The Charlotte News

Friday, June 4, 1954


Site Ed. Note: The front page reports that in the 27th day of hearings before the Senate Investigations subcommittee regarding the dispute between the Army and Senator McCarthy, the Senator this date agreed with Army special counsel Joseph Welch to permit use in the hearings of the Senator's monitored telephone calls with Army officials, plus all such monitored calls with other Senators. He and Mr. Welch agreed also that calls involving other key figures in the dispute, between Administration officials only and calls involving Roy Cohn and Francis Carr, aides to Senator McCarthy, would not be introduced. Thus, the only calls which would be introduced would be those between Army officials and Senators.

In the afternoon session, three witnesses involved in monitoring and transcribing the phone calls between the Army officials and the Senators would testify, authenticating the transcripts and then reading into the record the transcribed phone calls deemed relevant by the subcommittee, the Army or Senator McCarthy.

Secretary of State Dulles told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this date that the military situation in Indo-China was "grave, but by no means hopeless". He was testifying in support of the President's new 3.5 billion dollar foreign aid program for the coming fiscal year. He urged Congress to allow the President great flexibility in spending the funds to enable him to act quickly and decisively in meeting the Communist threat.

In Paris, the French Cabinet appointed General Paul Ely, armed forces chief of staff, to undertake the dual role of military and political chief in Indo-China this date, seeking to bolster the sagging defenses in the war. He replaced General Henri Navarre as military commander and Maurice Dejean as commissioner general of Indo-China. General Ely had recently returned from a survey mission in Indo-China and his report had been made the basis for government plans to conduct an all-out defense against the new threats of the Vietminh to the vital Red River Delta area around Hanoi and Haiphong. In combining the two posts, the French Government returned to its formula adopted when the late Marshal Jean de Lattre de Tassigny, holding both positions, had repulsed the Vietminh from the Delta in 1951.

The House Appropriations Committee voted this date to provide the Labor and Welfare Departments just short of two billion dollars in new cash to finance them for the coming fiscal year, less than one percent below that which the President had requested and $302,000 less than the same agencies had been voted for the current fiscal year. It was the ninth of 11 annual departmental appropriation bills presented to the House. The House had passed eight others and the Senate had passed three, with only one having been sent to the President.

Representative Clifford Davis of Tennessee testified in the trial of the four Puerto Rican Nationalists, which began this date in Washington, resulting from the March 1 shooting attack in the House of Representatives, in which five Congressmen were shot, one critically, all of whom had since recovered. Mr. Davis was one of the five wounded and testified that he had seen the bullet coming toward him which had struck him, identifying Rafael Cancel Miranda as the defendant who had shot him. Each of the defendants was charged with five counts of assault with intent to kill and five counts of assault with a deadly weapon, facing up to 70 years each in prison. Representative Louis Graham of Pennsylvania, who was not wounded, testified that he had witnessed the entire shooting. He arose from the witness chair and aimed a finger at the four defendants, singling them out one by one as he called their names, saying they had fired the shots. He twisted and turned, describing thereby what he had seen during the shooting, saying that Mrs. Lolita Lebron, the self-described leader of the group, had caught his eye as she leaped to her feet with a snarl on her face, let out a scream and waved a banner before commencing to fire. Another Government witness this date was Representative Kenneth Roberts of Alabama, who had also been wounded.

In St. Louis, the Southern Baptist Convention was considering a proposed resolution which described the Brown v. Board of Education decision of the Supreme Court, holding segregation in public schools unconstitutional, to be in harmony with Christian teaching. The executive secretary of the commission presenting the proposed resolution said that the Convention would urge their people to be good citizens and conform to the decision as the basic law of the land and to be good Christians in the type of attitude they assumed toward it. If the Convention adopted the resolution, it would not be binding on any Southern Baptist church, as they were free to follow or ignore Convention recommendations. The Christian Life Commission would also present to the convention its annual report, prepared prior to Brown, saying that it was time for Baptists and other citizens of the country to restore to 13 million black citizens their rights and privileges as guaranteed to them by the Constitution. It said: "Our treatment of minority peoples in our citizenship weakens the witness of our missionaries in other lands even more than in their own." Delegates from 17 states represented on the Commission had voted for the report, though seven delegates were absent.

