Tuesday, October 31, 1944

DEWEY FOR PRESIDENT. Babe Ruth said earlier this month he would be voting for Governor Dewey because of his opposition to a fourth term for President Roosevelt -- "I don’t think anyone is good enough for 16 years." All too true. But thankfully, there are many other good, positive reasons to vote Republican in 1944.

In Thomas E. Dewey we find a young, energetic politician of impeccable character who has served the public bravely and with distinction. As New York’s district attorney, he fearlessly took on organized crime, putting his life on the line in pursuit of one notorious gangster, Dutch Schultz, and winning the greatest legal victory in the history of such prosecutions when he sent Lucky Luciano to prison. He was elected governor of New York two years ago by a landslide, and is making good on his platform of cutting taxes, aiding education, and cutting the state debt. His administration’s efficiency and no-nonsense approach to state government contrasts sharply with the creaking New Deal bureaucracy in Washington. And while once an isolationist, the Governor has learned the lessons of our times. He has wisely joined President Roosevelt in endorsing U.S. participation in a peacetime United Nations and is dedicated to continued Big Three cooperation on all postwar problems.

President Roosevelt certainly did some great things -- once upon a time. But as he’s grown old in office, his administration has gotten shockingly disorganized and reactive. Roosevelt’s men have dropped the ball these past four years on food rationing, gas rationing, French policy, postwar German policy, the future of Poland, and so much else. These past few years he has acted with an increasingly brazen duplicity. At this summer’s convention, he vowed to eschew campaign speeches, which he now seems to be making every other day. Four years ago, the President infamously said that if the public would bless his unprecedented appeal for a third term, then at the end of that term "there would be a new President of the U.S."

Come to think of it, that still might turn out to be correct. I certainly hope so. The voters have it within their power to make it so.

posted by Michael 8:11:00 AM

. . .

WHY THE JAPANESE ARE LOSING THE NAVAL WAR. The Japanese are stumbling from disaster to disaster in the Philippines -- first, in the success of General MacArthur’s landings on Leyte, and now in the great naval battle which has resulted in the smashing of three Japanese battle fleets, and a loss of at least 39 ships. U.S. naval losses have been light, and it’s a mystery why Japan sent her ships into battle with shockingly little air cover. Barnet Nover’s column in the Washington Post today offers a shocking, but entirely plausible, explanation --

"It is not difficult to understand why, in view of the strategic importance of the Philippines, the Japanese reacted as violently as they did to General MacArthur’s move into Leyte. What is bewildering is the strategy the Japanese employed. Of the three enemy fleets that converged on Leyte only one -- and that the most distant -- had any carrier strength. This was the fleet that moved down from Formosa and was intercepted and smashed up by Admiral Halsey’s Third Fleet. The other two Japanese fleets -- the ones that moved in from the China Sea and into the Sibuyan Sea and the Mindanao Sea -- apparently depended for air cover on land-based craft alone. Did the Japanese high command assume that despite the fierce pounding which Japanese airfields in the Philippines had received and the tremendous destruction of Japanese planes in the air over the islands and on the ground that such land-based air cover was still available? Judging by the action taken by the Japanese navy it is hard to avoid the conclusion that they assumed exactly that. And that may have very well been because the Japanese ground commanders in the Philippines did not want to lose face by admitting that their air power had been decimated and so exaggerated their own strength while minimizing ours."

posted by Michael 8:06:00 AM

. . .

BETTER LATE THAN.... From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Chatham, Ont., administrators finally settled the estate of John McKerroll, dead since 1872, sent to 121 heirs scattered through the U.S. and Canada their shares, ranging from 25¢ to $1 each."

posted by Michael 8:02:00 AM

. . .

Sunday, October 29, 1944

A SECOND-STRING ELECTION CAMPAIGN. If the election ballyhoo sometimes seems a little more silly than usual this year, Walter Lippmann has an interesting explanation for it in his latest New York Herald Tribune column. He seems to say that politics is very much like pro baseball right now -- all of the first-string players have gone off to the war. Here’s an excerpt --

