WLB to name panel to hear arguments in mine dispute
three public members will comprise group; 67 mines in four states are affected
…
Hillman renews attack on Dewey
Saratoga Springs, New York (UP) – (Sept. 9)
Sidney Hillman, chairman of the CIO Political Action Committee, said in an address today that Thomas E. Dewey, Republican presidential nominee, is “a man who has so far shown that he has neither principles, policies nor practical experience of his own.”
He told the New York State CIO convention that Mr. Dewey “merely reflects the policies of the Old Guard and covers them over with phrases calculated to reflect the shifting vagaries of the Gallup Poll.”
Mr. Hillman said:
Thomas Dewey has clearly shown us what it is we have to do. We have to get out the vote – the farmer’s vote – the working man’s vote – the votes of the men and women serving in the Army, the Navy, the Marines and the Merchant Marine – in other words, the people’s vote.
Tobin reappointed
New York – (Sept. 9)
Robert E. Hannegan, Democratic National Committee chairman, today announced the reappointment of Daniel J. Tobin, president of the International Brotherhood of Teamsters (AFL), as head of the Labor Division of the Democratic Campaign Committee.
Mr. Tobin had held the same post during President Roosevelt’s previous election campaigns.
1 Like
U.S. communal farm failure cost $300,000
Members at auction said ‘too much help’
By Victor Peterson, Scripps-Howard staff writer
…
Dewey Short blasts ‘Commander-in-Chief,’ indispensable theme
‘How did country exist before Roosevelt?’ he asks in speech condemning New Dealers
By Kermit McFarland
Opening another drive to swing Pennsylvania from the Roosevelt column in the November election, the Republican State Committee here yesterday launched a campaign of unrestrained bitterness against the New Deal and all its cohorts.
Leading the attack in a keynote speech which heaped disparagement and belittlement upon the President was Congressman Dewey Short of Missouri, who styles himself a “hillbilly from the Ozarks.”
He ridiculed the “indispensable man” and “Commander-in-Chief” themes which some Democratic stump speakers have adopted calling it “tommyrot.”
“How in the world did this country ever exist before Roosevelt came into office?” he shouted in sarcasm while the assembled Republicans roared approval.
And he was Commander-in-Chief at Pearl Harbor, too. Don’t forget that! He must have known what was going on in Germany and Japan.
Mr. Short assailed the Roosevelt administration for the national debt, which he predicted would reach $300 billion at the end of the war.
Throws off coat
He said:
All the time Hitler was building up a war machine. Roosevelt was busy increasing out debt from 22 to 67 billion dollars at the time of Pearl Harbor. The debt was $203 billion as of last June 30 and it will be $300 billion by the end of the war.
Warming to his job, Mr. Short, midway in the speech, threw off his coat, unbuttoned his collar and loosened his tie.
This led him into a charge that the “Commander-in-Chief” title is “just a fraud.”
Generals winning war
He said:
This war is being won but it is being won by Marshall and King and MacArthur and Arnold and Spaatz, Stilwell and Chennault, not by any politicians in Washington.
He bitterly assailed the Four Freedoms declaration proclaimed by Mr. Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill prior to U.S. entry into the war.
He shouted:
It must have taken an intellectual giant to go into confinement and give birth to that one. America always has had those freedoms. Even a man in jail enjoys the Four Freedoms. When was America ever without them?
Get in there and fight
Mr. Short warned the Republicans they must “take off your coat, roll up your sleeves and fight like hell between now and November” to offset the fourth-term campaign launched by Sidney Hillman and the CIO Political Action groups.
He said:
They say they have got $700,000 to spend, but I have it on good authority they have three million dollars. You’d better do something about it. These Communists would burn down the Capitol if they had their way.
In retort to a statement last week by Democratic State Chairman David L. Lawrence in which Mr. Short was accused of voting against “every national defense measure introduced in the House of Representatives to prepare us for war,” the Missouri Congressman said:
I have been further back under the barn looking for eggs than Dave Lawrence ever has been away from home – blast his dirty, stinking hide.
By this time, the “hillbilly from the Ozarks,” gulping glass after glass of water between denunciations of the New Deal, was getting worked up.