In Baltimore, the Air Force announced this date development of a solar generator which, when refined, could convert sunlight into enough energy to run a home. The Air Research and Development Command said that the new generator had evolved through research conducted by Donald Reynolds and Lt. Col. Gerard Leies at the Wright Air Development Center near Dayton, O. The previous April 25, Bell Telephone Co. had unveiled a solar battery which converted sunlight into electricity through silicon transistors. The Bell device and the Air Force generator were capable of storing the energy from the sun. The generator used cadmium sulfide, a pigment used in the manufacture of paint. The Air Force said that the slab of crystal, measuring four feet by fifteen feet, would supply enough current to take care of a house. What will they think of next? Electric cars?

In Pittsburgh, Pa., two thugs slugged an 18-year old bank messenger at a hospital this date and escaped with $22,900 in payroll. Usually, the bank policeman accompanied the messenger inside on such visits, but on this occasion had let the messenger out of the car while he found a parking space. The payroll was for the hospital's 400 employees, not including nurses.

In Raleigh, a Greensboro man who faced 16 to 20 years in prison for manslaughter had his conviction reversed by the State Supreme Court this date, holding that the trial judge should have allowed a defense motion to dismiss the charges at the conclusion of the State's case, on a ground similar to the corpus delicti rule, that a case cannot solely rest on the confession or admission of the defendant, without other independent evidence of a crime. In another case, a Charlotte man who was convicted in Guilford County of presenting false and fraudulent claims to an insurance company in a fire loss had his conviction reversed, as the Court determined that it was not a crime to procure over-coverage of insurance, that under certain circumstances, it might be a civil wrong, but that one could not "willfully and knowingly" violate a statute when he did that which he believed he had a bona fide right to do. In a civil case, the Court, upholding the lower court's decision, refused to dismiss a lawsuit against NASCAR, filed by the administrator of the estate of Jesse Midkiff, who had been killed in a stock-car race in Raleigh in September, 1953, the estate seeking $100,000 in damages for his wrongful death, ultimately the case being dismissed, presumably on subsequent demurrer or summary judgment based on the defense that assumption of risk was established as a matter of law, while the right of the decedent's widow to receive a $3,000 death benefit would be later upheld in 1957. (The monkey should be made standard equipment in the cars to complement the roll-cage, don't ye think?)

In Cleveland, O., an appellate court ruled that a defendant could be prosecuted for getting drunk in his own home, citing Ohio precedent from as far back as 1854, upholding a municipal court ruling finding the defendant guilty and sentencing him to three days in jail and a $25 fine, after police had found him drunk during a call at his home regarding a traffic accident.

Also in Cleveland, it was reported by the dogcatchers that dogs were heading up one-way streets and then doubling back to avoid being caught by the dogcatchers in their trucks. The dog warden said that the dogs seemed to be aware of the trick, that they stopped running after doubling back, sat down and grinned at them.

In Chippenham, England, a man began rebuilding his garden wall this date for the 20th time after a truck came down the hill below which he lived and plunged through the wall, just as 19 other trucks and cars had done previously.

On the editorial page, "School Board Shows Common Sense" indicates that the North Carolina Board of Education had been sensible in awaiting the Supreme Court's implementing decision regarding the method and timetable for desegregation, set for the following term starting in the fall, before taking steps in response to the Brown decision of May 17. The Board voted unanimously to continue segregated schools in the fall, pending the formal decrees from the Court, and to continue appropriations for new black school facilities in locations where the facilities would be needed in a non-segregated system, while declining approval of any projects which would not be needed were integration to be ordered forthwith. It finds that the Board had thus maintained a calm attitude which had been characteristic of state officials in reaction to the decision.

It also indicates that the state was too firmly wedded to the principle of equal and universal public education to give serious consideration to the more precipitous steps contemplated by several other Southern states, such as South Carolina and Georgia, giving consideration to ending their public school systems and substituting them with publicly funded private schools through vouchers.

