If you have been paying attention to the Virginia Governor’s race this Summer, then I’m sure you have heard about the historical writing by Republican candidate Bob McDonnell. Back in 1989, McDonnell wrote his master’s thesis entitled “The Republican Party’s Vision for the Family: The Compelling Issue of the Decade.” This writing has been used by McDonnell’s challenger Creigh Deeds in a series of ads as a way to decrease McDonnell’s popularity in Northern Virginia while cutting his lead in the polls. My questions are, what historical writings are fair game in an election, and is there a certain point of time when the writings are no longer relevant?
In McDonnell’s thesis, he argues that there is a correlation between the breakdown of the traditional family and the decline of societal norms. Increases in teenage pregnancies, abortions, divorces, and other issues are related to things like single-parent households and duel income families. While he premised the thesis as “an inside look at the formulation of the Republican policy in the U.S. House of Representatives,” the Deeds camp has termed the thesis as McDonnell’s “blueprint” to govern. So out of curiosity, I decided to see what Deeds position was on another Virginia campaign a few years back.
In 2006, Jim Webb was running against Senator George Allen – an election the majority of the press assumed Allen would win easily. During the campaign, Webb’s published books and papers were examined and questioned. One of the more scrutinized writings was a 1979 article entitled “Women Can’t Fight.” The article was written while he was serving on the staff of the House Committee on Veterans Affairs as well as teaching at the U.S. Naval Academy. Making the case for hardship in war, he states “no benefit to anyone can come from women serving in combat.” He continued, “their presence at institutions dedicated to the preparation of men for combat command is poisoning the preparation.”
Using these two examples as the basis for our questions, when are historical writing fair game? It really depends on the topic and the tone. Both articles are detailed analysis on controversial topics designed to challenge the thinking at the time. Both articles take a stance on the role of women in society, with McDonnell focusing on the impact women have in the family and Webb focusing on the impact women have in combat. Due to their controversial tone that impacts a key demographic, it is in the challengers favor to focus the attention away from the key issues of the election and on to something that will bring doubt to the minds of the voters.
The next question isn’t as straightforward. Does an article that is a few years old more relevant than one that is 30 years old? You would think so, but all is fair in politics it seems. McDonnell’s article is 20 years old, while Webb’s was 27 years old during his campaign. Both articles received more focus than their work in the government. McDonnell’s explanation for the thesis is that it was an academic exercise, and that his views have matured over the years. Webb defended his work by saying it wasn’t putting down the role of women in the military, and he apologized for anyone who might have been offended.
In end, this might serve as a word of caution of any would-be political candidate in the future. What you have written, especially in this modern era of technology and politics, will certainly be researched by your challengers and possibly use against you. While the morality of the practice might be questionable, the truth is that all is fair in love and war, or should I say politics. In fact, this article might come back and haunt me one day.