‘When we get into power’
He said:
I won’t say every New Dealer is a lunatic, but every lunatic I meet is a New Dealer…
It’s going to take all of our prison camps to hold those New Deals when we get into power – the dirty, contemptible crooks…
I don’t want to raise up a Hitler here to get rid of one abroad…
I want somebody in the White House who loves America as much as Winston Churchill loves the British Empire…
Cooperation? Collaboration? Yes, of course. When did America ever refuse? We’ve been more than kind and generous. But I’m not going to give this country away. We’re fighting with our allies, not for them.
Earlier he had quipped, to the vast relief of his listeners: “Washington is the only insane asylum on earth run by its own inmates.”
Truman gets it
He said:
Mr. Roosevelt promised in 1940 to keep us out of war. He kept us out of war, just as the Democrats did in 1916.
Mr. Short also unleashed a stormy attack on Senator Harry S. Truman, also of Missouri, the Democratic nominee for Vice President.
“Harry Truman is boss-picked, boss-reared and boss-controlled,” he alleged.
Far milder assaults
Mr. Short’s speech climaxed a day in which the State Committee heard similar, but far milder, assaults on the New Deal.
Senator James J. Davis, candidate for reelection, accused the administration of spreading a “false gospel of pessimism and defeat.”
He said:
We must have in this government men who have faith in America, in an economy of ever-increasing abundance.
Mrs. Edna R. Carroll, vice chairman of the State Committee, said “America is at the crossroads.”
To the left national socialism
She said:
To the left is the road to national socialism, with a million signposts pointing the way. And down that road the New Dealers travel with strange companions to the certain destruction of representative republican government.
The committee, in a series of resolutions (adopted in lieu of the customary state platform), condemned the Roosevelt administration for “blundering dissension, economic experimentation, confusion, conflicts and chaos” and for “one-man government.”
Perkins: Railway union paper blasts Hillman’s PAC
Attack on McCarran called ‘brazen lies’
By Fred W. Perkins, Pittsburgh Press staff writer
Washington – (Sept. 9)
Denunciations of CIO political activities continued today with a blast from Labor, organ of 115 railway brotherhoods and unions, against Sidney Hillman and the CIO Political Action Committee for unsuccessful efforts to unseat Senator Pat McCarran (D-NV).
The white-haired chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, who recently severely condemned administration procedure in the Montgomery Ward seizure of last spring, won renomination this week, defeating Lieutenant Governor Vail Pittman, brother of the late Senator Kay Pittman.
Labor charged the Hillman committee with “lies,” with having “united with reactionaries,” and with using Communistic tactics in an effort which the publication asserted was thwarted by the railway unions and the American Federation of Labor.
Other AFL attacks
That was one of a series of attacks on the CIO politicos from labor sources. In a recent one, Philip Pearl, publicist for the AFL, characterized the CIO-PAC as “the strongest anti-labor force in America today” and predicted it would prove not only to be “a fearful boomerang for the CIO but that it will do a lasting harm to the cause of the entire labor movement of America.”
To this Len de Caux, publicist for the CIO, replied in print that the AFL had been deceived into repeating slanders which had been originated by “anti-labor sources,” including some newspapers that were charged with being anti-union.
‘Brazen lies’ circulated
Today’s Labor article said:
Reactionary Democrats in Nevada have always been against McCarran because of his outspoken support of labor and other progressive measures. They thought they could “get him” this time.
Hillman’s outfit, which apparently had money to “throw at the bords,” was not interested in McCarran’s labor record. It opposed him because he refused to embrace its peculiar “ideologies” and circulated the most brazen lies concerning his work in the Senate.
Some workers were deceived. They were not familiar with Communist tactics and imagined Hillman’s propagandists must be telling the truth.
Chiefs of the standard railroad labor organizations and the AFL put on a staff campaign for McCarran and succeeded in neutralizing the vicious work of the CIO crowd.
‘Menace’ to labor program
Labor also gave some observations on the overall effect of the CIO’s political efforts.