It predicts that the state would work its way out of the "problem" sensibly and with moderation, in the tradition which had made the state a leader in "The New South".

"More Than Words Are Needed from Ike" indicates that the previous December, the President had tied Republican fate at the polls to the party's success in enacting progressive legislation, quoting from a speech. It finds that the President had performed his role impressively, sending to the Congress a program consisting of more than 200 measures, of which more than 30 had been considered major bills, but that thus far, the Congress had enacted only seven of those major bills, two having been killed and six others appearing destined to be killed. Currently, the Administration was pushing hard for passage of the rest of the major items on the legislative agenda, which it lists, and at his press conference during the week, the President had re-emphasized the importance of a good legislative record, telling reporters that his principal objective was to get his program passed.

It indicates that he would have to place more pressure on Congress if he hoped to do so, as the Congress, deficient in leadership, had floundered rather aimlessly with no sense of urgency, with a succession of committee sideshows made "all the more grotesque because they are being played in the lengthening shadow of the hydrogen bomb". It urges that the President had to be more assertive if he was to get the nation moving forward toward a solution of the many problems facing it.

"Taxpayers Need Not Finance Campaigns" indicates that Congressman Samuel Yorty of California, campaigning for the Senate against Senator Thomas Kuchel, had a slogan, "Let's Build a Better America", the title of a speech of which more than four million copies had been sent through the mails via his Congressional franking privilege at taxpayer expense, amounting to more than $119,000. It comments that it was some way to "build a better America" and some way to campaign for public office.

House mailing room personnel reported that several members of Congress had each mailed a couple of million copies of Congressional Record inserts, also at public expense. It urges that the franking privilege needed investigation for its abuse, and that the General Accounting Office would be the appropriate agency to conduct that investigation, as part of the executive branch. It also favors stricter limitations on the use of the privilege, as a means of reducing the deficit of the Post Office Department.

"Good-Bye to 'Tantamount,' 'So-Called'" indicates that what Louis Graves of the Chapel Hill Weekly had called the "tantamount season" was about over, referring to the primaries in North Carolina, a one-party state, where election in the primary was "tantamount" to election in November—as a recent piece on the front page during the week had stated in reference to the Senate race between former Governor Kerr Scott and interim Senator Alton Lennon, which, you might note, because of a previous piece in The News complaining of its triteness, we assiduously avoided, employing a substitute, "equivalent".

It indicates that Republican Congressman Charles Jonas and a few others like him in the South might be able to eliminate "tantamount" from the primary vocabulary.

It believes that another word was deserving of a similar fate, the over-worked "so-called", which was used in a mean and smearing context. It was being used routinely by letter writers in reference to the Brown decision, as in the "so-called Supreme Court", "so-called liberals", "so-called Americans", and, in other contexts, as the "so-called Old Age and Survivors Insurance program", etc. It created doubt as to its modified word without producing any so-called evidence.

It concludes: "To be 'so-called' is, shall we say, tantamount to being guilty. And with that, both words leave these columns, forevermore."

But nowadays, they will say something like: "The iconic candidates in the race for the iconic position, while awesome, did nothing but push back and double-down, detracting from their iconic status as iconic Americans in an iconic land where awesome freedom is the most ever."

By the way, for the etymologists, "tantamount" derives from the myth of Tantalus forever pushing the rock up the mountain, tumbling down, tumbling down, also the origin of "tantalize"—which our mama used to urge us constantly to refrain from doing to our family's little chihuahua, which hated our guts, growled snarlingly, gruffed and bow-wowed every time we so much as stared at it, apparently, according to our mama, for having preceded us by a couple of years on this earth and thereby our existence deemed by Her Highness threatening to her supreme place in the sun. Regardless of that, we still like dogs, save for the little brats who think they are entitled as supreme beings, as Sisyphus. The little chihuahua eventually died of a heart attack at age 12, one of her last acts on earth having been to bow-wow at us.

