The Charlotte News
Thursday, January 23, 1958
THREE EDITORIALS
Site Ed. Note: The front page
reports from Caracas, Venezuela, that military leaders had overthrown
the dictatorship of El Presidente Marcos Perez Jimenez this date via
a bloody revolt
Six dictators had been deposed or assassinated in Latin America in less than the previous four years. On June 30, 1954, pro-Communist Jacobo Arbenz Guzman had been overthrown after a 12-day civil war in Guatemala. On September 19, 1955, Juan Peron had been ousted as El Presidente of Argentina. On September 29, 1956, General Anastasio Somoza of Nicaragua had been assassinated, and replaced by his son. On December 12, 1956, El Presidente Paul Magloire of Haiti had gone into exile after an unsuccessful effort to perpetuate his rule. On May 10, 1957, Gustavo Rojas Pinilla had been forced out of office by a revolt in Colombia.
A Charlotte family, who had left the city the previous fall, was presently residing in Maracay, Venezuela, about 60 miles from the capital, and the couple had written family and friends of occurrences at various times prior to the overthrow of El Presidente the previous day. The woman's parents had received a letter dated January 13 from their daughter the previous day, in which she had told of air activity in the New Year's Air Force demonstrations against El Presidente. In Christmas greetings to friends in Charlotte, the couple had told of the December election when El Presidente was the sole candidate on the ballot, that during a three-day period, the schools had been closed and Americans had been asked to remain indoors. (Suddenly, it has become clear what the MAGA people have been so incensed about for the past four years, that being that the only actual candidate on the ballot in 2020 was former Vice-President Biden, El Presidente, by that point, having become a nugatory cipher to all, save some assorted nuts. Remember, historically challenged little Trumpie, Juan Peron also returned to power...)
General Lucius Clay proposed this date to members of the Senate Preparedness subcommittee, chaired by Senator Lyndon Johnson, that U.S. military forces be drastically reorganized with all major commanders in the same uniform and under a single chief. The retired World War II general, a friend to President Eisenhower and former commander of U.S. forces in Europe, presently head of Continental Can Co. and a director of other large corporations, said that such single control was necessary because "no future commander is going to fight a war with the weapons of one service." He urged greatly increased power and authority for both the Secretary of Defense and the chairman of the Joint Chiefs. He said that the Secretary should have authority to transfer the billions of dollars of defense funding from one purpose to another, so as to be able to push research and development. He said that the Joint Chiefs chairman, presently a non-voting member of the group, ought take over their authority. He indicated that the present Joint Chiefs was "just another committee" and should serve only as advisers. He said that the time had come when senior officers ought belong to the same service and wear the same uniform, permitting some specialists to be promoted in their separate fields.
The President had urged this date that labor unions be made subject to loss of legal bargaining status if they failed to file true and proper data on their finances and other subjects, one of 12 specific proposals contained in a special message to Congress calling for curbs on "corruption, racketeering and abuse of trust and power in the labor-management field." The President called for legislation "to benefit and protect the welfare of American workers and the general public." He said it should curb abuses and provide greater harmony and stability in labor-management relations. The 12-point program had been unveiled previously by Secretary of Labor James Mitchell, having outlined it in his speech to the AFL-CIO convention in December. As he had outlined it, the program had drawn criticism from both labor leaders, who contended it had gone too far, and management spokesmen, who said that it did not go far enough.
The New York Times said this date that a secret staff memorandum to a House subcommittee had charged members of the FCC with illegally accepting industry favors.