"No one who has been through as many election campaigns as I have been expects the month of October to be a season of rational, or even fair-minded, debate on the great questions of public policy. It is perhaps not too cynical to say that that would be expecting too much of men who are seized with the frenzy of office-getting and office-holding. But it is a shock to find that the most enormous experience in American history has done nothing to assuage this conventional October madness. . . . There is an obvious, factual explanation for the brainless character of the electioneering. It is that virtually all the ablest men in the United States are debarred by their duties from talking in public, or are otherwise too busy with the war to take any part in the campaign. We have mobilized for the war -- in the armed forces, in public office, in industrial management, in scientific research, and in other fields -- the bulk of the best brains of the Nation. If we had not done that, we should have not risen from the defeat and deadly peril of 1940-41 to the majestic power of the victories of 1944. For what America has done cannot be got by ordering it from a department store. Our power has been dug out the people’s labor and skill, and our victories earned by their valor and their brains. The men who are doing these great things are not being heard from in the campaign . . . No wonder the electioneering is so irrelevant. . . . The subject matter of this campaign, more than any other, I think, is being chosen by a group of professional politicians and public relations experts, whose business is to get elected or stay elected, not the business of governing a great State. Let them remember, however, that the great energies and talents now dedicated to the war will not always be withdrawn from public life. For the professional politicians who are now having a field day are going to be judged by men who will have passed through experiences that try men’s souls and have been matured in achieving great things. I do not think that these men will think that politics as we now see it in this October is good enough for the United States of America in the crisis of the second World War of the Twentieth Century."

Though beautifully expressed, I think this is somewhat unfair. Part of the reason why these great issues aren’t being well debated in this campaign is because there’s so much more agreement on them. There’s no longer the split between isolationists and interventionists that prompted the sharp debates of the 1940 campaign. The consensus supporting U.S. postwar cooperation with our wartime allies is remarkable -- remember that a Gallup poll earlier this year said that two-thirds of Americans would support a world organization capable of attacking aggressors with armed force. I don’t see any real difference between President Roosevelt and Governor Dewey on how much power America’s U.N. peace council delegate should have. If there are few manor differences between the candidates on the biggest issues, doesn’t it make sense that the campaign would become more trivia-obsessed than usual?

posted by Michael 7:56:00 AM

. . .

WHEN WILL THE WAR END? (XII) More hard-nosed predictions of a winter war, from Clifton Daniel in today’s New York Times --

"There is every prospect of a winter war in western Europe. Unless the Germans sag and surrender unexpectedly there will be fighting well into December at least. Beyond that it is not feasible to forecast. That is not an official estimate. It is merely the consensus of a number of qualified civilian observers, but it is an opinion that is gaining wider currency every day. Such a conclusion does not preclude by any means another Allied offensive. It is merely an expression of doubt that in view of the Germans’ determination to fight every mile of the way back, the campaign can be driven to a finish before winter sets in."

Yet it could well be that the Red Army will do more in the weeks ahead to determine the success of the Allies on the Western Front than our own troops will do. As Sidney Shallett notes in another Times commentary today, Russia’s slow-going offensive in East Prussia could turn into a lightning-quick advance if the Soviets succeed in penetrating close to East Prussia’s southern border, which would flank the German armies defending Warsaw. This could give Stalin's troops a good shot at cracking the Nazi lines in the center, open the road to Berlin some 325 miles away, and force Hitler to reshuffle his forces in a hurry, lest the Russians pour into Germany proper. And that would give the U.S. and Britain a splendid new opportunity to race into Germany from the west.

So, it’s still possible we could be in for a pleasant surprise before Christmas gets here.

posted by Michael 7:50:00 AM

. . .

LIKE THE SIGN SAYS... From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Fort Worth, burglars lifted $2,186 in cash and a 600-lb. steel safe from the Helpy-Selfy Grocery and Market."

posted by Michael 7:46:00 AM

. . .

Tuesday, October 24, 1944

A WEEK OF GAINS EVERYWHERE. There hasn’t been much "big news" outside of America’s landings in the Philippines, but everywhere the news is good for the Allies. U.S. Marines have liberated the Philippine islands of Dinagai, Suluan and Homonhon, and are pushing the Japanese on south Leyte toward encirclement. In the Baltics, the Red Army has done some encircling of its own, trapping a sizable Nazi garrison in Memel. In East Prussia, Soviet troops have now battered their way 21 miles into prewar Germany. Meanwhile, British troops have liberated Athens with little fuss, as German troops in Greece flee urgently to avoid being cut off by the Russian advance in Yugoslavia, where the Reds have just taken Belgrade. On the Western front, U.S. troops have claimed total control over the "ghost town" of Aachen, the German border city almost completely destroyed in this past month’s desperate Nazi stand.

Maybe it’s a forlorn hope by now, but might it not just be possible that at any moment ordinary Germans will be finally, definitively struck by the realization that they are doomed unless they quit? How can people facing complete destruction go on working for the regime now seemingly so determined to wreak it upon them?

posted by Michael 8:12:00 AM

. . .

ANOTHER REASON TO CHOOSE DEWEY. The current issue of the Christian Century endorses Governor Dewey for President, and here’s why --

"The spirit of cynicism is undermining the moral foundations of our democracy. And we have suggested that any searching diagnosis of the numerous sources from which this poisonous infection has spread would have to include the success of a policy of dissimulation by which one man has kept himself at the head of our government for twelve years. From the very beginning Mr. Roosevelt has used deception as a major political strategem, until today he has lost the moral confidence of the nation. Even in the ranks of those blocs which represent his followers his support rests, not upon their confidence in their integrity. but upon the cynical assurance that he will serve their interest. . . . The nation at this juncture desperately needs a president whose yea is yea and whose nay is nay. . . . [Governor Dewey] has already given high promise that he matches this crying need of the hour."

posted by Michael 8:09:00 AM

. . .

