Most of us who have an abiding interest in politics can point to an event, or an issue, or even a person that galvanized our souls and turned us on to both the entertaining theatrics and passionate, heartfelt by-play that makes the inner workings of our democracy such a marvelous spectator sport.
For me, it may surprise you to learn that it was not a Republican or a conservative that first piqued my interest in politics but rather a liberal Democrat. Hubert H. Humphrey was a smallish man but his energy, humor, quick wit, and sunny disposition made him seem larger than life.
The 1964 Democratic Convention was my first real introduction to politics as I came to know and love it. At the age of 10, I was already reading the great political columnist Mike Royko whose hilarious insights into the less than honest workings of Mayor Richard J. Daley’s Chicago political machine was the stuff of legend. But the convention that year would be my first lesson in politics as theater, a drama played out on a national stage with heroes, villains, and colorful personalities galore. Without a doubt, the most outsized personality on display during the convention was that of the Senator from Minnesota and putative Vice Presidential candidate Hubert Humphrey.
There was tremendous drama at that convention. Not in who was going to be the nominee but on the convention floor. Mississippi’s all-white delegation was having their credentials to be seated challenged by a rival delegation made up of both blacks and whites. It was the Old Guard against the New South and the issue of Mississippi’s credentials was roiling the entire convention. In American politics, there are times when it is too painful or divisive to talk about an issue directly. Instead, we surround the problem and obscure its true nature by dealing with the atmospherics of it in such a way that we can debate the issue without tearing ourselves apart.
Such was the situation with the Mississippi Democratic Freedom Party as the insurgents called themselves. The overarching issue was voting rights for African Americans. But the convention chose to address it by debating which delegation had a right to sit on the floor.
In the end, a compromise was reached allowing for representatives from several rival Mississippi delegations to be seated. And in a historic decision that was to have unseen consequences, the national Democratic party committed itself to requiring all delegations be integrated for future party gatherings. The left would take this decision and in later years, make the Democratic party a vessel for identity politics by requiring specific percentages of not just African Americans, but women, homosexuals, and every other minority group who could wangle seats from the party’s leadership.
All that lay in the future. In 1964, with the death of President Kennedy still fresh in everyone’s mind and Viet Nam a barely discernible blip on the nation’s radar, the question to be answered following the credentials fight was who would President Johnson name as his running mate? Humphrey was the front runner but there were rumblings from the delegates who thought that either Bobby Kennedy or Sargent Shriver, Kennedy’s brother-in-law, should get the second spot.
Johnson, who could be cruel and vindictive, had decided on Humphrey weeks before the convention but left the Minnesota Senator dangling uncomfortably all week. He then called Humphrey into his presence and grilled the Senator unmercifully about his private life. Humphrey emerged from the meeting shaking with anger at the treatment Johnson had meted out but within hours was his old, sunny self backslapping his way from delegation to delegation and treating people to his own special brand of oratory.
Humphrey had earned the sobriquet “The Happy Warrior” thanks to one of the more principled and decent stands ever taken by an American politician. At the 1948 Democratic Convention, Humphrey, at that time the Mayor of Minneapolis, was instrumental in ramming through a civil rights plank in the party platform that caused Lester Maddux, Strom Thurmond, and other southerners to walk out of the convention. The “Dixiecrats” would run Thurmond for President that year but it is Humphrey who is remembered and honored. His speech in support of the plank, considered one of the greatest political speeches ever, was a clarion call for fairness and decency:
To those who say that this civil rights program is an infringement on states’ rights, I say this, that the time has arrived in America for the Democratic Party to get out of the shadows of states’ rights and walk forthrightly into the bright sunshine of human rights.”
Just three years prior to that speech, Humphrey had led the effort to unite the old Minnesota Farm-Labor party with the national Democrats to form the Democratic Farm Labor Party (DFL), one of the most active and influential state parties in American history. The impact of both the DFL’s policy positions and its personalities on the American political scene through the 1980’s was astonishing.
