WPB chief says vast armament production represents one of nation’s greatest achievements; asks new effort
…
…
Bavaria and Austria may be placed under U.S. Army
By Helen Kirkpatrick
London, England –
Germany, it is believed, will be divided into three zones for occupation by Russian, British and U.S. troops, according to plans discussed at Tehran.
The three zones suggested are believed to be:
RUSSIAN: Eastern Germany up to a line running from Kiel to the Bavarian border.
BRITISH: Northwest Germany, the Ruhr and the Rhineland.
AMERICAN: Bavaria and Austria.
By this plan, the complications of making three armies and nationalities attempt to administer German territory jointly, would be avoided.
It is clear that the plan is an interim one which may be subject to alterations. With closer cooperation being achieved between the French, on the one hand, and the British and Americans, on the other, it is probable that the French may seek and be given a zone of occupation. The general theory, however, is that the French as well as the Belgians, Dutch and other Allied people will have their hands full inside their own countries with relief and reconstruction work.
Allied HQ, Algiers, Algeria –
The largest contingent of WACs ever to arrive in the Mediterranean Theater, 372 enlisted women and eight officers, debarked recently at a Mediterranean port to bring total WAC strength in this theater to more than 1,500.
Pittsburgher ducks bullets and Yank barrage to get back
…
Lt. McClurg gets rare fighter – one with pontoons
…
Choice is to support so-called states’-rights bill or to get behind federal-state compromise
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer
Washington –
Republicans in Congress face an important decision in their attitude on the soldier-vote bills which are expected to come up soon in House and Senate.
The question is: Shall they join with Southern Democrats in supporting the Eastland-Rankin “states’-rights” bill, so-called, which would leave soldier voting to varying and complicated state laws?
Secretaries Stimson and Knox hold that voting under state laws would be impossible for the Army and Navy to administer, although they take no position on any specific legislation.
Or shall they support compromise state-federal-cooperation bills prepared in both branches, which would provide for a simple ballot on President, Vice President and members of Congress, to be distributed and collected by the Army and Navy and turned over to state officials for counting?
GOP attitude disturbing
A tipoff on the probable official attitude of the Republican Party in the House, where the real test will come, was seen in the solid Republican vote in a House Elections Committee for the Rankin-Eastland “states’-rights” bill. Four Republicans were joined by three Southern Democrats to defeat the compromise federal-state measure sponsored by Rep. Worley (D-TX) and to report the “states’-rights” bill to the House. The vote was 7–5.
This attitude of Republican committee members, and reports that House Republican Leader Joe Martin (R-MA) is active behind the scenes in trying to put over the “states’-rights” bill, are disturbing some Republicans on both sides of the Capitol who are for the compromise state-federal bill and are fearful of political consequences for their party if they don’t provide some practical means for servicemen to vote.
They feel that the party has already suffered politically from the coalition of some Senate Republicans with Southern Democrats to pass the Eastland bill in the Senate a few weeks ago, they see an opportunity for the party to retrieve itself by supporting in both House and Senate compromise federal-state bills which the Army and Navy can administer, so that voting will be easy.
A compromise federal-state bill now before the Senate Privileges and Elections Committee, sponsored by Senator Lucas (D-IL), is expected to be reported out this week. Senator Lucas is confident this measure will be approved by the Senate, as there have been some switches since the Senate acted previously.
Martin on spot
This puts the issue squarely up to House Republicans, who can gang up with Southern Democrats to defeat such a bill and put over the Eastland-Rankin bill, or can throw their strength behind the Worley measure and pass it with the help of Democrats outside the South. Some few Southern Democrats will support the Worley bill.
Because of the parliamentary situation, which will bring the Eastland-Rankin “states’-rights” bill before the House, it will be possible for Republicans to avoid a record vote on the Worley bill, which the Texas Congressman will offer from the floor as substitute.
He has announced he will seek a record vote.
So, when Democrats meet this week, they probably will lay plans
Washington (UP) –
The Democratic National Committee meets here this week probably to elect a new chairman and to prepare for the 1944 campaign in which President Roosevelt is now generally regarded as an inevitable fourth-term candidate.
There is little support here for reports that Southern states would bolt a Roosevelt candidacy. But many persons do believe Mr. Roosevelt is the only Democrat who would have a chance to carry such vital states as Pennsylvania, New York and New Jersey.
Therefore, practical politicians hereabouts incline to the belief that Mr. Roosevelt is the only Democrat with a chance to win this year. The National Committee meeting is likely to develop some fourth-term enthusiasm, and there is no hint that it will be discouraged from the White House. The committee’s scheduled business is to select the time and place of the nominating convention. Chicago in mid-July is expected to be the decision.
Washington (UP) –
Rep. Stephan A. Day (R-IL) charged today that President Roosevelt has endorsed a program to place all practicing physicians and hospitals under government control as part of a “fourth-term platform.”