In Greenville, S.C., four Klan members had been convicted in the beating of a 58-year old black farmer the prior July 21 and had been sentenced to prison terms this date. The head of the local Klan had received six years at hard labor, while a 24-year old Klansman, also convicted of conspiracy to commit assault and battery and of committing assault and battery, received a three-year sentence, while two others, ages 24 and 28, respectively, had been sentenced to a year each for conspiracy. An all-white jury had returned the verdicts the previous night. The farmer and his wife had told of the men having burst into their home, complaining that they were holding white children. The couple had been caring for seven white children while their father had been visiting their mother in the hospital. The white family rented a house on the property from the black farmer. The State had contended that the beating had been planned and carried out because of the friendship of the farm couple with the destitute white family. The judge remarked, "I don't see I can accomplish any good by lecturing these men," and then quickly passed sentence. He said that he was handing the stiffest sentence to the oldest of the four men, 30, because he was the leader of the Greenville Klan. The jury had deliberated for nearly four hours and had acquitted two men charged in the case. The judge had dismissed charges against five of the 11 men originally indicted. The judge had instructed the jury that segregation was not an issue in the case and that it was not the jury's job to censure the principles of the defendants.
Also in Greenville, S.C., a 42-year old former Church of God minister had pleaded guilty to murder this date in the 1955 poisoning death of his wife, and the judge entered the mandatory sentence of life imprisonment. His court-appointed attorneys said that they advised him to enter the plea after a thorough study of the case. The defendant had been confined at the State Hospital for treatment for some period of time after his arrest. He had signed a statement in April, 1956 that he had placed rat poison in his wife's meal at their home because she had nagged him and he thought he would then be free to continue his ministry. No inquest had been held after her death in October, 1955 at a hospital, with a subsequent investigation having resulted in the husband's arrest after he had been dismissed by the church. Nothing had been offered in mitigation during the brief court proceeding and no character witnesses had been called on his behalf. He said: "I guess the Devil got hold of me and I could not shake it off until I'd killed her." The week before the poisoning, the defendant had been quoted as saying during a sermon that before another week would pass, one of those in attendance would not be with them any longer.
In Little Rock, Ark., two more anonymous telephone calls had caused new searches of Central High School for explosives, according to police this date, but nothing was found in either instance. The high school had been integrated with nine black students among its 2,000 students the prior September.
In London, it was reported by Reuters from Peiping that three American mothers received "no definite commitment" when they appealed to Communist China's health minister and the Red Cross president this date for the release of their three sons, jailed on espionage charges.
In Loretto, Pa., the two-story frame library building of St. Francis College had burned to the ground this date in a fire which college officials said caused damage amounting to at least a half-million dollars. No one had been hurt.
In Goldsboro, N.C., the mother of four children made plans this date to remarry her first husband who had just completed a ten-year term in prison. She would divorce her soldier-husband who had financed her divorce and married her in 1955 after a canteen courtship at Seymour Johnson Air Force Base. The woman, appearing before a magistrate on a charge of abandoning the sergeant and the children, vowed her love for the first husband and said that she wanted to remarry him. The sergeant said that he loved his wife very much but decided to let her and the children go, dropping the abandonment charge. Her first husband had served the prison term for assault, armed robbery, larceny, forgery and breaking and entering.
In Monte Carlo, Princess Caroline of Monaco had celebrated her first birthday this date and the palace announced that she had six teeth and liked to play.
Julian Scheer of The News reports that it seemed like a pretty normal day at Bethune School, that traffic had whizzed past with frightening speed, cafeteria odors had filled the corridors and every five minutes, another youngster had to be excused to go to the bathroom. But one classroom was nearly empty, with only three students present when there should have been seven. One had a cold and another mumps while two had not completed transfers. The teacher had enough to do just the same, as it was the first day of school for the three students present. She told them that they would be in the room for awhile and then would go to other classrooms. Two of the students were in the fourth grade and one was in the first. The latter explained that her birthday occurred in the middle of the year and she would be in the second grade, while the two boys had attended school in Raleigh the previous year, both saying that they thought they would like it in Charlotte. You will have to turn to an inside page to find out the rest of this exciting story, which we are certain has a very dramatic ending.
In Whiteville, North Carolina's "Drive Safely" slogan on the license tags was too much for one inmate at Central Prison in Raleigh, discovered when the manager of the Columbus County license bureau in the town had opened up a shipment of the new tags, finding a message, apparently penned by a worker at the prison factory: "Drive crazy and come help me make these tags."