It said:
More and more, as the campaign develops, it becomes evident that Hillman and his Communist colleagues are a serious menace to organized labor’s political program. The CIO never had many supporters in Congress and now it is so discredited that the foes of labor have discovered the most effective argument they can use against a measure favored by the workers is to brand it a “CIO bill.”
That’s bad enough, but now the CIO under Hillman’s leadership is invading states and Congressional districts, assailing candidates who have sturdily championed the cause of the workers and bringing the entire labor movement into disrepute among voters who do not appreciate that the noisy Reds who are on Hillman’s payroll do not speak for the American labor movement.
Poll: Maine slated to continue in GOP tanks in election
Whopping Republican majority predicted for Hildreth and Dewey over Democrats
…
‘Battle of generals’ –
War mystery develops in ouster case
Saipan Marine chief relieves Army aide
…
Marshal von Kluge reported dead
London, England (UP) –
A British front dispatch today quoted a captured German general as saying that Field Marshal Günther von Kluge, Nazi commander in the west, died aboard a Germany-bound train from exhaustion after 48 hours in ditches in the Falaise Pocket.
The general also said that Field Marshal Erwin Rommel was recovering from head wounds in a hospital at Kreustadt, and that it would be several months before he recovered.
Yanks blast bases for Siegfried Line
RAF Mosquitoes hit Nuremberg in force
…
One Superfortress lost during raid
B-29s blast 28 Jap fighter planes
…
Open ears only to Eisenhower!
False rumors of peace certain to be heard, Americans are warned
‘No Nazi surrender en masse, but gradual, piecemeal disintegration’ predicted
…
Despite rains –
Allies continue gains in Italy
Nazis pushed back behind Gothic Line
By Eleanor Packard, United Press staff writer
…
Byrnes maps plan to aid reconversion
Hopes to maintain present income peak
…
Navy’s Guam hero gets Legion of Merit
…
Nazi leaders save their own skins –
Wolfert: German dead litter France, but not one is general or colonel
They lead their men into the slaughter, and then give themselves up without battle
By Ira Wolfert
…
No such luck!
Liège, Belgium – (Sept. 8, delayed)
Rumors are widespread in Germany that Adolf Hitler is dead, according to Belgians who have escaped from concentration camps in the Reich.
It’s Sinatra, no less –
Bobby Soxers’ hero speaks: Most of Hollywood stinks!
‘The voice’ talks about ‘jerks’ in filmland as he announces he’s through with movies
…
Editorial: Dewey’s foreign policy
For a man who is supposed to know nothing about foreign policy – to hear some of the fourth-termers talk – Mr. Dewey did pretty well in his Louisville speech Friday night.
Certainly, there was much more meat in it than in the evasive generalities which Mr. Roosevelt gives off so airily on those rare occasions when he breaks his habit of secret diplomacy.
Is such a comparison unfair to the President because he, at the moment, is carrying the responsibility of international negotiations and the Republican candidate is not? We don’t think so. Mr. Churchill has no hesitation in telling the British people what is British policy and, indeed, Allied policy. In this democracy should the people have less information about, or control of, official policy than in Britain?
Since the Dewey address in Louisville there is more hope of smoking the President out of his secrecy to approximate, if not match, his opponent’s frankness. If that happens, all Americans will be indebted to Mr. Dewey for a great public service. Because the Rooseveltian habit of fixing things up with Winnie and Joe behind a Tehran screen or over the personal phone – and never reporting to the American public – is one of the gravest dangers today to open covenants openly arrived at.
This is not the first time Mr. Dewey and the Republicans have prodded the administration toward a more enlightened foreign policy. The Republican Mackinac Declaration, in favor of American participation in an effective international organization for peace and security, forced the Roosevelt hand which for months had blocked Congressional action. Just as that incident, and the GOP platform and Dewey acceptance speech robbed the fourth-termers of their fake “isolation” issue, so Mr. Dewey on Friday night proved that he and his associates, far from being amateurs, have a thorough knowledge of foreign affairs.
Mr. Dewey’s foreign policy is genuinely international – and realistic. He is for continued cooperation among the big powers to enforce a peace of non-aggression on the Axis, and an international organization for the long haul.
But he is much more specific than the President on what to do with Germany, and about open diplomacy, and the rights of small nations, and the necessity of any lasting peace restraining the victors as well as the vanquished in the years to come.