A piece from the Washington Post, titled "Senate Commercials", indicates that Senator Wallace Bennett of Utah had raised pointed questions in connection with his resolution to forbid the commercial sponsorship of Senate hearings when being broadcast by radio and television networks. Presently, they were permitted to sell commercial advertising, and Senator Bennett believed that ultimately it would impair the dignity of the body, just as Queen Elizabeth, he said, had been featured on a program with a chimpanzee.

After the networks, as a public service, had televised the initial testimony of Private G. David Schine, Secretary of the Army Stevens and Army general counsel John G. Adams, they felt an obligation to accord similar treatment to other witnesses testifying, imposing a financial burden on the networks. The Investigations subcommittee had thus approved commercial sponsorship on condition that the proceedings would not be interrupted for commercials, with the name of the sponsor mentioned only at the beginning and end of the broadcasts.

Parenthetically, we could see it now, had they permitted interruptions during the testimony for commercials regarding, for instance, shaving appliances, suggesting that the 5 o'clock shadow exhibited by Senator McCarthy could easily be gotten rid of by a better shaving cream or razor, or, better yet, an electric shave, or that life goes better with Blatz Beer, or the functional equivalent, as anyone could see from Senator McCarthy's behavior during the hearings, etc. Ice cream commercials also might have supplemented some of Private Schine's testimony, regarding his butterscotch sundae on Monday, that a nice yummy bowl of Sealtest would go oh so well with the testimony on any day of the week, nuts optional.

The piece indicates its agreement with Senator Bennett that the commercialization of the hearings would be obnoxious, indicating that it went even further, as a large corporation interested in an investigation could promise to sponsor television broadcast of the hearings, provided that the committee chairman or some other Senator would undertake such an investigation. Other vested interests could seek to evade the law against corporate political contributions via that method. Ambitious legislators would be under constant temptation to trade favors for sponsorship of official telecasts in which they were featured.

It indicates that there was a large question as to where the line ought be drawn in broadcasting Congressional proceedings as a public service. While such broadcasts could become a valuable antidote to "political quackery", the hearings before the Senate Investigations subcommittee had undoubtedly been prolonged by the participants playing to the cameras and microphones. Senator Bennett had commented that they had already seen "many demonstrations of grandstanding, scene stealing and headline hunting."

Drew Pearson indicates that it had been approximately 18 months since Governor Thomas Dewey of New York, who had done more in getting the nomination for General Eisenhower at the 1952 Republican convention than anyone else, had called on the President and provided him with some secret but sound advice, which the President had belatedly accepted. Governor Dewey had told the President that the issue of McCarthyism would be one of the most difficult he would face during his Administration and that since he had to face it sooner or later, it would be easier if he did so sooner. He imparted that when he was the Republican nominee during 1948, he had been persuaded to go to Illinois and make a speech endorsing Dwight Green for governor and Curley Brooks for Senator, both isolationist candidates put forth by the Chicago Tribune, published by Col. Bertie McCormick, a traditional isolationist, and Mr. Dewey said it had hurt him with independent voters. He therefore urged the General to meet the McCarthy issue head-on when he made his forthcoming campaign speech in Milwaukee—though Mr. Pearson appears to mix his timeline somewhat between the fall, 1952 campaign and the early stages of the Eisenhower Presidency. Governor Dewey had emerged as a leader of the non-isolationist, more progressive wing of the Republican Party. The conversation had lasted three hours and at the end of it, General Eisenhower promised to follow the advice. But RNC chairman Arthur Summerfield got wind of it and joined with Tom Coleman, the Republican leader of Wisconsin, plus Senators Homer Ferguson of Michigan and Bourke Hickenlooper of Iowa, chartering a special plane to catch up with the General's special campaign train in the Midwest, convincing him to reverse his pledge to Governor Dewey and agree to endorse Senator McCarthy in his campaign for re-election in Wisconsin. As a compromise, however, the General inserted two paragraphs in the Milwaukee speech, praising General George Marshall, who, as Army chief of staff during the war, had promoted him in one year from lieutenant colonel to lieutenant general, and who Senator McCarthy had criticized as a supposed spokesman for Communism for his policies as Secretary of State under President Truman beginning in 1947, after having been the President's special envoy to China for a year prior to that. At that point, Senator McCarthy intervened and convinced General Eisenhower to delete the two paragraphs regarding General Marshall, after Mr. Summerfield had gotten him into the General's hotel room in Peoria via the service elevator so that the press would not be aware of it, the Senator convincing the General that he could praise General Marshall anywhere else except in Milwaukee, a request to which the General acquiesced. White House aides said that presently, the President was a wiser and sadder man.