WHEN WILL THE WAR END? (XI) John E. Lee of the International News Services writes that war correspondents and other "observers" at Allied Supreme Headquarters in France are still hopeful that the Nazis can be downed before the first buds of spring. Mr. Lee goes on --

"While conceding that unavoidable weather conditions may present the Allied armies with a difficult task in beating the Nazis to their knees, some quarters believe an effort to deliver the final crushing blow to Germany will come during the winter months. If the attacking force has an overwhelming superiority in the way of materiel, there appears to be no reason why it cannot override the enemy, regardless of the weather. The Russians did just that last winter, and there is no reason why the Allies cannot do it this winter. During the coming winter months, there is reason to believe, Germany is going to be blasted from the air on an even greater scale and more terrific scale than before. The London 'blitz' was child’s play compared to that Germany is experiencing even now. Meanwhile, the caliber of German troops -- as indicated by those captured in the Siegfried Line breakthroughs -- makes it evident that Hitler is dangerously weak as far as manpower is concerned."

posted by Michael 8:06:00 AM

. . .

EXCUSES, EXCUSES. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Seattle, Louis Coleman petitioned for a refund on a marriage license, explained that he and his girl were still in love but unfortunately were also in jail."

posted by Michael 8:02:00 AM

. . .

Sunday, October 22, 1944

YANKS ADVANCING IN THE PHILIPPINES. General MacArthur’s triumphant return on Friday has been followed by some promising advances. Some of the 250,000 U.S. troops landed on Leyte have already seized the island’s capital of Tacloban, and are "advancing an average of 4 miles on all sectors through strong Japanese pill-box defenses with only light casualties," according to United Press. MacArthur himself says that so far the news from the front lines "couldn’t be better." and the U.P. has one other heartening detail in today’s account --

"Weakened and pinned down by continuing supporting attacks in the southern Philippines by land-based planes and in the north of Admiral William F. Halsey’s Third Fleet carrier aircraft, the Japs’ aerial reaction to the invasion still remained largely ineffective, it was indicated. Small groups of aircraft were attempting to strike at the American beachhead and offshore naval craft in daylight forays, with three enemy bombers destroyed by ship antiaircraft fire."

Again and again in this war, we have seen air superiority determine success or failure in battle. If we are able to inflict heavy damage on the Japanese from the air, and they are unable to adequately protect themselves or respond on kind, there’s no question of victory or defeat. Clearly, we will win and the Philippines will be free.

That said, we shouldn’t forget that, as columnist Barnet Nover wrote yesterday, the Philippines campaign will be "long and arduous and possibly costly." We are facing some 225,000 well-armed Japanese This is a nation built on thousands of islands, and once the Yanks have finished them off in Leyte, then tougher tests will come on Luzon and Mindanao. But first things first, and today we can exult in the fact that General MacArthur’s promise to the Filipino people, made in the darkest days of 1942, has been redeemed with three stirring words: 'I have returned.'"

posted by Michael 7:56:00 AM

. . .

THE 100th ANNIVERSARY OF THE WORLD’S END. The editors of the Washington Post commemorate this morning the centennial of Earth’s final day. At least, that’s what thousands of people thought at the time --

"One hundred years ago today thousands of people all over the United States were certain that the world was going to end before midnight. the prophet of this disaster lived in Groton, of all places . . . . He had spent 14 years in reckoning out to a T this fatal date, and his followers had all prepared beautiful white robes to be ready. Many of them had new sets of false teeth specially made for this exceptional occasion. Towards dusk they went out into the country, or climbed into trees, or on roofs of buildings. They had given away all they possessed, clothing, furniture; some even destroyed their things, as they would be useless in the future. In fact, there was to be no future. . . . On the fated day, Ralph Waldo Emerson and Theodore Parker were walking in t he roads of Concord. A Millerite, for so the fanatics were called after their leader, William Miller, rushed up to them shouting: 'Gentlemen! Do you realize the world is coming to an end today?' Mr. Parker replied: 'That does not concern me, for I live in Boston.' And Emerson added, 'The end of the world does not affect me; I can get along without it.' Great was the disappointment among the true believers when the dawn of October 23 broke and the world went on. There were many broken limbs, and little furniture."

