Content area
Full Text
Articles
"Heart and eyes ... filled to overflowing," Vivian L. Uhlig listened closely as President Richard M. Nixon spoke about the war in Vietnam on the evening of 3 November 1969. Still grieving for a son killed in Vietnam nearly two years earlier, Uhlig felt a deep connection with the President as he sought to explain the United States' role in the conflict. Writing to Nixon the next day, she told him, "I could feel your strong, inner emotions, your honesty, and your great concern for our men in Vietnam and for our country." Both she and her husband were "comforted some-what [sic] with the knowledge that you aren't going to withdraw our troops and let this great country go down in defeat" because, she wondered, if "we give it all over to the communists now - for what and why did my only son die?" Furthermore, "if we just give up now, the faith in our government will really suffer a shattering blow," so Uhlig urged the President not to "let the pressures of the kooks and cowards and the ever-lasting misleading news media get you down."1
Uhlig's letter was one of thousands to arrive at the White House in the days and weeks following Nixon's speech. In many ways, it was exactly the type of response White House officials had hoped for: not only did it indicate an emotional connection between the President and the writer, but it also framed Nixon's policies as strengthening the nation and marginalized his opponents. While Uhlig's was likely sincere, many of the letters and telegrams on Nixon's Oval Office desk would more accurately be described as part of a larger "astroturf" - or false grassroots - campaign organized by the White House. That the speech is remembered as inspiring a groundswell of support, rather than as an early astroturf project, reflects just how effectively administration planners hid their involvement. Even so, they were not entirely successful and Jonathan Schell and other contemporary observers did notice the close ties between the White House and some of the President's more vocal supporters.2Still, their success in blending grassroots responses with ones orchestrated in the White House meant that the speech would serve as a model...