In Hollywood, a vice-president of
RCA Victor records predicted that rock 'n' roll would monopolize the
record market for at least the ensuing four years, telling newsmen
that Elvis Presley "is the largest single factor" in the
recording industry's growth, indicating that 20 million platters had
been sold by Mr. Presley in 1957. The Army had him now
On the editorial page, "Take the Blinders off U.S. Science" indicates that most of the country's political manias had been neutralized in the course of time by the hearty laughter of reasonable men. But the bureaucratic obsession with secrecy, which had afforded more than its share of examples of silliness, seemed to lead a charmed life. Unnecessary secrecy persisted even when it threatened the national security which it was supposedly intended to protect.
Lloyd Berkner, a member of the President's Science Advisory Committee, had disclosed recently that seven Washington agencies had recently translated a Russian scientific report and then marked it as secret. He could not name the agencies for Congress because their identity was also a secret, but had expressed his fear that "we might someday have to fight a war with pieces of paper marked 'Secret', rather than with weapons."
Mr. Berkner had possessed that fear for some time and was seeking a freer flow of scientific information long before Russian progress in missiles had made such a flow an obvious necessity. He had said several years earlier: "One can readily understand the need for security with respect to a specific weapon where disclosure would not only permit its duplication but would also render it susceptible to enemy countermeasures. But the present craze for secrecy goes far beyond this. It is bad enough to deny to our own people information that is already in the hands, not only of friendly nations, but of those behind the Iron Curtain as well. It is outrageous to cover inaction and weakness by secrecy when disclosure would lead to public support of remedial measures…"
He had estimated that 90 percent of the information presently classified ought be released so that it could be of benefit to the research and development efforts of American scientists. The piece urges that a Congress willing to push for reorganization of the Pentagon ought be equally vigorous in demanding that the U.S. remove such security restrictions on scientists. Most members of Congress could probably remember when it had been fashionable to believe that Soviet science would never account for much because of the secrecy of the Soviet regime.
"The Republicans Whistle in the Dark" finds that forced optimism had been the theme of the televised Republican Congressional campaign initiated during the week, suggesting that rather than winning control of Congress in the fall, the Republicans more likely would lose a sizable amount of the strength they presently had. All things held equal, the mathematical odds were weighted strongly against them as there were more Republican than Democratic seats at stake in the Senate and more Democratic than Republican seats considered safe in both houses.
But all things were not equal, as the Republicans had been placed on the defensive regarding national security by the launch in October and November of the Russian Sputniks. The President had placed them on the defensive on domestic issues with a budget calling for cuts in domestic spending without creating the national mood that would make those cuts acceptable at the local level. His assurances that there was nothing to worry about with regard to national security would not persuade voters that domestic sacrifice would be necessary.
The President and other Republican leaders were seeking to disguise the party's problem with the security issue by taking the offensive against mixing security with politics. But Congressional investigations controlled by Democrats would stir the mixture between the present and election day, and the President thus far had missed most of his opportunities for placing his imprint on revival of American scientific and military prestige. His conclusions differed vastly from some of those reached by committees of eminent people from the business and industrial community. The Gaither and Rockefeller Reports would serve as a substantial shield against Republican charges that the Democratic preoccupation with the security issue had been motivated by partisanship.
But even if those factors had not been present, Republicans would still face a bleak prospect in the midterms. They had lost Congress when the President had scored a landslide victory in 1956 and nothing had happened since that time to indicate a resurgence of party popularity.
"The Shortest 90 Minutes in TV" tells of the DuPonts deciding to sponsor on CBS a 90-minute production of "The Bridge of San Luis Rey". "Sandwiched between three acts of masterly acting by Judith Anderson, Viveca Lindfors, Hume Cronyn and Eva Le Galliene, the commercials recounting DuPont's own miracles could have made only the most fleeting impression."
