Archive for the ‘Politics’ Category
BAY OF PIGS, BERLIN WALL, BILL CLINTON, BRUCE GREENWOOD, CARLOS MARCELLO, CIA, CIVIL RIGHTS, CLIFF ROBERTSON, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DAVID HALBERSTAM, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIDEL CASTRO, FRANK SINATRA, ICH BEN EIN BERLINNER SPEECH, INTERNET MOVIE DATABASE, J. EDGAR HOOVER, JAMES MARSDEN, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MAFIA, MALCOM X, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MARTIN SHEEN, MOVIES, NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV, NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY, PT-109, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, ROBERT S. MCNAMARA, SAM GIANCANA, SANTOS TRAFFICANTE, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, SOVIET UNION, THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST, THE BUTLER, THE MISSILES OF OCTOBER, THE RAT PACK, THIRTEEN DAYS, TWILIGHT ZONE, TWITTER, VIETNAM WAR, WILLIAM DEVANE, WILLIAM PETERSEN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on November 13, 2013 at 12:26 am
By October, 1962, the Soviet Union had sent more than 40,000 soldiers, 1,300 field pieces, 700 anti-aircraft guns, 350 tanks and 150 jets to Cuba to deter another invasion.
Nikita Khrushchev, the premier of the Soviet Union, also began supplying Castro with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles–whose discovery, in October, 1962, ignited the single most dangerous confrontation of the Cold War.

John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis
On October 16, Kennedy was shown photographs of nuclear missile sites under construction on the island. The pictures had been taken on the previous day by a high-altitude U-2 spy plane.
Suddenly, the two most powerful nuclear countries–the United States and the Soviet Union–found themselves on the brink of nuclear war.
At the time, Kennedy officials claimed they couldn’t understand why Khrushchev had placed nuclear missiles in Cuba. “Maybe Khrushchev’s gone mad” was a typical musing.
None of these officials admitted that JFK had been waging a no-holds-barred campaign to overthrow the Cuban government and assassinate its leader.
After being informed of the missile installations, Kennedy convened a group of his 12 most important advisors, which became known as Ex-Comm, for Executive Committee.
Then followed seven days of guarded and intense debate by Kennedy and his advisors. Some of the participants-–such as Air Force General Curtis LeMay-–urged an all-out air strike against the missile sites.
Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General (and the President’s brother) opposed initial calls for an air strike.
It would be, he said, “a Pearl Harbor in reverse.” And, he added: “I don’t want my brother to go down in history as the Tojo of the 1960s.”

Robert F. and John F. Kennedy
Others-–such as Adlai Stevenson, the United States delegate to the United Nations–urged a reliance on quiet diplomacy.
It was Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara who suggested a middle course: A naval blockade–-a “quarantine” in Kennedy’s softened term–around Cuba. This would hopefully prevent the arrival of more Soviet offensive weapons on the island.
The President insisted that the missiles had to go–by peaceful means, if possible, but through the use of military force if necessary.
Kennedy finally settled on a maval blockade of Cuba. This would prevent additional missiles from coming in and give Khrushchev time to negotiate and save face.
On October 22, President Kennedy appeared on nationwide TV to denounce the presence of Russian nuclealr missiles in Cuba.
He demanded their withdrawal, and warned that any missile launched against any nation in the Western hemisphere would be answered with “a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.”
Kennedy ordered American military readiness raised to a level of Defcom-2–the step just short of total war.
The United States had about 27,000 nuclear weapons; the Soviets had about 3,000. In a first salvo of a nuclear exchange, the United States could have launched about 3,000 nuclear weapons and the Soviets about 250.