The Post finds a moral in this for our own time, one which is probably well taken --

"Today, too, there are a great many people who think the world we know is going to end after the war. It is very probable that they are wrong. The world will no doubt be very much the same world that we have known. It will change. It is changing all the time, for that is its nature. But the nature of life will not change. The old will always complain that it has changed too much, but most of the change is in them. The young will find it very much the same world they have grown up in. We look forward to a whole series of October 23d’s without the slightest -- well, without any serious tremor."

posted by Michael 7:49:00 AM

. . .

JUST PLAIN OUT, PERIOD. In Cincinnati, a sign on a locked cigar store read: 'Out of cigars. Out of cigarets. Out of gum. Out of films. Out of stamps. Out of patience. Out of town.'"

posted by Michael 7:44:00 AM

. . .

Tuesday, October 17, 1944

THE "TREND" IS TOWARD DEWEY. But don’t take my word for it. Look up yesterday’s column by Ernest Lindley, who often supports the Roosevelt administration in his writings --

"The polls and the reports of political observers do not indicate a Roosevelt ‘trend.’ On the contrary, many of them indicate that Dewey’s chances of winning have improved. He has had the advantage of the backing of powerful and now seasoned political organizations, which were skillfully mobilized by him and his campaign managers. But, also, in the frank opinion of some of the most experienced politicians on the Roosevelt side, Dewey’s speeches and interviews have been clever and effective. Dewey has used liberally quotations twisted from their context and unauthoritative statements to support his charges and insinuations. In that respect he has been a more flagrant offender than any other major party nominee for the Presidency in many years. These tactics may hurt him among thoughtful and independent voters, as the facts catch up with him. But they have put the Democratic campaigners on the defensive and compelled them to spend time and effort in answering allegations and innuendoes which, in some instances, were so novel, not to say fantastic, that their interjection into the campaign could not have been anticipated."

Mr. Lindley doesn’t say what these scurrilous charges are, and I’m confused by his categorization of them as "novel" and "fantastic." It’s a fact that the Communist Party is supporting President Roosevelt, and it’s fair to ask what the Communists expect to gain from a Democratic victory. It’s a fact that the extreme-leftist labor leader Sidney Hillman has played a role in the effort to re-elect the President. As far as Governor Dewey’s allegation that the President plans to delay demobilization of men from the armed forces once victory is achieved, that’s based on a published report issued by the National Resources Planning Board last year. How "fantastic" is that?

But the upshot of all this is that the election seems to be swinging Governor Dewey’s way, and those in the press who support President Roosevelt are increasingly hard-pressed to deny it.

posted by Michael 8:05:00 AM

. . .

THE RED TIDE ROLLS ON. There haven’t been any sudden, dramatic Russian offensives making headlines lately. Just as on the western front, the Reds are still pushing the Nazis back, a few miles here and a few miles there. And those miles add up, as the latest New York Times map shows --

(1) Russian troops and Titoist partisan fighters in Yugoslavia have laid siege to Belgrade, which is expected to be Nazi-free within a few days.

(2) The Russians have pushed battered German units completely out of Bulgaria and out of four-fifths of Rumania. The surrender of these two former Axis satellites, and assistance to the Allies from their national armies, has been a huge help in pushing the Nazis out.

(3) The bulk of Estonia and Latvia have been taken by Red troops, as well as almost all of Estonia, except for the critical Memel district.

(4) The Russians have now pushed the Germans out of three-fifths of Old Poland, where the main Nazi defenses now rest on the Vistula River. Soviet troops have made one sharp advance past the Vistula line, to Cracow, and correspondents say that this is the likeliest area for the next major Red drive. That drive will surely bring about the long-awaited fall of Warsaw.

(5) A new Soviet push is driving from Rumania into Hungary, pointed at Budapest. The panicked Hungarians still under the control of Admiral Horthy are now trying to switch sides, but the Nazi-installed puppet regime, with the backing of German troops, is fiercely trying to keep the Hungarians in line.

Not all the progress is due to the Russians. In Greece, a low-key offensive by some 2,000 British troops has cleared the Peloponnesus of Nazi units, and now British units and Greek partisans stand on the verge of liberating Athens and Corinth.

It’s interesting to note that for all the continued Soviet advances, U.S. and British troops are still closer to Berlin than the Russians are -- 317 miles to Berlin from the edge of the Western Front, compared to 325 miles to Berlin from the most forward part of the Russian lines. But barring a dramatic attempt by the U.S. and Britain to force the European war to a conclusion before winter, it’s likely the Reds will soon be the closest ally to Berlin. They’ve got more firepower facing the Germans on their front, and the Germans have no Westwall to provide a defense-in-depth in the East.

posted by Michael 8:03:00 AM

. . .

COULD BE TROUBLE. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Tulsa, a 'Let’s Swap' column listed: 'Exchange. Unused engagement and wedding rings. Want automatic shotgun.'"

posted by Michael 7:58:00 AM

. . .