Some sponsors appeared to have learned that if the entertainment was bad enough, the commercials could be made to live vividly in the memory of viewers. Time Magazine recently had reviewed the commercials on a "Studio One" production rather than the play itself.
But DuPont would have no such luck. Had they employed actors of lower caliber and chosen a poor vehicle for their talents, the 90 minutes could have been stretched into an eternity, but as it was, it seemed quite short. It had shown how large television's potential for achieving moments of beauty and truth could be, and might result in a greater demand for programs in which the viewer could not look forward with eagerness to the commercials.
It suggests that DuPont could console itself, for if it were somewhat poorer for having sponsored the program, the viewers who had seen it were a great deal richer for the experience.
A piece from the Twin City Sentinel in Winston-Salem, titled "Winston-Salem Has a Hint for Charlotte", indicates that according to The News, the Charlotte Symphony Orchestra had to raise funds for its support within the ensuing 30 to 60 days, but at last report, its board had not found anyone with the necessary ability and interest with time to head the campaign. Moreover, the funding was stretched thin by the demands of other cultural enterprises in Charlotte.
It finds the complaints similar to those heard around Winston-Salem ten years earlier and so offers its sympathetic understanding for the genuine cultural dilemma, as those who would further the arts wanted to see them advanced everywhere. In Winston-Salem, its Arts Council was setting up the machinery for its annual fund campaign later in the month, combining the appeals of the Symphony, the Little Theater, the Arts and Crafts Association and all of the other cultural organizations, thus able to garner the leadership of some of the community's most able men and women in its key campaign positions. Business and industry had become more interested in participation and the organizations themselves had flourished.
It was not yet easy for Winston-Salem to raise the necessary funding for the sort of arts program it wanted, but by combining the efforts, they were meeting the problem in the way they thought best, and were making headway.
Drew Pearson indicates that in the winter of 1956, during the height of the controversy over the natural gas bill, he had received a phone call from recently deceased Senator Matthew Neely of West Virginia, who had died at 83 during the week after serving 35 years in Congress. He had told Mr. Pearson that he had just read what he had written in his column about the influence peddlers anent the gas bill and urged him to keep it up, but that he did not know the half of it, wanted to know whether Mr. Pearson's phone was tapped.
When Mr. Pearson told Senator Neely that his phone was tapped by so many people that he sold commercials on it, he arranged to meet him 15 minutes later at the F Street entrance of the Willard Hotel and drove the Senator to the Capitol. En route, the Senator had told Mr. Pearson how former Secretary of Defense Louis Johnson, a major Democratic wheel in West Virginia, had urged that he should change his position in opposition to the gas bill and vote for it, with Mr. Johnson promising a contribution of $5,000 to the campaign of Congressman Bob Mollohan in his race for governor of West Virginia. He had told Mr. Johnson that while he loved Mr. Mollohan, and would do anything to make him Governor, he could not do that.
Mr. Pearson says he could not help but remember it as he had read the tributes to Senator Neely, which included how he had pioneered the first nine safety bills, had crusaded against Senate windbags, had cleaned up crime in the District of Columbia, had worked patiently to make the nation's capital a model city, had quoted from almost every chapter of the Bible, had been intensely loyal to West Virginia, and had been the first man to urge that the Government spend a billion dollars to fight cancer.
Ironically, it had been cancer which had killed him.
Mr. Pearson says that he would always remember the Senator for his explosive wrath against the lobbying attempts of big business, for his record as a crusading, uncompromising battler against economic injustice even before anyone ever heard of the New Deal. In those earlier times, there were some mighty voices in the Senate, those of Senators George Norris of Nebraska, Tom Walsh and Burton Wheeler of Montana, Hiram Johnson of California, Bronson Cutting of New Mexico, Bob La Follette of Wisconsin, and Charles McNary of Oregon, battling against those who sought to write laws through economic power. In his latter years, however, Senator Neely seemed very much alone in that crusade.
