In my latest reading of Conrad Black's Richard M. Nixon: A Life in Full,
what stood out to me was Black's Monday morning quarterbacking about
what people could have done better. In this post, I'll give four
examples of this, then I will comment.
1. In May 1970, National Guardsman opened fire on
students at Kent State University, as students were protesting President
Richard Nixon's campaign in Cambodia. Four students were killed and
eleven were wounded. Black narrates that the National Guardsmen did
this in response to students who "pursued them, pelting them with rocks
and returning tear gas canisters" (page 671). Black believes that both
the Governor of Ohio and the National Guardsmen acted wrongly in this
situation, and that the National Guardsmen could have solved the problem
in a manner that did not involve bloodshed. Black states on page 671:
"[The
student protesters] were irresponsible and annoying, and the Cambodian
activity did not justify the histrionics it attracted even on
Kissinger's staff, much less the campuses of the country. But the
governor of Ohio had no right comparing this university student
demonstration to Hitler's SA. And he should have assured that the
National Guardsmen had the proper rules of engagement. They should have
had rubber or plastic bullets if tear gas wasn't adequate, and if they
went to live ammunition they should have fired in the air, or even right
on the ground. Student demonstrators are rarely hard to scatter, and
there is no excuse for students to die from gunshot wounds."
2.
There were people within Nixon's Administration who simply did not get
along with each other, and there were some who did not cooperate
adequately with President Nixon's agenda. Henry Kissinger and Secretary
of State William Rogers did not get along. FBI director J. Edgar
Hoover was not doing enough (according to Nixon) to investigate and
undermine domestic radical groups, and even right-winger Pat Buchanan
urged Nixon to retire Hoover immediately, calling Hoover a
"'reactionary' who was alienating the young people of the country and
whose moral authority was steadily evaporating" (Black's summary on page
680). On pages 684-685, Black says how he thinks that Nixon could have
organized his Administration better, such that it would have been more
functional:
"The logical move would have been to move or remove
Rogers and give his job either to Rockefeller or Kissinger himself.
Either would have ended the friction between the White House and the
State Department and enabled the White House to use the resources of the
State Department more extensively. Rockefeller could have managed
Kissinger, but he was becoming rather a defeatist about Vietnam
himself...If Nixon didn't want to reward Rockefeller, or create a
Rockefeller-Kissinger axis right behind his back, he could have found
something else for Rogers, who had no particular aptitude for foreign
affairs other than a conciliatory personality, and given the job to
Kissinger. This was the eventual solution. If Nixon had wanted to make
a dramatic move, he would have retired Hoover, replaced him with
Mitchell, and Mitchell with Rogers; moved out Laird and replaced him
with Shultz, a former marine combat officer in addition to his other
attainments; given State to Kissinger with a lecture to desist from some
of his more irritating practices; given Finch a serious mandate to turn
the new EPA into something important without antagonizing all of
American industry; and prepared either Rockefeller or Reagan, depending
on which way Nixon wanted to push the party, for the vice presidency in
1972...There were plenty of combinations that would work, and these are
just a few of them. Instead, in the unfortunate manner in which things
drifted before events forced Nixon to go into isolation, drink with
Rebozo, watch inspirational military films, and then take draconian
crisis measures bravely, the squabbling of his administration
continued."
3. When President Nixon received the report of Lyndon
Johnson's National Commission on Obscenity and Pornography and saw that
it "concluded that pornography did not contribute to crime,
delinquency, or deviant behavior" (Black on page 696), Nixon was
outraged. He said: "I have evaluated the report and I categorically
reject its morally bankrupt conclusions....Pornography can corrupt a
society and a civilization....Smut...should be outlawed in every state
of the Union." Black states on page 696 that Nixon's response was
inappropriate:
"He could have attacked the report, which was
pretty naive and idealistic, and even insensitive to traditionalists,
without ranting about the suppression of questionable or offensive
literature, which enabled his opponents to conjure up thought police,
intrusions into homes, book burnings, and so forth."
4. In San
Jose, Nixon's car was hit by bricks and bottles that were thrown by
demonstrators. Two days later, Nixon gave a speech in which he said:
"Those who carry a PEACE sign in one hand and a bomb or a brick in the
other are the super-hypocrites of our time." Nixon directed that this
speech be shown on the networks on the eve before the election (in which
Senate and House seats were up for grabs). The Democratic response to
the speech was given by Senator Edmund Muskie, who spoke "calmly against
fear-mongering from a rocking chair in his house at Kennebunkport,
Maine" (page 697). This was a disaster for Nixon. Nixon's speech did
not come across well on account of the "grainy film", "poor acoustics",
and confrontational message (page 697). Meanwhile, Muskie's response
appeared rather cozy and reasonable. Black says that Nixon would have
done better had he shown to the public the news film of the
demonstrators' behavior in San Jose, and then followed that up by
"giving the sort of address that Muskie did" (page 697).
Now for
my comments. On the one hand, Black's Monday morning quarterbacking is
rather annoying.
On the other hand, Black's Monday
morning quarterbacking is interesting. I think that his suggestions are
reasonable, and that Nixon probably would have done better to have done
the sorts of things that Blacks suggests. Something that I ask authors
(in my mind, of course) when I read books is, "So you think he did the
wrong thing. Well, what should he have done instead?" Black offers his
opinion on what Nixon and others should have done instead, and that's
what makes his book insightful and interesting.