Horse Trader & Broker
Sir:
As I reach legal voting age, I am at a loss to understand . . . the dangerous and deplorable electoral system in this country which allows one individual to control, swing or influence such a large bloc of delegates that he could theoretically personally choose the next President.
Without casting any aspersions on such leaders as Governor Fine of Pennsylvania [TIME, June 30], Senator Knowland of California and others who have strong political leverage, I only wish to suggest that it would invoke an almost superhuman strength of character for an individual in such a political position to act solely for the best interests of the American people . . .
ANN DAMSBO
Escondido, Calif.
Sir:
. . . Your otherwise excellent reporting of Pennsylvania politics implies that it is a pretty dirty business, yet John S. Fine and politicians like him render a valuable service, i.e., as political brokers and as negotiators of various conflicting interests vying for recognition in the governmental process . . .
DEAN R. CRESAP Palo Alto, Calif.
Toft, Ike & More Arithmetic
Sir:
The June 30 article, "Taft, Ike & Arithmetic," is indeed clever and even superficially convincing. The purpose of this letter, however, is to indicate how simple it is to do a bit of figure juggling, with no more violence to the probable facts of the matter than your own, and arrive at a considerably less dramatic disparity in the convention delegate strength of Taft and Eisenhower in the hardcore Republican and in the doubtful states. TIME'S figures are apparently based in considerable measure on the most recent off-year congressional election, which is a most doubtful bit of evidence upon which to rely, since such an election almost always goes against the party in power. My own arithmetic is based largely on the last presidential election, with attention to party affiliation of present governors, Senators and Representatives.
In 1948 the states of Illinois, Iowa, Minnesota, Ohio and Wisconsin, which TIME lists in the hard-core group of Republican states, all went to Truman. These states have a liberal sprinkling of Democratic governors, Senators and Representatives. Is it then safe to conclude, as does TIME, that these states are part of the Republican hard core? If the convention strength of these states is shifted to the third or doubtful group, then Taft has 193 and Eisenhower 258 from this doubtful group.
With respect to the doubtful group, the states of New Jersey, Oregon and Pennsylvania all went to the Republicans in 1948, and the chances are they will again in 1952. Leaving out the undecided convention votes in Pennsylvania and moving this group of states to the hard-core group, where they may more properly belong, this makes the doubtful states read as follows: Taft 185 and Eisenhower 196. This shifting around also strikes a much more even balance between Taft and Eisenhower in the hard-core Republican states: Eisenhower 130 and Taft 92. The above analysis, if nothing else, shows the very real difficulty involved in attempting to make out an invincible case for Eisenhower as the strongest candidate in the doubtful states which will decide the election . . .
HUGH Ross Golden, Colo.
Sir:
. . . Of all the misleading, slanted, self-serving, statistical mumbo-jumbos, pp. 13-15, TIME, June 30, stand as a monument . . .
J. H. HENNESSY JR. Springfield, Ohio
Sir:
Shame on you! I thought TIME never made loose statements, but . . . that article states that "among the practical politicians of the battleground states, Eisenhower has few, if any, old friends, and Taft has many, But the desire for victory in 1952 is apparently stronger than friendship." Below that statement you show a delegate lineup, including 85 New York delegates (of 86 committed) for Ike, and 29 Massachusetts delegates (of 32), also for Ike.
You have apparently forgotten that New York and Massachusetts are the respective stamping grounds of two Eisenhower strongmen, T. E. Dewey and H. C. Lodge. The 114 Ike delegates from these two states comprise just five shy of one-half the Ike delegates in that table. "
Do you imply that Dewey and Lodge are not "practical politicians"? Certainly they are good friends of Ike, and powerful ones at that.
JIM HOLLAND Chicago
There'll Always Be a G.O.P.
Sir:
I feel this talk of "now or never" for the Republican Party is unfortunate. If the Republicans lose the coming election, we are told, it will cease to exist . . .
Let's be logical about this. How many Republican Senators and Representatives will there be in Washington even if the Democrats win in a landslide? If the two-party system is "wiped out," what will become of these orphaned politicians? Obviously, it is not going to be wiped out; obviously, there will always be an opposition party.
I think what they are saying is that one more defeat will spell the end of the "old guard" as a directing force in the party. I think this is correct, and as it should be. Perhaps the voters of America will have to tell the Republicans how they feel about the matter if the G.O.P. fails to observe current trends in the world . . .