He said the Wagner-Dingell bill is a detailed program for socialized medicine and:
…a faithful epitome of what the New Dealers have in mind for the communistic America they now have on the Washington planning boards.
He said the bill, now before the House Ways and Means Committee, is the “boldest attempt of the New Dealers to date to apply communism by legislative compulsion.”
Washington (UP) –
John E. Rankin (D-MS), of the House Elections Committee, insisted today that the committee-approved “states’-rights” soldier-vote bill meets all fair objections and predicted its speedy passage by the House soon after debate begins Thursday.
The measure has been denounced by House Democratic Leader John W. McCormack as meaningless and ineffective.
The Army and Navy Journal, the unofficial service publication, has warned Congress that swift action on the soldier vote is vital if the Armed Forces are to gain balloting privileges this year. It called the legislation as essential as the Selective Service Act.
Gen. Wilson, commander in Mediterranean, see victory in 1944
By Donald G. Coe, United Press staff writer
…
Leadership of Washington, London at stake in Polish crisis
By William Philip Simms, Scripps-Howard staff writer
…
Some of the members of Congress either didn’t go home for their Christmas recess, or they didn’t get around much while they were home.
They would be the members of the House Committee on Election of President, Vice President and Representatives in Congress, who have rejected a soldier-vote bill.
The committed has voted, 7–5, to present to the House what the committee chairman, Congressman Eugene Worley (D-TX) calls a “ghost bill.”
It simply authorizes the War and Navy Departments to send a postcard to the members of the Armed Forces suggesting that they write to their home states for ballots on which to vote in this year’s elections.
This is not giving the Armed Forces the right to vote. Like the Senate measure, which merely recommended that the states set up an absentee voting system for the Armed Forces, it sidesteps the issue.
It doesn’t do anything.
Some of the states have made provision for taking a vote among the Armed Forces. Some have not. Some which have enacted such legislation, like Pennsylvania, did so before these was any idea that seven million fighting men might be overseas before the next election.
The Pennsylvania law was not adequate last year. It will be less adequate this year.
But it is not easy for the states to do an effective job of providing for a vote among the Armed Forces.
It is much easier for Congress to do the job. And it is Congress’ duty to do it. The responsibility of Congress to these men is greater even than its responsibility to the home front.
And there is one good way to get Congress to act, poll-tax Congressmen, coalitions, “unholy alliances,” or whatever.
That is for the people to act, to let Congress know how the voters at home feel about it. And the way to do that is to write them letters about it.
Depriving these men of a vote would be an unspeakable betrayal of the trust they left in the home front when they went abroad to fight and die.
Only trickle of letters received by Congressmen urging enactment of President’s recommendations
By Fred W. Perkins, Pittsburgh Press staff writer
…
Color is evident throughout collection, with revival of World War I blueprints have field day at New York showings
By Lenore Brundige. Press staff writer
…
By Maxine Garrison
The dulcet tones of the soap program announcer pulsated across the airwaves. He queried:
Do you, too, want to have a lovely, man-tempting skin?
At that point, I became – to quote Mr. Lucius Beebe – sick in my hat. Or would have, had there been a hat handy.
This passion for purple prose has got to stop somewhere, and that little sample is as good a place as any to end it all, and better than most.
Maybe women do want “man-tempting skins,” if by that loathsome phrase is meant clear, bright complexions. But any woman who would express, or even think, her desire in such language should have her head examined. I think it’s an insult to women to appeal to them in such terms.
Insult to men
It’s also an insult to men to presume that such an item as a “man-tempting skin” is enough to make them fall madly in love on the spot, overlooking all possible flaws of character and any temperamental differences, ready if needs be to leave home, family and friends and follow the will-o’-the-wisp of a man-tempting skin.
Because that is precisely the implication.
Any woman wants to be attractive, if only to be able to face her mirror without flinching. To make herself more attractive to men is undoubtedly one of the aims of her grooming and primping, and from Cleopatra to Hedy Lamarr, such care has been a help.
But the distortion of such a phrase as “man-tempting skin” is a rank injustice all the way around. And that’s only one of many equally distasteful mistreatments of the language in vogue these days.
It’s enough to make a woman vow never to wash her face again, never to have a manicure, never to use comb or lipstick, never to dab perfume behind her ears (shades of Westbrook Pegler!).
No guinea pig
And it’s enough to make men swear off women entirely. Any self-respecting male would be likely to lay down the law to himself:
Just what sort of sucker do they think I am? “Man-tempting skin,” indeed! Well, there’s one man that won’t be tempted.
In fact, I henceforth refuse to be a guinea pig for any cosmetic treatment undertaken by any fair lady. I shall wear dark glasses so dark that I can’t see through them at all, and judge any woman solely by whether or not I like the sound of her voice.
Things have come to a pretty pass when it is generally accepted that the only way to appeal to a woman at all, whether you want to sell her scouring powder or a subscription to a magazine, is to promise her that she will promptly become irresistible to all men.