Significantly, he finds, Governor Dewey had returned as an adviser on McCarthyism, with his former campaign manager and right-hand man, current Attorney General Herbert Brownell, having been one of the leading appeasers of Senator McCarthy, though no longer so. Presently, Senator McCarthy had only two friends in the Cabinet, Postmaster General Summerfield and Secretary of Defense Charles E. Wilson, the latter being semi-friendly to the Senator at the time he had departed for the Far East. Other members of the Cabinet were almost solidly opposed to the Senator. But in the Senate, a rollcall of the Republican "sheep and goats" would still find a majority lined up with the isolationist, conservative McCarthy wing of the party, probably the biggest problem presently for the President.

H. L. Hunt, the Texas oil multi-millionaire and major supporter of Senator McCarthy, was purchasing radio and television time for the "Facts Forum", responding to Americans in Minnesota and Illinois, deemed two key states where the Senator was trying to unseat Senators Paul Douglas of Illinois and Hubert Humphrey of Minnesota. Most television and radio stations sought to follow the practice of selling equal time to both candidates in the races, but if time were purchased in advance by a so-called impartial program, as "Facts Forum" pretended to be, it would be difficult to dislodge the program during the election campaign.

It should be recalled that a note purporting to be from Lee Harvey Oswald was transmitted to the House Select Committee on Assassinations in 1975 from an assassination researcher who received it from an anonymous sender in Mexico City, dated November 8, 1963, addressed to "Mr. Hunt", cryptically regarding Mr. Oswald's "position" "before any steps are taken by me or anyone else". While never ascertained as to any precise identity of the addressee or whether it was definitely in Mr. Oswald's handwriting, though if not genuine at least a "clever imitation", it has been assumed to be in reference to H. L. Hunt, though the latter, who died in 1974, always denied any association with Mr. Oswald or the assassination, having been connected to it previously through other links. Of course, it could have been regarding another Mr. Hunt. Neither Mr. Liddy nor Mr. Ehr-lich-man was mentioned. Nor was Warren Earl Burger or G. Harrold Carswell.

Joseph & Stewart Alsop indicate that one of the complicating factors in the Indo-China crisis had been the attitude of British Prime Minister Winston Churchill, that according to Americans who spoke from first-hand knowledge, he seemed to find it difficult to interest himself in the Indochinese problem. He also did not know Eurasia as he knew Europe first-hand, and tended to see the Indochinese war as a remote colonial dispute in which the French had become embroiled, seeing no reason for Britain to help extricate them. The Alsops suggest that the larger reason for his attitude was that he had become preoccupied with the threat to Britain posed by Soviet atomic and hydrogen bombs, driving all else from his mind. He returned to that topic at every opportunity in private conversations and pleaded with American listeners to recall that Britain was composed of islands, even exaggerating the danger, having a theory that a hydrogen bomb dropped in the Irish Sea would overwhelm the British Isles with "a massive tidal wave". Sometimes in discussing that situation, he had been moved to tears, never being ashamed to show his emotions.

