Nixon
guilty of serious errors of omission. In their opinion Nixon has tragically
failed to cut back any of the social legislation of the Johnson years. Even
more alarming, however, in their view, is the Nixon failure to take
sufficient steps to secure the nation's security in the face of increasing
Soviet challenges in strategic armaments and in naval power, particularly
in the Indian Ocean and in the Mediterranean.
So it can be seen that conservatives who have supported Nixon have
been disappointed. Still what possible gain could result from the
Ashbrook campaign. I really expect to beat Nixon either for the
nomination or in any single primary, rather they hope to influence Nixon
to operate in a more conservative fashion. The effort is not to "dump"
Nixon, but instead to push him in the right direction. Some feel that
Nixon has already begun to drift toward starboard because of the
Ashbrook candidacy. Human Events, for example, theorizes that the
President's veto of child development legislation, his statement to CBS
correspondent Dan Rather in support of keeping Vice President Agnew
on the ticket, and a new Administration energy in regard to defense
priorities, can all be traced to the efforts of the Ohio congressman.
Although his showing in the polls has been small, Nixon has turned much
attention to his conservative challenger. Prominent Republican
conservatives such as Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, John Tower,
William Brock and Spiro Agnew, have all been scheduled to take to the
stump for candidate Nixon.
Reports have circulated that Nixon forces have planned a primary
campaign in Ohio to unseat Ashbrook from his Congressional seat. (This
is not the first time G.O.P. higher-ups have tried to rid themselves of
Rep. Ashbrook. He has been gerrymandered twice, but escaped
unscathed in both cases.) According to columnists Rowland Evans and
Robert Novak, Mr. Nixon dispatched Vice-President Agnew to
dissuade William P. Buckley from supporting Ashbrook. In the same
vein, John Mitchell, up to the last minute, implored John Ashbrook not
to run. And when L.E. Thomas, Republican State GOP Chairman,
predicted that Ashbrook would receive 25% in that state's primary, he
was quickly brought into line and is now predicting an Ashbrook disaster.
So much for the Ashbrook campaign. What about Ashbrook himself?
Although largely unknown to the general public, the 43 year-old
Congressman has long been known and respected among the nation's
conservative community. A poll of conservatives conducted in 1969
ranked Ashbrook behind only Goldwater, Reagan, Tower and Bill
Buckley in their respect. While the Ohio AFL-CIO has termed him "a
Neanderthal, mossback reactionary", others have described him as "an
attractive and militant conservative," and one of "the world's most
charming, intelligent and natural men . . . "
In 1956 at the age of 28, he was elected to the state legislature and also
to the post of GOP County Chairman. Meanwhile in 1954 he was
elected president of the YR organization, and one year later became the
first chairman of the Young Republican National Federation to be
elected without opposition. In 1960 he defeated incumbent Robert
Levering and began his congressional career.
In the House, Ashbrook compiled a solidly conservative record and until
recently served as chairman of the American Conservative Union. Early
in the Nixon administration, Ashbrook's disenchantment began, and
soon he was challenging one Nixon program after another, but his formal
break with the President did not come until last December. Said
Ashbrook, "I am not one of those who 'can view with alarm' under
Kennedy and Johnson, then 'point with pride' when the same policies are
advanced by a Republican President. In time some circumstances may
change, but basic principles remain the same." And that fact that John
Ashbrook holds fast to his principles, no matter what the cost, earns him
respect from even those who hold differing viewpoints.
Hampshire and Florida primaries is based on a premise that Richard
Milhous Nixon's performance these last three years has not been
conservative enough. Yet this is what John Ashbrook truly believes, and
he is not alone. Behind his seemingly quixotic crusade stand most of the
leaders of intellectual conservatism in America—among them William F.
Buckley of National Review, Thomas S. Winter of Human Events, J.
Daniel Mahoney of the New York State Conservative Party, and
Ronald F. Docksai of Young Americans for Freedom—and the reasons
behind their discontent, and the hopes they have for the Ashbrook
candidacy are not as unrealistic as they first seem.