They were in the forefront of civil rights issues, the environment, arms control, food stamps, and a host of other social issues long before most national Democrats dared to talk about them. Except Hubert Humphrey who rarely needed an excuse to give a political speech. Humphrey loved the DFL with a passion and to his dying day sought to keep the party vibrantly engaged on issues important to liberal Democrats.
It was his acceptance speech at the 1964 convention that held me mesmerized and inspired my lifelong love of politics. To get an idea of what it was like think of Zell Miller’s speech at the Republican Convention last year and multiply the intensity by a factor of 10. Humphrey absolutely skewered Barry Goldwater. In a sing-song style that was both rousing and entertaining, Humphrey attacked Goldwater by ticking off a list of Great Society programs that moderate Republicans had voted for, always ending with the refrain “but not Senator Barry Goldwater!” After two or three examples, the entire convention picked up the refrain and would scream with one voice on cue “but not Senator Barry Goldwater” and roar with laughter and applause. It was electrifying. And it was great political theater.
But there was no malice in Humphrey’s words. Humphrey respected Goldwater and, in later years, developed a good working relationship with the Arizona Senator – as many old liberal Democrats did when their party kept moving ever leftwards, ever more defeatist on foreign policy issues especially with regards to the Soviet Union and Communism.
Humphrey was a gentleman, a patriot, a dedicated public servant, and great legislator. We may look upon many of his ideas today as wrong headed. But his advocacy for those less fortunate among us was heartfelt and genuine. If he failed to see the consequences of creating a welfare state, a culture of dependency, and other nightmares that have come about as a result of a government grown too large, it was not out of a desire for personal power. He was a humble man who was motivated to do good. If that be a sin, then would that there were 534 transgressors just like him in Congress today.
What would Humphrey think of his creation, the DFL today? Considering the fact that today’s incarnation of the party of Humphrey, Mondale, and Wellstone is asking its members to help deny American veterans of the Iraq war their rights guaranteed under the Constitution to free speech, I daresay that the Happy Warrior is weeping in his grave. Herre’s DFL Chairman Brian Melendez in an email message to members:
I’ve heard from many of you that you are disturbed by the misleading “Midwest Heroes” ads produced by Progress for America Voter Fund that are currently being run by KARE 11 and WCCO. The ads erroneously make a connection between Iraq and the 9/11 terrorists attacks and suggest that the war in Iraq will prevent an attack by Al Queda in America.[...]
Right now, our state is a testing ground for these ads. If Minnesota speaks out and says no to this ad, the entire country can thank us. What we do here, now, will have an enormous impact on the success or failure of this kind of swiftboating in 06.
The Progress for America ads feature soldiers and their families talking about the war in a personal way, asking Americans to continue to support the mission until it’s completed. The problem, according to Chairman Melendez, is that he and the DFL disagree with the sentiments expressed in the ad:
DFL Party Chairman Brian Melendez called a news conference to call the ad “un-American, untruthful and a lie.”“Minnesota has a chance to take a stand against this misleading and untruthful propaganda,” he said. Referring to controversial ads that ran during the last presidential race, he said, “Minnesota TV stations should pull this ad and send a message that we will not tolerate this kind of ‘swift-boating’ anymore.”
To call the opinions expressed by soldiers and their families propaganda is ridiculous on its face. If Mr. Melendez can prove that the people featured in the ad aren’t real or are not really expressing their true feelings, then he may have a case. But no one has stepped forward to offer any proof of that nor can they. It is simply a blatant attempt to silence a point of view the DFL doesn’t agree with, something Hubert Humphrey would have squelched before it got out of whatever committee meeting this idiotic idea was hatched.
John Hinderaker adds this:
So now soldiers who support the war they fought in are “un-American.” Unbelievable. And, by the way, does anyone have any idea what “Swiftboating” is supposed to mean? Is that when a veteran says something that liberals disagree with? Is it when a serviceman publicly describes events that he participated in and witnessed with his own eyes? I’m not sure just what the criteria are, but it seems clear that only veterans and servicemen can be guilty of the dreaded crime of “Swiftboating.”