House Speaker Sam Rayburn had entered Congress from Texas the same year Mr. Neely had arrived in Washington as a Congressman in 1913. At the start of the New Deal in 1933, Mr. Rayburn had sponsored some of its most important legislation. But while Senator Neely was turning a deaf ear to political contributions to influence his vote on the gas bill, Speaker Rayburn had been promoting political contributions to help Congressmen who would vote for it. And now, the Speaker was opposing any penetrating probe of the very New Deal agencies he helped to create, especially the FCC. It had repeatedly been reported, though denied officially, that the real reason for the Speaker's retreat was a backstage Republican-Democratic deal. Mr. Pearson indicates that it seemed like a long time since Mr. Rayburn and Mr. Neely had served together in the House.
Princess Margaret wanted to visit the U.S. the following year after she would visit Canada, wanting to spend a month touring the U.S. from coast to coast. But advisers had suggested that she should not stay more than two weeks in the U.S. because Canadians would be offended for the fact that she was only planning to spend two weeks in Canada.
Walter Lippmann indicates that the U.S. was telling itself that it was engaged in a propaganda contest with the Russians, that it had to prove to mankind that it was the true champion of peace. Based on no less an authority than Secretary of State Dulles, himself, it was apparent that the Russians were leading in that contest. The best evidence was the mounting popular pressure in the Western world in favor of accepting the Soviet proposal to hold another summit meeting. That had become the rallying point of the opposition parties in Western Europe and there were important signs that the idea was making deep inroads among the parties which supported the governments.
In West Germany, the success of George Kennan's lectures had been a clear sign of the strength of the opposition to Chancellor Konrad Adenauer's Government. British Prime Minister Harold Macmillan was on the political defensive at home, and even in Washington, the President and Secretary Dulles had felt that they had to bend to the pressure.
Yet, there were major reasons for thinking that no good and much harm could be done in a summit meeting under present conditions. Secretary Dulles appeared to have been correct in wishing to avoid such a meeting and no one had argued his case more cogently than had Mr. Kennan.
Mr. Lippmann suggests that the question to be asked was why this wrong-headed idea was winning such popular support in the Western world. It had been said that the democracies were easily deluded and would grasp at any straw which seemed to offer relief from the threat of war and the burdens placed upon them in the armaments race. But that begged the underlying question of why the democracies were grasping at that straw. He suggests that the answer was that the leaders of the democracies were not giving them anything else to grasp. Secretary Dulles, Chancellor Adenauer and Prime Minister Macmillan had given the impression not only that they did not want to negotiate at a summit meeting but that they did not want to negotiate at all. They created the impression because regarding the crucial issues of the Cold War in Germany, the Middle East and in Eastern Asia, they had been standing inflexibly for terms which they and all the world knew were not negotiable.
He urges that the effective answer to the Russian proposal for such a summit meeting, which was undoubtedly propaganda, would be a concrete effort to negotiate a specific issue through normal diplomatic channels, such as limitation of arms shipments to the Middle East or reduction of the garrisons in Central Europe, or the Polish plan for a central zone without the presence of nuclear weapons. But it had to be something definite and substantial. As long as the Western governments refused a summit meeting and would not accept concrete and limited proposals, they were surrendering the diplomatic and propaganda initiatives to the Soviets and could not hope to gain the initiative by elaborate proposals regarding disarmament which nobody understood, or by suggesting that in outer space, the U.S. might, in the end, conduct through metaphysical negotiation what it could not do by diplomatic negotiation on earth.
He indicates that he had been talking about the propaganda contest in which the country was engaged and did not mean to suggest that there was any imminent prospect that the Russians would negotiate a limited settlement, there being good reason to believe that both sides preferred the existing division of Germany and of Europe to any settlement which had thus far been proposed.