The impression had been left with visitors that the burden of his years, at age 80, was growing too heavy for him. Yet, they regard his obsession as neither foolish nor senile, but rather as a warning, such that if his American listeners were more wise, they would understand that warning, especially when within two or three years, the same peril would be threatening the U.S. Britain at present was within easy range of the IL-28 bombers of the Soviet airbases in East Germany, with no air defense capable of intercepting those jets. The Soviets had an ample enough stock of atomic and hydrogen bombs to reduce Britain to ruins. A couple of years hence, the Soviet Strategic Air Army would possess a powerful striking force of their new Tupolev-37 jet bombers, with a smaller number of larger Tupolev-39's. At present, the U.S. lacked a sufficient air defense against those new jets and two years hence, the Soviets would likely possess a sufficient stock of atomic and hydrogen bombs to reduce the U.S. to ruins.

The secret weapon from Tupelo, however, is in the wings, awaiting release onto the world stage. Then, you Commies will see that your 37-year program of revolution has been all for naught.

The Congressional Quarterly, in the second of a series of articles on Brown v. Board of Education, decided by the Supreme Court on May 17, indicates that the decision had rendered unconstitutional laws providing for separate schools in 21 states, in 17 of which segregation had been legally mandatory either by statute or, more usually, state constitutions. It lists the latter states, all of which were in the traditional South, with the exception of Delaware. Five school districts, from Kansas, Virginia, South Carolina, Delaware and the District of Columbia, had been directly before the Court, consolidated under Brown, being challenged for their segregated public schools by the plaintiffs, who, for the first time, convinced the high Court that segregation, per se, was in violation of the Fourteenth Amendment Equal Protection Clause, and that the old "separate but equal" doctrine of Plessy v. Ferguson, decided with respect to railway cars in Louisiana in 1896, was no longer sufficient to pass Constitutional muster.

The piece indicates that in four states, Wyoming, Kansas, New Mexico and Arizona, separate schools had been permitted, particularly at the elementary level, at the option of local school boards, either in all or in specified communities, in Kansas, the Topeka School Board having been the one challenged in Brown. In Wyoming, the option had never been exercised to segregate schools. (It does not say so but there were probably no more than about ten black people residing in the state of Wyoming.)

Segregation was primarily directed at the black minority, but it also had been applied to various other groups such as Puerto Ricans, Mexicans and Orientals.

Sixteen states, either by their constitutions or statutes, specifically prohibited segregation, and in a number of those, the prohibition had been enacted since World War II and accompanied by desegregation of schools where separate facilities had been maintained in certain districts in contravention of earlier statutes. New Jersey and Illinois were examples of that practice. The other 14 states which barred segregation are listed, all of which were in the Northeast or Midwest, with the exception of Idaho, Colorado and Washington. The remaining 11 states had no current legislation regarding segregation. Among those, California, for instance, had earlier statutory provisions which authorized segregation but those had been repealed by the Legislature. It lists the other 10 states without any provision, scattered across the country.

It cautions that the end of legal segregation did not necessarily mean the end of de facto segregation, as in a large number of Northern cities where there were large black populations, many schools existed where all, or nearly all, of the pupils were black because no whites happened to live in the particular neighborhoods where the schools were located.

Professor Charles Thompson of Howard University in Washington had estimated that in the Northern and Western states, about 25 percent of the black school population in the elementary grades, half of that in high school, and 83 percent in college attended institutions which were racially integrated.

When New Jersey had recently integrated its schools in 52 of 550 school districts where separate schools still remained, it had been discovered that nine of the districts contained only black population.

In the states where segregation had been practiced, whether by law or the facts of the case, considerable improvements had been made in recent years in both white and black schools and the gap between facilities had been greatly narrowed. In the 17 states and the District, where segregation had been by law, the average annual salaries of teachers were $2,143 for blacks, compared to $2,713 for whites during the school year 1949-50. The number of pupils per teacher in the elementary schools was 32.1 in the black schools and 27.3 in the white schools. The percent of one-teacher schools among the elementary schools was 43.5 for blacks and 32.3 for whites.

In the 1939-40 school year, a survey of expenditures per classroom unit showed the median range among 12 Southern states to have been between a low of $155 to a high of $1,382 for the black classrooms, whereas in the 1949-50 school year, the range was between $562 and $5,305. In white classrooms, the median range in the latter school year was between $1,979 and $5,222, and between $577 and $1,595 in 1939-40. In the nation as a whole, the median expenditure per classroom unit was $1,649 in 1939-40 and $4,391 a decade later.