Read the rest of the Powerline piece as John and the guys work over their favorite target, Nick Coleman, for his outrageous claims about the Progress for America ad.
Although a conservative, I always admired Hubert Humphrey and the DFL. They both represented what is best in American politics; strong, heartfelt principles, decency, and a concern for their communities and the country at large. You could strenuously disagree with their ideas. But you would be hard pressed to criticize their sincerity or their love of country.
Considering what the DFL has turned into in the last 10 years or so – a tired echo of the national Democratic party with little in the way of principle or original ideas – I would think that it would be unrecognizable to Senator Humphrey and the small band of reformers who, in the face of overwhelming opposition, stood up for the equality of the black man so many years ago and pricked the conscience of an entire nation.
UPDATE
Powerline has more today on the PFA ad issue.
And my friend Thomas Lifson at The American Thinker goes me one better on Humphrey – his parents were active in the DFL and they actually knew HHH. Tom gives some wonderful thoughts of his own on a man who I am discovering today inspired a whole helluva lot of conservatives to become interested in politics.
9:05 am
If the democrats were still populated by the Hubert H. Humphrey calibre of politicians, I would still be a democrat. The current power in the party belongs is the Clinton Machine. It has divided the USA more than any other modern dynamic. It splits the public into smaller factions with race baiting, class envy, fear, Multiple crazy ass fringe groups etc. The press belongs to it. It is THAT machine,with its socialist agenda, that has undermined our rights and created a fascist state inside the Democrat Party. I voted for Bill Clinton believing he would bring change. He did, all the seeds sown in that 1964 convention were seized by the Clintons and magnified by the press. Now moderate voices are shouted down within the party. The only power the people still have is the vote; but what are the choices? So here I am with my eyes open and without the representation I felt I once had. The Clintons are dangerous. Wolves in sheep’s clothing. Hillary’s way or the highway. No dissent permitted.
10:32 am
Royko!
When I was growing up, I had a hard time deciding if I wanted to be Walter Payton, or Mike Royko.
It was Royko that piqued my interest in politics – it was hard not to like that hard-drinking old cuss.
Came here via Powerline, by the way. I would have gotten here eventually however, I come by every day.
10:51 am
Great column. Like you, I was drawn to politics by Humphrey and his obvious integrity and optimism, even though my own politics have evolved toward the center-right. I can’t help but think that not just Hubert, but Truman, FDR, Jefferson, and Scoop Jackson are all shaking their heads at the party of Pelosi, Reid, and Dean.
ps. I found this site via Powerline, too.
10:55 am
Swiftboating?
“You keep using that word…I do not think it means, what you think it means.”
Who’s Melendez to challenge these parents “moral authority”?
11:00 am
I was a Democrat for the first half of my life – and a proud one at that. Humphrey epitomized the party and those like him allowed for all voices to be heard, liberal and conservative alike. The Democratic Party was a party of Inclusion and full of honest debate on the issues of the day.
For me, the turning point was Jimmy Carter and the Rainbow Coalition. With that movement, only Liberal voices had a say in the Democratic Party. And over time conservatives and then even moderates were squeezed out of the voice of the party until it has become, like Clinton, without substance.
Compare the party of Humphrey with the pretenders of today’s Democratic Party. Go ahead. Look at the war, NSA surveillance, nuclear proliferation, terrorism, and the list can go on and on. How would Humphrey and his party have responded to these issues. I dare say, they are rolling in their graves at what today’s Democrats are doing! And for what the new generation of DFL’ers are trying to perpetrate, Humphrey would cry “But not you!”
I agree with you, Beto Ochoa “If the democrats were still populated by the Hubert H. Humphrey calibre of politicians, I would still be a democrat.” You’re Damn Straight!
11:08 am
your reference to hubert humphrey conjured up the memory of walter mondales superb and touchingeulogy at his hubert humphreys funeral. it was a classic—wish i had a video of it.
a tribute well-deserved.