The most striking difference between the Dewey policy and what little is known of the Roosevelt policy is the Republican candidate’s emphasis on the fact that building peace is not only a matter of treaties and organizations. It is a continuous, constructive process of creating a healthy world, politically and economically. He wants an American leadership that neither dictates to others nor keeps them on a Yankee dole. In this, his foreign policy is an inseparable part of his domestic policy, so different from that of “the Washington wasters” as he calls them:
To hear them talk Uncle Sam must play the role of the kindly but senile old gentleman, who seeks to buy the goodwill of his poor relations by giving away the dwindling remains of his youthful earnings. That is no lasting way to win friends or to influence people. Goodwill cannot be bought with gold. It flows to the man who successfully manages his own affairs, who is self-reliant and independent, yet who is interested in the rights and needs of others.
What has the fourth-term candidate to say to that?
He kept faith –
Norris proved courage can be political asset
By Thomas L. Stokes, Scripps-Howard staff writer
…
Perkins: Job-separation formula
By Fred W. Perkins, Press Washington correspondent
Washington –
The general hope is that indefinitely after the war there will be a job for every man and women who wants a job, including the returned veterans. The political importance of the question is shown by the main theme of Governor Thomas E. Dewey’s opening campaign speech, when he portrayed the Republican Party as best able to produce and maintain the private industrial activity necessary for full employment.
But support economic conditions so shape themselves, no matter who wins the election, that dismissals from industry will become seriously numerous? What will be the fairest way of choosing the workers who will have to leave private employment and depend for a while at least upon whatever form of public works or public unemployment compensation that may be provided?
Discussion has started here, but has not reached the stage of official public comment, on the possibility of adapting to industry the rating system that the War Department announces it will use in selecting the men (not officers) to be discharged first from the Army after the defeat of Germany.
Army credits
Priority of separation from the Army (for men who want to be separated) will be determined by the number of points the veteran can compile for himself from the following four factors:
-
SERVICE CREDIT: Based upon the total number of months of Army service since Sept. 16, 1940.
-
OVERSEAS CREDIT: Based upon the number of months served overseas.
-
COMBAT CREDIT: Based upon the first and each additional award to the individual of the Medal of Honor, Distinguished Service Cross, Legion of Merit, Silver Star, Distinguished Flying Cross, Soldier’s Medal, Bronze Star Medal, Air Medal, Purple Heart and Bronze Service Stars (battle participation stars).
-
PARENTHOOD CREDIT: Which gives credit for each dependent child under 18 up to a limit of three children.
The fairness of this scheme is attested by the War Department’s statement that:
Opinions expressed by the soldiers themselves became the accepted principles of the plan. As finally worked out, the plan accepted by the War Department as best meeting the tests of justice and impartiality will allow men who have been overseas and men with dependent children to have priority of separation. Ninety percent of the soldiers interviewed said that that is the way it should be.
Could such a plan be adapted to the unwelcome task (supposing that it becomes necessary) of choosing the men and women to be separated from the production end of the war machine? Some who have studied the subject think it could be, but with the No. 1 essential requirement that it would have to be applied without suspicion of unfairness, and with complete and unselfish cooperation from management and the representatives of labor.
It has been suggested that it might be a good subject for investigation by the labor-management organization which has functioned in the War Production Board, with local branches in several thousand war-production plants. Another suggestion is that to be fully effective the plan would have to be applied nationally in industry.
This for industry?
The job preference of a civilian worker might be evaluated on such factors as the following:
- His length of service in industry (what unions call seniority).
- His efficiency rating as an able, industrious and productive worker.
- His age, with some allowance to older men below the usual years of retirement.
- The number of his dependents.
There might be, in addition to the merit factors, some of demerit – for instance, in the individual’s record on unexcused absenteeism.
It is generally agreed that the plan could not be expected to work without a higher degree of sympathetic cooperation between management and the unions than apparently now exists in some important industries. It would requite a completely different atmosphere from that repotted in some industrial centers which fear that the end of the war in Europe will mean a resumption of domestic warfare between labor organizations and employers.