By: The Commentator Editorial Board  | 

Humphrey’s the One (Vol. 34, Issue 2)

Next week the American public will choose a President. He should be a man capable not only of solving the complex problems of our own society, but also of providing leadership for the entire free world.

The Commentator, on the basis of an evaluation of each candidate, his promises and possibilities, supports. the election of Hubert H. Humphrey as President of the United States. 

While we view with some reservation his position on Vietnam, we feel that Mr. Humphrey’s past political performance warrants our support for his candidacy. He has shown dynamic leadership in pioneering civil rights legislation, arms curbs, educational and social facilities and a deep friendship for Israel.

Mr. Nixon, on the other hand, urges a delay in the ratification of the Nuclear Non-proliferation Treaty, and calls for the energetic use of our police forces to curb civil disorders, rather than attacking problems at their core. We feel that Mr. Nixon cannot stand on his record, which makes his refusal to debate all the more suspicious.

Furthermore, Nixon’s choice of Spiro Agnew with the approval of Strom Thurmond and the Southern bloc, casts aspersions on his decision making ability. Mr. Agnew has been injudicious, bungling, inconsistent. Mr. Humphrey’s choice, Edmund Muskie, has been forthright, honest, refreshing.

Finally, as Jews, we have a singular responsibility to elect a candidate whose program for the Middle East is most promising for peace. Both Mr. Humphrey and Mr. Nixon have pledged to keep an arms balance in the region, but we favor Mr. Humphrey in recalling his support of Israel when such friendship did not endear him to a strong voting minority.

The election this year is crucial. As Mr. Nixon’s campaign slogan runs: “this time vote as if your whole world depended on it.” The Commentator feels strongly that this vote should be cast for Humphrey-Muskie.