The Western governments were concerned that a reunited Germany, with the British, American and Russian troops withdrawn, would hold the balance of power and use it to make Germany dominant in Europe. The Soviet Government was afraid that if it withdrew from East Germany, the whole satellite empire would dissolve and be replaced by implacably anti-Russian governments. Those reciprocal fears led to the maintenance of the status quo and were standing obstacles to any general settlement.
He indicates that the chances were that the deadlock would not be resolved by the initiative of the great powers, but rather by political developments in both halves of Europe. In the Eastern half, there was always some prospect of a revolt of the Hungarian type of the fall of 1956. In the Western half, there was the likelihood that within a few years, during the remainder of the Eisenhower Administration, there would be new governments in Eastern Europe and that in those governments the existing opposition parties would play a leading role. Should that happen, it would be important that the U.S. not have alienated them and thus find itself on the outside looking in.
Marquis Childs tells of Republican orators around the country, marshaling statistics and quotations supplied by the RNC, seeking to prove during the week that the blame for the lag in the development of missiles was the fault of former President Truman. The same figures and same quotations had appeared in most of the speeches released in advance, with the theme being that the Eisenhower Administration had done everything possible to make up for the delay and indifference of the preceding Administration. The result did not hold out much hope for unity on what had to be done to catch up with the Russians.
The figures used in a number of the speeches were intended, as Secretary of Commerce Sinclair Weeks had told a Republican fund-raising dinner in Tulsa, to "curl your hair". From 1943 through 1952, 3.5 million dollars had been spent on long-range ballistic missiles, while from 1953 through 1958, more than 3.5 billion dollars had been spent. They had repeatedly quoted Wernher von Braun, the missile authority who had directed the development of the Army's Jupiter missile at the Redstone Arsenal in Alabama, as having said in answer to the question as to why Russia led in outer space: "The main reason is that the United States had no ballistic missile program worth mentioning between 1945 and 1951. These six years, during which the Russians obviously laid the groundwork for their large rocket program, are irretrievably lost."
White House chief of staff Sherman Adams went further than the others, stating in his dinner speech at Minneapolis that the Democrats were to blame for the "military catastrophe" of Pearl Harbor, the "Red invasion of Korea", "the plight of our defenses when the invasion began", "the handcuffs put upon our conduct of that war", "the tragic loss of China", and the "surrender of positions of freedom throughout the world". In other words, he blamed the Democrats for everything which had happened while the Democrats had been in control of the executive branch, standard political practice.
But if that were the rule, then a Republican Administration which happened to be in power when the missile lag came to public notice would get the blame for that.
When all was said and done, the line taken by Mr. Adams would likely set the tone for the Republican campaign for the midterm elections in the fall. He had asserted that the President could achieve, more than any other man in present times, genuine peace and "save humanity from the holocaust of nuclear war." Other speakers had taken the familiar line out of the campaigns of 1952, 1954 and 1956, adding up the casualties of World War II and Korea to suggest that 462,000 U.S. sons had been killed, 744,000 wounded in wars under "Democrat Administrations". Thus, the Republican Party was being represented again as the party of peace and the Democrats as the party of war.
Speaking in Yakima, Wash., Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Benson had said in his prepared text: "We are not lost in the abyss of a bloody, hopeless war which neither side could win, as we were only five years ago. While some international problems remain unsolved, we must always remember the vast difference between a shooting war and shooting satellites." For the benefit of the farmers, he had said that no one should be misled by farm statistics "based on casualty lists". The same strategy had not worked in 1954, when the Democrats had regained both houses from the Republicans, despite the RNC having spent large amounts of money in several states to blanket radio and television outlets with spot advertisements of "Democrat" wars and "Democrat" casualties. Mr. Childs suggests that perhaps on this occasion, with there being a greater longing for peace and an end of cold war tensions, it might do the job.