1:33 pm
[...] Rick Moran of Right Wing Nut House salutes Hubert Humphrey and takes the opportunity to take a swipe at the Democratic Farm Labor Party, which Humphrey helped to found. Humphrey’s defeat by Nixon in 1968 is the only instance I can think of in which the candidate with the more positive vision of America lost a presidential election. Shows you what defending an unpopular administration can do for you. [...]
2:19 pm
Great post. I suspect if you were to listen to Humphrey’s speech today, you might wince a bit. Goldwater was a fine man, a “leave us the hell alone” conservative, who blazed the trail for Ronaldus Maximus.
Unfortunately, my first experience with watching a convention was four years later in Chicago. Not pretty, not pleasant.
2:52 pm
The face of the Left
In Minnesota, where “Give us this day our daily Strib” is the extent of religious training in many households, the Left is attacking the Midwest Heroes commercials as “propaganda.” Worse, they are claiming the message of the ads is “misleading.”
4:34 pm
“If there is dissatisfaction with the status quo, good. If there is ferment, so much the better. If there is restlessness, I am pleased. Then let there be ideas, and hard thought, and hard work. If man feels small, let man make himself bigger.”—Hubert H. Humphrey.
And…
“The right to be heard does not autmatically include the right to be taken seriously.” -HHH
And, HHH could have been speaking about Powerline on this one:
“Propaganda, to be effective, must be believed. To be believed, it must be credible. To be credible, it must be true.”
Too bad Powerline propaganda ain’t true.
6:20 pm
Who said what? What did they mean by say no to the ad? Who was the comment addressed to?
7:14 pm
Hesoid,
Pot Kettle?
8:49 pm
Rick, does this mean you were a closet Humphreyite?
I still remember when the Dems had a spine and good goals. Integrity has a way of building many qualities. Key word is building…..
9:05 pm
“The Progress for America ads feature soldiers and their families talking about the war in a personal way, asking Americans to continue to support the mission until it’s completed.”
This is not entirely true, as you would know if you saw the ads. The ads feature service members and their families talking about the war, yes, but not in a personal way, but in a political way. And those comments contain false statements.
One such statement is that we only hear bad news from Iraq. Aside from the fact, that the elections were all over the local, national and cable news programs, which showed happy Iraqis voting for the first, second and third times, the WCCO conducted a “’reality check’” which disputed the statement from the PFA. The WCCO’s ‘reality check’ demonstrated that “4 in 10” news stories about Iraq contained postive news. Furthermore, it showed that most commentators on the Sunday news programs are conservatives who obviously would say positive things about Iraq.
Another statement that is false in these commercials is when several of the spokesmen say that the insurgents in Iraq are the same terrorists who attacked the U.S. on 9/11. This patently false. The 9/11 commission said that there was no relevant connection between Saddam Hussein and al-Qaeda. The Defense Department, Donald Rumsfeld and George Bush have said that only about 7% of the insurgents in Iraq are foreign terrorists and that most are dissatisfied Sunnis and Bathists. If we are going to fight and succeed in this war, it is important to know who our enemies are. We cannot go on trying to convince people of lies and then wonder why they don’t trust us.
Finally, the ad states that American service members support the war “overwhelmingly.” While the American military supports the war at a greater level than the general public, the military is not “overwhelmingly” in support of this war. A Military Times poll conducted in early January of 2005 has 56% approving of the war and 54% approving of the president’s Iraq War policy. This is hardly “overwhelming.”
These service members and their families deserve every right and more to speak. They have given to their country what so few are willing to give today. I give them great credit for all the success that we do see there. I further acknowledge that there are legitimate reasons to stay in Iraq, such as to prevent a civil war, which would allow for a haven for terrorists, and to hopefully give to that country peace, which has not had for over a century. But nobody has a right to make false statements without being challenged. This is what the DFL wants to do. And I doubt that Hubert Humprehy would differ in this.
1:09 am
Thanks for a nice article on HHH. He was much as you describe him. I met him a year or two after the election after he made a speech on campus. He was even more dynamic and likeable in person. I too have admired him since 1964.