Sunday, October 15, 1944

DEWEY CAN BEAT ROOSEVELT. Democrats have been talking like President Roosevelt’s got his fourth term in the bag, but today’s latest updating of Gallup’s comprehensive 48-state opinion survey says: Not so fast.

Since late September, Gallup says, Governor Dewey has improved his position in 18 states, while President Roosevelt has done so in 14 states. This means that if the election were held today it would be tantalizingly close -- Roosevelt would win 25 states, with 243 electoral votes, and Dewey would win 19 states with 228 electoral votes. (266 electoral votes are needed to win.) The winner would be decided by the states of New Hampshire, Pennsylvania, Missouri, and Oregon, with 60 electoral votes among them. Right now, these four states are split 50-50 between the two candidates.

And Gallup’s figures show the trend is going in favor of the Republicans. In both August and September F.D.R. held a definite lead in enough states to be assured of more than 280 electoral votes. But the Democratic vote has fallen in Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, and Oregon, and it’s fallen so much in two other states -- New Jersey and New Mexico -- that Gallup has shifted them from Roosevelt to Dewey.

The President has a slight popular vote lead of 51% to 49% over Dewey, but Mr. Gallup has noted in the past that the Democrats need a larger lead than this to have a good chance at victory. The Democratic majority of the popular vote in the Southern states is typically so lopsided (as much as nine-to-one) that Roosevelt would likely need as much as 52% or 53% of the popular vote nationally to be assured of victory in the Electoral College.

You’d think that under these circumstances, and their consistency in our time, that we would have had a twentieth-century election where the Democrat won the popular vote and the Republican won the electoral vote. Maybe this will be the year it happens.

posted by Michael 7:42:00 AM

. . .

HOW TO SELL THE "UNITED NATIONS" TO CONGRESS. Edwin James of the New York Times mentions one possible way to avoid a League of Nations-style fight in Congress over what degree of power American should cede to the "United Nations" world body when it begins operations --

"In this country there has been a good deal of debate over the powers of the United States representative on the new Council. Shall he represent the President or shall he represent Congress? Shall he have the power, in the last analysis, to put this country into war without a vote by Congress? They are difficult points but points which we should be able to resolve. It has been suggested -- and there is merit in the suggestion -- that some formula be worked out under which the American delegate, under powers from the President, be given full powers to act in connection with keeping Germany and Japan unarmed while some other provision be worked out to cover other eventualities. There are two things to be said for this suggestion: in the first place, it apparently would get support from most all members of Congress, and, in the second place, and more important, it would provide machinery for action in any case of serious proportions which might come before the Council of the United Nations in the next ten years. If its adoption would smooth the way for the United States getting into the proposed organization and remaining there ten years, the rest would probably be easy."

This sounds like a smart plan. It assumes, of course, that the main job of the Council for the next few years will be to keep Germany and Japan from being able to make war again. But at this point that’s probably a safe bet. Idealists will surely want the United Nations to be stronger, and to set up shop as a full-scale "Parliament of Man." But as Mr. James points out, we should stick to getting what practical progress we can manage in human affairs at this critical time --

"The greatest advance which can be had now, or while most of us are living, is an organization of national governments. That is what Dumbarton Oaks provides. Those who believe in international cooperation should get behind the principles it represents. One may quarrel about details, but the quarrels should be about details. The main idea should stand."

posted by Michael 7:40:00 AM

. . .

A LEGEL EAGEL. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Durham, N.C., one A.E. Lloyd insisted that 'stoping' meant an excavation method in mining, refused to pay a fine for a parking beside a 'No Stoping' sign. The court docilely dropped charges, ordered the misspelling corrected."

posted by Michael 7:37:00 AM

. . .

Tuesday, October 10, 1944

THE BIG KIDS WILL RUN THE "UNITED NATIONS." Monday’s announcement of the Dumbarton Oaks formula for a postwar world league, as negotiated among the Big Three these past weeks, has been greeted with almost universal favor. Both President Roosevelt and Governor Dewey praise the plan, which establishes a peace-time United Nations. This new world organization would be set up like a parliamentary democracy, with a lower chamber (the "General Assembly") and an upper chamber (the "Security Council"). But as Barnet Nover points out in his column today, the creation of the General Assembly looks like a sop to the smaller countries, whose destinies in the post-war world will be largely guided by the Big Four (or, counting France, the Big Five) --

"The proposed General Assembly in which all 'peace-loving states' will be represented, will be little more than a debating society, and not always that. The Assembly is to meet once a year . . . [its] functions will largely be advisory. It will not even have any control over its own membership. It will not be able to elect new members or expel old ones. . . . The functions of the small powers in the new League will thus be to deal with small matters, letting major problems be dealt with by the major powers."

