University of Virginia Library

Robert Gillmore

Lindsay: Republican
Without A Party

An open letter to John Lindsay.

Dear John: (a greeting now especially
appropriate)

When you shook Arthur Goldberg's
hand Monday and said that
he-and not Nelson Rockefeller-ought
to be governor of New
York, you ended your political
career. Like Jimmy Walker and
Robert Wagner you have risen to
the top of the bottom of the barrel
in Gracie Mansion.

You have, in effect, deserted the
party of your grandfather and
mine.

Oh, you can say, "I am a Republican
and I intend to remain a
Republican." But you are then a
Republican without a party. You
will never have a significant Republican
nomination.

I know, you deserted the party
before when you refused to support
Goldwater. But that was a matter
of survival-your own and that of
countless other Republicans in the
Northeast. And besides, you weren't
hurting Goldwater, whose campaign
in New York was always
hopeless.

Forgiveness

So the party could forgive you
that transgression-as it did Kenneth
Keating and many others. And the
fact that your majority was bigger
than any other Republican Congressman's
helped to sweeten the
grace.

Things were stickler when you
ran for mayor last time as an
independent. That, by itself, was
fine. But unfortunately you had to
run against the duly nominated
Republican candidate. Of course,
that too many have been excused in
time-especially if one recalls that
John Marchi could never have won
and that you, after all, did.

But what have you done now?

You just may have facilitated
the defeat of an excellent governor
who deserves reelection and who
otherwise would probably have it.

Killing Blow

But more than that you may
have dealt a killing blow to a leader
of that wing of the party which was
the only support you still enjoyed.

In other words, John, you did
exactly what Spiro Agnew did the
other day when he called Charlie
Goodell the "Christine Jorgonsen of
the Republican party" and supported
his opponent, Conservative
James Buckley.

I know it sounds awful, John, to
compare you to Agnew. But its the
awful truth.

You and Agnew seem to have no
respect for a party. You both seem
to think you can lop off members
at will. You seem to have forgotten
that a party is pluralistic, broad-based,
and therefore inchoate.

You forget that it depends on
mutual support at nearly all
times-and that when support is not
rendered it is usually not rendered
back.

That is why the party liberals
will do their best to sink Agnew.

And that is why, John, in the
party at least, you are a dead man.

All of which, of course, makes
me and many others very sad.

Skeptical

We were skeptical when you ran
against the 17th District organization
candidate in 1958. But we
cheered when you won, and when
you won in 1960, 1962, and
1964-the latter especially, when
the odds were incredible.

We were dubious when you ran
for mayor in 1965-against even
more incredible odds. And we
cheered when you won.

And we thought that perhaps
you were The One. You would go on
to Albany or to a Senate seat. And
you would do what Nelson Rockefeller
failed to do to become the
first activist progressive Republican
President since Theodore Roosevelt.

Oldest Trap

But, we understand, you were
caught in the oldest trap-the Republican
dilemma which is that a man
who could appeal to he party cannot
appeal to the country, and vice
versa. Eisenhower, of course, broke
the dilemma. And Nixon-mainly
because of the war-did also.

But the dilemma got you early,
in New York City.

And now you have left us. And I
suppose we cannot blame you. You
after all want to be President and
our party just won't let you.

But it was a nice dream while it
lasted.