As a footnote or an adjunct to your article, it is interesting how LBJ treated potential VP candidates and their response. President Johnson was keeping Humphrey and J. William Fulbright on the hook by dangling the VP before them. When Humphrey got it, Fulbright was very angry and vengeful (unhinged in today’s lingo) and never got over it. Fulbright couldn’t get back at Johnson directly so he went full bore against the war in Viet Nam to hurt Johnson. The rest is history, but this shows the difference between HHH and Fulbright. One died a happy man full of life’s joy. The other died a bitter angry man who opposed a war for personal reasons. I’ll take the Happy Warrior any day and Over the Hump with Humphrey!
10:14 am
[...] Rightwing Nuthouse’s reaction is that Minnesota liberal legend Hubert Humphrey, who narrowly lost the 1968 presidential election to Richard Nixon, must be spinning in his grave. Indeed. [...]
3:44 am
Submitted for Your Approval
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… here are all the links submitted by members of the Watcher’s Council for this week’s vote. Council li…
7:19 pm
Rick, thanks for the refresher. I was strongly for Goldwater in 64 but not old enough to vote. In 68 I voted for HHH because I didn’t trust Nixon and he remains one of only two dems that I have voted for. The second Dem vote I deeply regret, but that first one was a good vote.
Thanks again
GM
5:38 am
The Council Has Spoken!
First off… any spambots reading this should immediately go here, here, here, and here. Die spambots, die! And now… the winning entries in the Watcher’s Council vote for this week are The “Happy Warrior” Is Weeping I…
10:17 am
[...] The Watcher’s Council has announced its picks for the most outstanding posts of the preceding week. This week the selection for the winning Council post was Right Wing Nut House’s post, “ The “Happy Warrior” Is Weeping In His Graveâ€. The second place post was Done With Mirror’s tremendous reflection on history, family, and mortality, “Team of Rivalsâ€. [...]
12:00 pm
The Council Has Spoken!
Once again, the Watcher’s Council has pondered and decided. Among the Council posts, Rick Moran, of Right Wing Nut House, won first place for a post on an American icon who inspired so many of us; his poignant points at
5:42 pm
This Week’s Watcher’s Council Results
The winning entries in the Watcher’s Council vote for this week are The “Happy Warrior” Is Weeping In His Grave by Right Wing Nut House, and How Does the Modern World Look When You Have Done Nothing To Help Create…
1:29 am
The Coalition of the Willing
As you may or may not already be aware, members of the Watcher’s Council hold a vote every week on what we consider to be the most link-worthy pieces of writing around… though I don’t actually vote unless there happens…
10:42 am
[...] In the council category the winner was The “Happy Warrior” Is Weeping In His Grave byRight Wing Nut House, with second place going to Team of Rivals by Done With Mirrors. [...]
7:05 pm
Watcher’s Council results February 24
Of the posts nominated on February 22, the following were winners in the weekly Watcher’s Council voting. Right Wing Nut House scored with a remembrance of Hubert Humphrey, The “Happy Warrior” Is Weeping In His Grave. It was his acceptance speech at…
10:39 pm
[...] What do you expect from a blog that calls itself Right-Wing Nut House? Well, surprise yourself. Much of what you see there probably matches your expectation. But how about a heartfelt paean to the hero of the blogger’s youth, Hubert Horatio Humphrey Jr.? [...]
11:29 pm
Royko – now there was a real reporter and columnist! But I can’t tip my hat to Royko without tipping it to Irv Kupcident or Kup, a Chicago journalisn giant that was contemporary with Mike. But the real Chicago journalistic miracle is that Paul Harvy is still at it. Has he hit 90 yet?
1:05 am
[...] Council Votes: The “Happy Warrior” Is Weeping In His Grave – Right Wing Nut House Team of Rivals – Done With Mirrors Clash of Science and Faith -– And a Stunning Contrast – Rhymes With Right Pity the Poor Anti-Semite – ShrinkWrapped So This Means God Is On Our Side, Right? – Gates of Vienna Ode To a Small Lump of Green Putty I Found In My Armpit One Midsummer Morning – New World Man [...]