By contrast, Mr. Nover writes, the Security Council will be in almost continuous session. The Big Four will dominate the 11-member body (and will become the Big Five upon France’s future entry), each with veto power and collectively charged with maintaining the peace. The Council would have the power to send air, sea, and land military forces into action to stop an aggressor nation, and all member countries, including the United States, would be obligated to make their forces "immediately available" for such a cause.

The troubling question this raises for us, of course, is this -- will the U.S. cede any of its sovereignty to the United Nations on questions of war and peace? As Edward T. Folliard writes in this morning’s Washington Post --

"Who will decide when and where American land, sea and air forces are to go into action? Will the United States delegate in the Security Council and the President have that authority? Or will Congress, jealous of its right to declare war, insist that the United States delegate come back to it for such authority? In the Capitol Hill debates thus far, Senators have indicated a willingness to give the United States delegate authority up to a point, but some have balked at giving him what they call a 'blank check.'"

What if the Security Council, with the U.S. delegate's approval, decides to fight a war, but Congress votes no? Could the United Nations then force America to fight a war? It’s going to take some time to get used to this new way of thinking.

posted by Michael 8:09:00 AM

. . .

WENDELL WILLKIE, R.I.P. Wendell Willkie’s sudden death this past week-end from coronary thrombosis has inspired an outpouring of tributes, from Democrats and Republicans alike, and from big shots in all corners of the world. I think Walter Lippmann’s New York Herald Tribune column sums up best the importance of this great man and what his nomination as the Republican candidate for President in 1940 has meant to our history --

"His part has been to save his country from an irreconcilable partisan division in the face of the most formidable enemies who were ever arrayed against all that America is and means. Historians will say, I believe, that second only to the battle of Britain, the sudden rise and nomination of Willkie was the decisive event, perhaps providential, which made it possible to rally the free world when it was almost conquered. Under any other leadership but his the Republican Party would in 1940 have turned its back upon Great Britain, causing all who still resisted Hitler to feel that they were abandoned. For while his rivals for the nomination at Philadelphia would almost certainly have been defeated, the fact that they had made the Republicans the isolationist party would have made it almost impossible thereafter to reinforce our Allies by lend-lease and to gain the time we had to have to prepare for war. Although Willkie never succeeded in converting the Old Guard, and of restoring the party to its great federalist tradition, he was able to hold in check its tendency to sink into know-nothingism and reactionary obstruction. Thus because of him, and of him alone, the Republican Party has survived during these four historic years, has preserved its title and its eligibility to govern in the world as it now is. If the ideals of his rivals in 1940 had prevailed, we should be today not on the slopes of victory but isolated, divided, and desperately hard pressed."

posted by Michael 8:06:00 AM

. . .

IF WILLKIE HAD WON... Here’s a strange thing. If Willkie had defeated Roosevelt in 1940, his Secretary of State would now be the nation’s President. That’s because Mr. Willkie’s vice-presidential running mate, Charles L. McNary, died this past February. So, if Willkie had won, both the President and Vice President would have died in office before their terms were up. And thus, the man President Willkie would have chosen for his Secretary of State would have succeeded to the Presidency, under the terms of the Constitution.

posted by Michael 8:04:00 AM

. . .

COME AGAIN? From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Northampton, Mass., a Smith freshman scrawled as her denominational preference: 'I like to be called Betty.'"

posted by Michael 8:01:00 AM

. . .

Sunday, October 8, 1944

WE NEED TO FINISH THE JOB NOW. This item’s from the A.P. today, and it’s one more reason why we can’t wait until 1945 to finish off Germany. The Nazis are now openly preparing for a "war without end" of guerilla attacks and sabotage once Hitler’s Reich has crumbled --

"SS Obengruppenfuehrer General von Den Bache has been appointed by Heinrich Himmler as supreme commander of Germany’s post-surrender underground resistance forces, according to usually reliable sources on the German frontier. Von Den Bache, while stationed in Poland, boasted that he personally enjoyed mass executions and had taken a direct hand in some of them with a submachine gun. Although little known outside Germany, he has been a high-ranking Nazi for years. Frontier sources reported von Den Bache had already taken over his new duties and was touring Nazi youth schools to select young leaders for the underground and guerilla forces."

This is especially disquieting to read in light of all the dispatches lately indicating that progress on both the Western Front and the Eastern Front has slowed to a crawl. The sooner we finish the destruction of the German war machine, at whatever cost, the easier it’ll be to stamp out these vermin in the year (or years) ahead.

We can’t wait through the winter to crush Hitler. The Big Three must act in concert, and now.

posted by Michael 7:44:00 AM

. . .

