GOP's focus on values is not new

Tuesday, August 22, 2006 By MARSHA MERCER MEDIA GENERAL NEWS SERVICE WASHINGTON — As congressional Republicans pushed this summer — again — for "values" legislation in Congress, I started wondering. Just how long have Republicans been lording family values over Democrats, anyway? In the bookstore, I picked up "Talking Right" by Geoffrey Nunberg, a linguist and Democratic partisan who studies political language. Nunberg pinpoints the precise day Republicans turned "family values" into a political cudgel. On Aug. 7, 1968, Nunberg writes, the Republican National Convention in Miami Beach that would nominate Richard Nixon for president heard a "round of inspirational songs from the preternaturally clean-cut 'Up with People' chorus — 'Not a hippie among them,' as the speaker who introduced them said." Delegates to that '68 convention then adopted a party platform that called for judges who "respect traditional family values and the sanctity of human life." And so began the battle over values that rages to this day. Thirty-eight years later, Republican congressional leaders warmed up for the 2006 midterm elections with an American Values Agenda that advocated: banning embryonic stem cell research and gay marriage and protecting the Pledge of Allegiance and the flag. The GOP agenda was not a serious attempt to change society. Most of the items went nowhere, although Congress did give condo owners the right to fly Old Glory — no matter what their condo association or board says. Election year If this seems a matter unworthy of congressional attention, you may have forgotten this is an election year. Democrats always seem surprised by GOP maneuvers. They complain about political posturing but have their own troubles when it comes to expressing their moral positions. Last week, voters in the Democratic primary in Connecticut rejected Sen. Joseph Lieberman, perhaps the Democrat most closely identified with values. Six years ago, Lieberman's religiosity — he's an observant Jew — and his independent spirit made him an attractive running mate for Democratic presidential contender Al Gore. Lieberman had excoriated President Clinton on the Senate floor in September 1998, calling the Monica Lewinsky affair both immoral and disgraceful. Gore's choice of the man some called "Holy Joe" was seen as a brilliant tactical move for a party that tends to mumble when it comes to values. "Chutzpah!" trumpeted Time magazine on the cover of its Aug. 21, 2000, issue. Lieberman wore the mantle of his faith and morality like a Superman cape, practically daring Republicans to come after him. But when Lieberman boasted they "can't say I'm weak on values," Nunberg says, "everybody understood that he was talking about his religious convictions and his campaign against sex and violence in the media, not his positions on the environment or the Iraq War." That was then. We'll have to see how it sifts out, but it seems that the war has elbowed out tolerance in other issues in Connecticut. After electing him to three terms, Democrats pulled the plug on Lieberman and his independent spirit. They want someone who'll fight against President Bush. Skillful use of language Part of Lieberman's problem was that he didn't explain his stand on the war until the last days before the primary. Nunberg, who teaches at the University of California at Berkeley, says skillful use of language has been crucial to Republican control of language. I looked up the 1968 Republican convention in Miami Beach to see what other clues I could find about the values war. Up With People's appearance didn't merit even a mention in the news stories, but a speech by Thomas E. Dewey, the former governor of New York and famous loser to Harry Truman in the upset presidential election of 1948, did. America was torn about Vietnam in 1968. Protesters were marching in the streets, and social and racial unrest had many voters scared. Dewey reassured Republicans that the country wasn't falling apart. "We have not lost our bearings," he said. The country wasn't alienated or sick. No, he knew exactly where the country's problems started: "I deeply believe the source of our disarray is our government in Washington," he said. Aha. I'll bet Dewey wasn't the first to blame the government in Washington, and you know he won't be the last — not if it's an Election Year. Marsha Mercer is Washington bureau chief of Media General News Service. Distributed by Scripps Howard.