The Democratic Party with a moderately conservative candidate like Stevenson will make the Landon defeat look like a moral victory . . .
JOHN A. MACGAHAN Chicago
Groans for a Groaner
Sir:
I am writing for a group of "aging" college girls--19 to 22 years old.
When Bing Crosby played an exhibition golf match [here] for charity, we were on the Junior Committee.
If only some of our brash young entertainers would take a leaf out of his book! He is the most enchanting, modest, literate, charming, patient, lovable gentleman in show business today, and he wasn't wearing his toupee, either!
If you ever dare to call him an aging groaner [TIME, June 30] again, we'll cancel our subscriptions!
HELENE STRATFORD Roanoke, Va.
Sweeps, Double & Triple
Sir:
Re June 30 issue, you comment concerning the golden jubilee race of the Intercollegiate Rowing Association: "Then it was up to the varsity (Navy) to duplicate the 'sweep of the river' achieved only by the West Coast's perennial powerhouse, Washington."
I was one of those who watched Cornell "sweep the river" in like manner back in 1903, and got a great thrill out of it . . . Shades of Courtney, Cornell's erstwhile unbeatable coach!
EDWIN N. FERDON, '03 Coshocton, Ohio
P: The late great "Pop" Courtney's freshman and varsity crews did indeed "sweep the river," eight times between 1896 and 1912. But sweeps achieved by Washington in 1936, '37, '48 and '50, which Navy duplicated this year, were triple victories. Prior to 1914 there were no jayvees at the annual regatta.--ED.
Ruthlessness in Colombia
Sir:
Your shocking June 30 account of how Roman Catholics have killed Colombian Protestants makes one wonder why the hierarchy would censure Communists for murdering Catholic priests, nuns and laity in China. Is ruthlessness less sinful when inspired by a church than when it is meted out by a godless Communist state?
(THE REV.) E. MARCELLUS NESBITT
First United Presbyterian Church
Beaver, Pa.
Sir:
. . Does not the Vatican have it in its power to either stop such persecution or excommunicate those who perpetrate and encourage such acts?
HERBERT L. WOOLF JR. Piedmont, Ala.
Sir:
. . . It is the obligation of the Roman Catholic hierarchy of the United States to unequivocally denounce such barbaric action perpetrated in the name of the Prince of Peace. If America is to defeat the forces of oppression and tyranny, then both Catholics and Protestants must present a united front against the agents of persecution, be they ecclesiastical or political. Let us hope that the Roman Catholics in the United States will repudiate this brutality in Colombia with actions as well as words.
C. E. LANGE
Larchmont, N.Y.
Sir:
Why do not our Protestant clergy spend their missionary zeal amongst the unbaptized and impoverished peoples of the world, instead of representing their nation and their faith in a country which is as predominantly Christian as is their own?
MRS. F. W. SHEA Seattle
Sir:
The news of the difficulties encountered by Protestants in Colombia brings to mind my experience as a missionary to Colombia for the Episcopal Church from 1944-47.
In a conversation with the Ambassador of the United States (Arthur Bliss Lane), I learned that many of the difficulties of the Protestant groups came from the anti-Roman sermons and tracts that they were distributing to Colombians . . .
One cannot consistently and indiscriminately criticize the religion of a people who have had the teachings of the Roman Church, as it exists in Colombia, ingrained in their life and thought for untold generations and expect a cordial reception.
While not condoning the action recounted in TIME, I felt that the other side of the picture should be understood in order to correct any false impression that the account might give readers. All the responsibility is not with the Colombians. The missionaries, and their boards, might well search the Gospel anew and redirect their activity. (THE REV.) GEORGE F. PACKARD
Rector
Immanuel & Trinity Churches Glencoe, Md.
Foggy Argument
Sir:
I am amazed that such an erudite individual as Professor C.E.M. Joad [TIME, June 30] should have such an erroneous impression of the American woman of 40. I have lived here for 6 1/2 years and have yet to encounter the creature [". . . horn-rimmed spectacles, leathery skin, strident voice . . ."] he depicts. If indeed she does exist, surely she is no more dreadful than her English counterpart with her flat-heeled shoes, shapeless tweeds and horsy vocabulary . . .
Professor Joad's views are on a par with the prevalent American impression that my native land is shrouded in fog for twelve months of the year.
DOROTHY M. WILSON
Wichita Falls, Texas
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.