Of course, it would fail, just as, ultimately, the present crazy Fox-Trump propaganda campaign against Democrats will miserably fail and even more so, possibly sooner than within the next year as we predicted on the eve of the inauguration. Indeed, it may be by the end of the current month of January should things proceed apace as in the prior four and a half days. The bumbler-in-chief has already angered enough people in the country for there to be calls from responsible people for his removal from office, not the type of riff-raff who went after "Brandon" from his early days in office and who stormed the Capitol in a delusional frenzy over a "stolen election", a delusion still maintained to this day by the idiot in the White House now, being a complete disgrace once again to the Presidency, showing daily his incompetence. The specifics are too numerous to list, and so we shall simply say that every single thing he has done thus far in the first four days represents despicable dismemberment of our democracy and the Federal Government, delightful to his hard-core followers of the riff-raff fringe, all of whom are traitors to the country, especially those idiots whom he pardoned for trying to bring down the country and democracy on January 6, 2021. A scumbag felon, who belongs in jail, pardoning or providing commutations of fellow scumbag felons does not innocence make for either scumbag. Eventually, the tale will be told, and, we suggest, not so good will be its ending for either side of the scumbag divide, the oligarchical side or the lunatic fringe side.
Emblematic of the cult mentality, characterized by unswerving allegiance to Il Duce, one lunatic-fringe member of the House has even gone so far as to propose an amendment to the Constitution to supplant the 22nd Amendment ratified in 1951, to allow a President to run for a third term only when he has not previously served two consecutive terms. The utter stupidity thus demonstrated in proposing such a sui generis amendment, given the history of the country, that only once previously, in the separated two terms of Grover Cleveland, has such a circumstance occurred, is only exceeded by the complete abandonment of independent judgment in exercising advice and consent by the nearly lockstep cultists in the Senate who are confirming His Majesty's Cabinet appointees, come hell or high water, regardless of their fitness to serve, as demonstrated vividly by their continuing lockstep insistence that the 2020 election had "irregularities" and that the 2024 election was won "overwhelmingly" by His Highness—that overwhelming victory having been by 1.5 percent of the vote, less than the popular vote margin won by Hillary Clinton in 2016, 2.1 percent, with the 2024 electorate severely depressed in key states by the manipulated implementation of voter suppression
If we were one of those whom he had
pardoned, we would keep a close watch in the rearview mirror,
especially on sparsely traveled roads late at night. That is not a
veiled threat, little lunatic, but rather a friendly warning. You
should look at history. What happened, for instance, to Jimmy Hoffa
after President Nixon substantially commuted his sentence for similar reasons, to get
back politically at the by then deceased Kennedy brothers? Beware
invitations to celebratory meetings of your good fortune in being
"made" by the Boss, your new dictator
We are still trying to figure out
what kind of lunatic mind finds no inconsistency between granting
pardons to more than 1,500 people who engaged in violent insurrection
against the Government without any conceivably legitimate purpose, as
ginned up by the head nut and his nutty entourage, most of whom are
now ruined and without a lifeline from the head nut, and the planned
deportation of hundreds of thousands of immigrants to this country of
immigrants, without affording them any due process, merely a plane
ride back to their country of origin where they may face torture or
death merely because they lack documentation
A letter writer comments on a "disgustingly biased article" printed on page 4-B of the January 15 edition of the newspaper regarding rerouting of a county school bus around Stilwell Oaks Road, finding it a sample of the effort the newspaper had put forth in reporting local news, not reporting the true facts. He says that he was a resident of that road, did not have children of school age in the current year and would not in the following year. He says that the parents seeking the route change were not asking the County School Board for sympathy and did not ask for "doorstep service", and he was sure that they had not suggested that the children had to "stand on an 18-inch concrete strip beside the highway" while waiting on the bus, finding, therefore, the article to be incorrect in its statement of the facts. He hopes that the County School Board and the State bus route supervisor would give the matter more serious consideration than had the newspaper. He suggests that the slight alteration of the county bus route being requested by the parents would keep 33 children off a thoroughfare with a 55 mph speed limit.
Framed Edition
Links-Date — Links-Subj.