First, many conservatives (among whom were some of the President's
most enthusiastic backers in 1968) feel that the 1972 model Nixon has
changed greatly from the 1968 Nixon, and that the change has been for
the worse. They sense that they have been had, and basically they are
correct. Few persons of whatever political persuasion would have, in
1968, looked ahead to a Nixon visit to Peking or the ousting of
Nationalist China from the United Nations. Few expected a Republican
president to saddle America's free market economy with wage and price
controls. Few had inklings of a Family Assistance Plan which would
double the number of those on welfare, or of a projected $70 billion
dollar deficit for the upcoming fiscal year.
But besides these errors of commission, conservatives also find Nixon
guilty of serious errors of omission. In their opinion Nixon has tragically
failed to cut back any of the social legislation of the Johnson years. Even
more alarming, however, in their view, is the Nixon failure to take
sufficient steps to secure the nation's security in the face of increasing
Soviet challenges in strategic armaments and in naval power, particularly
in the Indian Ocean and in the Mediterranean.
So it can be seen that conservatives who have supported Nixon have
been disappointed. Still what possible gain could result from the
Ashbrook campaign. I really expect to beat Nixon either for the
nomination or in any single primary, rather they hope to influence Nixon
to operate in a more conservative fashion. The effort is not to "dump"
Nixon, but instead to push him in the right direction. Some feel that
Nixon has already begun to drift toward starboard because of the
Ashbrook candidacy. Human Events, for example, theorizes that the
President's veto of child development legislation, his statement to CBS
correspondent Dan Rather in support of keeping Vice President Agnew
on the ticket, and a new Administration energy in regard to defense
priorities, can all be traced to the efforts of the Ohio congressman.
Although his showing in the polls has been small, Nixon has turned much
attention to his conservative challenger. Prominent Republican
conservatives such as Ronald Reagan, Barry Goldwater, John Tower,
William Brock and Spiro Agnew, have all been scheduled to take to the
stump for candidate Nixon.
Reports have circulated that Nixon forces have planned a primary
campaign in Ohio to unseat Ashbrook from his Congressional seat. (This
is not the first time G.O.P. higher-ups have tried to rid themselves of
Rep. Ashbrook. He has been gerrymandered twice, but escaped
unscathed in both cases.) According to columnists Rowland Evans and
Robert Novak, Mr. Nixon dispatched Vice-President Agnew to
dissuade William P. Buckley from supporting Ashbrook. In the same
vein, John Mitchell, up to the last minute, implored John Ashbrook not
to run. And when L.E. Thomas, Republican State GOP Chairman,
predicted that Ashbrook would receive 25% in that state's primary, he
was quickly brought into line and is now predicting an Ashbrook disaster.
So much for the Ashbrook campaign. What about Ashbrook himself?
Although largely unknown to the general public, the 43 year-old
Congressman has long been known and respected among the nation's
conservative community. A poll of conservatives conducted in 1969
ranked Ashbrook behind only Goldwater, Reagan, Tower and Bill
Buckley in their respect. While the Ohio AFL-CIO has termed him "a
Neanderthal, mossback reactionary", others have described him as "an
attractive and militant conservative," and one of "the world's most
charming, intelligent and natural men . . . "
In 1956 at the age of 28, he was elected to the state legislature and also
to the post of GOP County Chairman. Meanwhile in 1954 he was
elected president of the YR organization, and one year later became the
first chairman of the Young Republican National Federation to be
elected without opposition. In 1960 he defeated incumbent Robert
Levering and began his congressional career.
In the House, Ashbrook compiled a solidly conservative record and until
recently served as chairman of the American Conservative Union. Early
in the Nixon administration, Ashbrook's disenchantment began, and
soon he was challenging one Nixon program after another, but his formal
break with the President did not come until last December. Said
Ashbrook, "I am not one of those who 'can view with alarm' under
Kennedy and Johnson, then 'point with pride' when the same policies are
advanced by a Republican President. In time some circumstances may
change, but basic principles remain the same." And that fact that John
Ashbrook holds fast to his principles, no matter what the cost, earns him
respect from even those who hold differing viewpoints.
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