MORE ON MOSCOW’S POLISH MYSTERY. Ernest Lindley’s column today is full of worries about Russia, in light of their queer hostility toward the Polish government-in-exile --

"The Kremlin’s handling of the Polish question is causing extreme disquiet, even among officials who think that the Polish government-in-exile has been far from blameless. . . . It is granted that the government of the new Poland should not pursue international policies inimical to the Soviet Union. It should not collaborate with Germany. It should not become the spearhead of a coalition hostile to Russia. But it will have no opportunity to do so if Germany is disarmed and Russia and the great powers of the west remain firm partners. But the Russians, it would now appear, intend to set up what could only be called a puppet government. Apparently they want no Pole around who is on speaking terms with London or Washington. . . . The Russians may only be hedging against the possibility of an eventual break-up among the Allies and an eventual failure to enforce the peace. But the methods which the Kremlin is using are reviving distrust of Soviet purposes, and not only among the smaller nations of Europe but among the peoples of the United States and Britain."

Mr. Lindley notes the Administration’s hope that "when Germany has been defeated, and after the Allies have proved their determination and ability to keep Germany demilitarized and have got the proposed world organization in proper working order, the Russians will feel less apprehensive about their security."

That sounds like a reasonable outcome. But it sounds reasonable that Stalin would have embraced the Polish government-in-exile as a wartime ally and given aid to its Warsaw rebellion. It also sounds reasonable that the Soviets would now be making sincere diplomatic efforts to incorporate the London-based government-in-exile into the Moscow-backed Polish National Committee. So why hasn’t any of this happened?

posted by Michael 7:41:00 AM

. . .

TESTING, TESTING. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In The Bronx, Acting Captain John Cronin, head of the Missing Persons Bureau, hunted for his two children, found them hiding in Woodlawn Cemetery. Explained eleven-year-old Alice: 'We wanted to see how good you were.'"

posted by Michael 7:39:00 AM

. . .

Tuesday, October 3, 1944

WHEN WILL THE WAR END? (IX). The voices warning us that the European war will likely continue into 1945, or might not have a clear-cut "end," have become more numerous lately. Prime Minister Churchill’s statement this past week-end indicates he's become one of them --

"I shall certainly not hazard a guess . . . as to when the end will come. Many persons of the highest technical attainments, knowledge and responsibility have good hopes that it will be over with by the end of 1944. On the other hand, no one -- certainly not I -- can guarantee that several months of 1945 may not be required. There is also the possibility that, after organized resistance of the German state and army is completely broken, fierce warfare may be maintained in the forests and mountains of Germany by numbers of desperate men conscious of their own guilt and impending doom. It may be necessary fo the Allies to declare at a certain date that the actual war against the German state has come to an end and that a period of mopping up of bandits and war criminals begun. No one can foresee what form exactly the death agony of Nazidom will take."

posted by Michael 8:07:00 AM

. . .

WHEN WILL THE WAR END? (X) Another vote for 1945, from E.C. Daniel in the New York Times --

"The prospect of a winter of war sharpened London’s autumn chill this week . . . . The facts behind this fear that the campaign against Germany may be prolonged into 1945 are these: With the liquidation of the British First Airborne Division’s gallant effort to bridge the lower Rhine at Arnhem, the swift impetus of the Allied armies all along the great front from the North Sea to the Alps has unquestionably been slowed to a slogging walk. For the first time since the breakthrough from Normandy, the German line has solidified and at Arnhem a sharp setback has been inflicted on Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower’s forces."

posted by Michael 8:05:00 AM

. . .

WHEN WILL THE WAR REALLY END? (I) It’s odd how everyone in the press, if not everyone period, talks about the "end of the war" when what they really mean is the end of the European war. Maybe it’s because we don’t want to think about how far a road we still have ahead against Japan. From George Connery in the Washington Post --

"An official American forecast that the war against Japan will last at least a year and a half after defeat of Germany was followed yesterday by an appeal for more assault craft of a type that can be loaded with men and equipment in this country and sent direct to hostile landing beaches in the Pacific."

A year and a half. If that forecast holds true, and if the Hitler regime holds out through "several months" of 1945, then we might not get this war won until late 1946, or early 1947.

A sobering, and even depressing, thought for an autumn day.

posted by Michael 8:04:00 AM

. . .

FIGHTING CRUELTY WITH CRUELTY. Time magazine adroitly sums up the Morgenthau Plan for governing postwar Germany as "barely above the level of 'sterilize all Germans.'" It is by far the harshest approach being discussed inside the Roosevelt administration. Secretary Morgenthau advocates removal of all industrial machinery from Germany; closing of all German mines; cession of the Rhineland industrial area to France; breakup of large estates into small farms; denial of economic or relief aid to the German people; and occupation by Russian, British, and American troops for a generation or more. According to Time, President Roosevelt is said to be "leaning" toward these extreme steps.