A letter writer comments on the "angry dissent" expressed in the letters column regarding Brown, and finds that the same abuse had been heaped on Northerners after the Emancipation Proclamation had freed the slaves in 1863—at least as to those states still in rebellion as of January 1 of that year—, which, she finds, had sped the progress of the nation. She indicates that blacks were only receiving their long-delayed rights which were due by birth, but for which they had to resort to the courts to obtain. She wonders what if Christ, having been a Jew, had refused acceptance of non-Jews. One previous letter writer had congratulated teachers who said they would refuse to teach black students, and she finds such teachers unqualified to teach citizenship. She indicates that white people should be flattered that black people would be willing to integrate white schools, "thereby lifting the standards of the schools", after what blacks had suffered at the white man's hands. She had observed that on the prior Lincoln's birthday, white schools which had flagpoles had not displayed the flag, whereas a black school, which had no flagpoles, had nevertheless displayed it. She finds that the black race had made more progress in the length of time they had been free in America than any other race in a comparable time period. She comments that one letter writer apparently did not like Yankees and wanted to ship them out, tranferring his disgust over the Supreme Court decision to Northerners. She indicates, without telling of her background: "We can take it, and we are staying right here pushing the progress of the South." She invites the other letter writer to leave if he did not like Yankees.

A letter writer comments on an article appearing in the May 25 edition of the newspaper, regarding the 15-cent tax rate cut for ABC funding, finding that any financial returns from the sale or taxation of alcoholic beverages could not benefit the people, as it came as a result of consumption of alcohol, which offset any returns by the need for maintaining institutions for rehabilitation of alcoholics and penal institutions. He cites a statistic that during the first four months of the year, there had been 3,179 driver's licenses revoked for drunk driving in the state. He thus objects to any income derived from the legalized sale of a "narcotic poisonous drug".

A letter writer reviews occurrences in the Soviet Union in the 1930's, 1940's and thus far in the 1950's, including associating the Brown decision with Communism, then projects ahead to the 1960's that "with only a small amount of misguided leadership by our own USSR heroes (operating under cover as political, religious and educational figureheads in the imperialistic USA), the poorer, oppressed classes of all creeds and color were goaded into rising against Wall Street, demanding and getting equal shares of the wealth that had been hoarded by that class. This of course resulted in the once mighty USA becoming a socialistic state." He then goes on to suggest that in the early 1970's would come "the time for all good comrades and members of the party to rise to the need, and help complete the destruction of the USA by transforming it to complete communism, to the credit of Marx, of Stalin, and the glorious USSR."

He wants "all good men to come to the aid of their country" and prevent that history lesson from being taught by standing up for the right of the individual, states' rights, and for the U.S.A.

Trumpies, of course, will use that as a brilliantly forecast primer, seek to find out who this individual was, and likely, if he is still alive, support him for the presidency in 2024. We think he must be "Q". What do you think? He mentions, incidentally, nothing about a future pandemic exacerbated beyond all bounds of what it should have been in this country by the chief moron in the White House between 2017 and 2021, "elected" by a minority of the people.

And, furthermore, by the early 1970's, let's see, who was it in the White House dealing directly with the Communists by way of "Ping-Pong Diplomacy" and "Detente"?

A letter writer, identified only as "A Reader", indicates that it had been interesting to read of the criminal records of the two men who had the audacity to run for the Charlotte Township constable, now apparently set to be the only two candidates in a primary runoff election for the office, wonders whether the two candidates had run on the assumption that "it takes one to catch one".

Now, we know that some smart-aleck will come along and say something like, "That's the way the 2016 wa' as to both candidates." That would, however, be true only in your mind. Neither had or have a criminal record—at least, as to Trump, yet.

Framed Edition
[Return to Links
Page by Subject] [Return to Links-Page by Date] [Return to News<i><i><i>—</i></i></i>Framed Edition]
Links-Date Links-Subj.