But I think columnist Ernest Lindley sums it up well -- "The plan is vengeful. It proposes almost everything that could be contrived to destroy Germany and the German people short of shooting a good many million of them." And what happens to an entire nation of many millions who are reduced to sustenance farming, who have watched their loved ones die of starvation -- and who are given no hope of attaining a decent life? Would a single generation of military occupation be enough? Would we, in the end, be that much better than the Nazis if we were ever to force an entire people to live in such a squalid state -- even if so many of them could be said to richly deserve it?

posted by Michael 8:01:00 AM

. . .

DO AS I SHAY... From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Glace Bay, Nova Scotia, a magistrate and two miners, drunk and disorderly, were locked up for the night, later met in a nearby court where the magistrate (who had just paid a $5.50 fine himself) lectured his jailmates on temperance, fined them $13 apiece."

posted by Michael 7:59:00 AM

. . .

Sunday, October 1, 1944

THE END AT ARNHEM. The story of the gallant "Red Devils" of the British First Airborne Division is one of the most heroic of the war -- but sadly, it is also a story of failure. The valiant force of some 8,000 paratroopers who fought desperately to secure the Arnhem bridge for ten days against incessant pounding by Nazi tanks and troops, a full 50 miles behind enemy lines, have withdrawn across the Neder Rhine. They took a terrible beating. Only about 1,800 men made it back to the Allied ranks. As Howard Cowan of the A.P. writes --

"Exhausted, weary from lack of sleep, wet from incessant rain, the plucky Tommies fought on with whatever they could lay their hands on. Many used weapons captured from the Germans. Others were reduced to bayonets."

The "incessant rain" was an especially cruel break. It allowed the Germans to hit the British with a terrific barrage from their tanks and heavy guns, without worrying about Allied warplanes.

There’s no doubt the Allies continue to make progress in the Netherlands. As the A.P. points out, the "corridor" in Holland is now more secure than ever, and expanding in all directions. But the bold gamble of making a sharp thrust to Arnhem, turning the Nazi right flank and speeding onward to Berlin, has unquestionably failed. There is still much bitter campaigning left to be done.

posted by Michael 7:53:00 AM

. . .

ROOSEVELT’S SPEECH -- "CHEAP BUSHWHACKING." The Washington Post editorial page, which more often than not finds favor with Roosevelt administration policies, let loose a righteous cannonade over the President’s sorry "Fala" speech last week-end. Some highlights --

"It is doubtful whether the President’s indispensability complex has ever been more boldly exhibited. He tried to dispose of 'that old, worm-eaten chestnut that I have represented myself as indispensable' by saying that it is a ‘malicious falsehood.’ But he did not deny that he thinks of himself as indispensable. On the contrary, his speech bristled with the arrogance that inevitably accompanies a feeling of indispensability. His opponents were branded as being insincere -- guilty of fraud for the expression of views that in part coincide with his own and in part do not. They are liars following the technique of foreign dictators. They have tried to prevent the defense of their country. The only safety for the Nation lies in the continued acceptance of the 'will and skill and intelligence and devotion' of the Roosevelt Administration. Here is the gospel of indispensability in its most flagrant form."

The Post also provides some helpful correctives to presidential distortions --

"We can find in the speech none of the democratic statesmanship which candidly submits issues to the public and cheerfully accepts the verdict at the polls. On the contrary, the speech reveals a profound impatience with any sort of opposition. Even an intolerance for facts leaps out at many points. For example, the statement that 'only one-tenth of 1 per cent of man-hours have been lost by strikes' since Pearl Harbor greatly distorts the effect of work stoppages on the war effort, as any responsible official dealing with manpower will readily admit. It takes no account of delays in the plants not on strike for want of strategic materials held up by strikes. . . . The President . . . then went on to drag the international peace problem into the political arena. The peace-building tasks, he said, were botched a generation ago by a Republican administration, and that must not happen again. The unquestioned fact is that the peace was botched a generation ago because it was made a football of politics. There is the gravest sort of danger that if it is again made a partisan issue that tragic error will be repeated. . . . At a moment when spiritual leadership of a high order is urgently needed the President resorted to a cheap variety of political bushwhacking."

The editors do concede, as do I, that as a partisan political speech it surely was a big hit with Democrats everywhere. But it’s striking in one respect how the President has so baldly gone back on his promise made just two months ago to not "campaign" for office. Could it be his political boys are telling him his re-election prospects aren’t nearly as bright as they appeared in July?

posted by Michael 7:49:00 AM

. . .

GOOD TO THE LAST DROP. From Time magazine’s Miscellany section -- "In Portland, Ore., a woman motorist gave four A coupons for 12 gallons of gas, sighed when the tank took on only 11.9, cheerfully raced her motor until there was room for the rest."

posted by Michael 7:47:00 AM

. . .