Nuclear missile in silo
On October 28, Khrushchev announced that the missile sites would be destroyed and the missiles crated and shipped back to the Soiet Union.
In return, Kennedy gave his promise–publicly–to lift the blockade and not invade Cuba
Privately, he also promised to remove obsolte Jupiter II nuclear missiles from Turkey, which bordered the Soviet Union. Those missiles were, in effect, the American version of the Russian missiles that had been shipped to Cuba.
The world escaped nuclear disaster by a hair’s-breath.
Khrushchev didn’t know that Kennedy had intended to order a full-scale invasion of Cuba in just another 24 hours if an agreement couldn’t be reached.
And Kennedy and his military advisors didn’t know that Russian soldiers defending Cuba had been armed with tactical nuclear weapons.
If warfare of any type had broken out, the temptation to go nuclear would have been overwhelming.
The Cuban Missile Crisis marked the only time the world came to the brink of nuclear war.
To the Right, it was a sell-out: Kennedy had refused to “take out” Castro when he had the chance, thus allowing Cuba to remain a Communist bastion only 90 miles from Florida.
To the Left, it was a needless confrontation that risked the destruction of humanity.
For Kennedy, forcing the Soviets to remove their misssiles from Cuba re-won the confidence he had lost among so many Americans following the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
It also brought him face-to-face with the brutal truth that a miscalculation during a nuclear crisis could destroy all life on the planet.
He felt he could now move–cautiously–toward better relations between the United States and the Soviet Union.
Ironically, the crisis had the same effects on Khrushchev–who had witnessed the horrors of Germany’s 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union and the subsequent loss of at least 22 million Soviet citizens.
Slowly and carefully, Kennedy and Khrushchev negotiated the details of what would become the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which banned nuclear testing in the atmosphere.
Underground tests would continue, but the amounts of deadly strontonium-90 radiation polluting the atmosphere would be vastly reduced.
The treaty was signed between the United States and the Soviet Union on July 25, 1963.
Kennedy considered it his greatest achievement as President, saying in a speech: “According to a Chinese proverb, a jouney of a thousand miles begins with a single step. My fellow Americans, let us take that first step.”
BAY OF PIGS, BERLIN WALL, BILL CLINTON, BRUCE GREENWOOD, CARLOS MARCELLO, CIA, CIVIL RIGHTS, CLIFF ROBERTSON, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DAVID HALBERSTAM, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIDEL CASTRO, FRANK SINATRA, ICH BEN EIN BERLINNER SPEECH, INTERNET MOVIE DATABASE, J. EDGAR HOOVER, JAMES MARSDEN, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MAFIA, MALCOM X, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MARTIN SHEEN, MOVIES, NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV, NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY, PT-109, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, ROBERT S. MCNAMARA, SAM GIANCANA, SANTOS TRAFFICANTE, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, SOVIET UNION, THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST, THE BUTLER, THE MISSILES OF OCTOBER, THE RAT PACK, THIRTEEN DAYS, TWILIGHT ZONE, TWITTER, VIETNAM WAR, WILLIAM DEVANE, WILLIAM PETERSEN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on November 12, 2013 at 12:05 am
During the 1960 Presidential campaign, then-Senator John F. Kennedy promised to build a Peace Corps to train people in underdeveloped nations to help themselves.

John F. Kennedy
In March, 1961, the program went into effect, with the President’s brother-in-law, Sergent Shriver, as director.
Starvation, illiteracy and disease were the enemies of the Corps. Any nation wanting aid could request it. The first group of volunteers went to the Philippines, the second to Equador and the third to Tanganika.
The problems of the underdeveloped world were too great for any single organization to solve. But the Corps lifted the spirits of many living in those countries. And it captured the imagination of millions of Americans–especially those of thousands of idealistic youths who entered its ranks.
To combat the growing Communist threat to Latin America, Kennedy established the Alliance for Progress. He defined the Alliance’s goal as providing “revolutionary progress through powerful, democratic means.”
Within two years he could report:
“Some 140,000 housing units have been constructed. Slum clearance projects have begun, and 3,000 classrooms have been built. More than 4,000,000 school books have been distributed.
“The Alliance has fired the imagination and kindled the hopes of millions of our good neighbors. Their drive toward modernization is gaining momentum as it unleashes the energies of these millions.
“The United States is becoming increasingly identified in the minds of the people with the goal they move toward: a better life with freedom,” said Kennedy.
Critics of the program, however, charged that the President was trying to “dress up the old policies” of Franklin D. Roosevelt in new rhetoric. Since FDR’s time, the United States has believed in giving economic aid to Latin America.
Much–if not most–of these billions of dollars has wound up in the pockets of various right-wing dictators, such as Anastasio Somoza and Rafael Trujillo.
Meanwhile, Kennedy was urging action on another front–that of outer space.
“This generation does not intend to founder in the backwash of the coming age of space,” declared the President. He committed the United States to putting a man on the moon by the end of the decade.
As indeed it happened less than six years after his death–on July 20, 1969.
Kennedy’s idealistic rhetoric masked his real reason for going to the moon: To score a propaganda victory over the Soviet Union.
Another of his anti-Communist goals: To remove Fidel Castro from power in Cuba at almost any cost.

Fidel Castro
Immediately after the failed Bay of Pigs invasion, Kennedy appointed his brother, Robert–who was then the Attorney General–to oversee a CIA program to overthrow Castro.
The CIA and the Mafia entered into an unholy alliance to assassinate Castro–each for its own benefit:
- The CIA wanted to please Kennedy by overthrowing the Communist leader who had nationalized American corporate holdings.
- The Mafia wanted to regain its lucrative casino and brothel holdings that had made Cuba the playground of the rich in pre-Castro times.
The mobsters were authorized to offer $150,000 to anyone who would kill Castro and were promised any support the Agency could yield.
“We were hysterical about Castro at about the time of the Bay of Pigs and thereafter,” then-former Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara testified before Congress about these efforts. “And there was pressure from JFK and RFK to do something about Castro.”
Nor was everyone in the CIA enthusiastic about the “get Castro” effort.
“Everyone at CIA was surprised at Kennedy’s obsession with Fidel,” recalled Sam Halpern, who was assigned to the Cuba Project. “They thought it was a waste of time. We all knew [Fidel] couldn’t hurt us. Most of us at CIA initially liked Kennedy, but why go after this little guy?
“One thing is for sure: Kennedy wasn’t doing it out of national security concerns. It was a personal thing. The Kennedy family felt personally burnt by the Bay of Pigs and sought revenge.”
It was all-out war. Among the tactics used:
- Hiring Cuban gangsters to murder Cuban police officials and Soviet technicians.
- Sabotaging mines.
- Paying up to $100,000 per “hit” for the murder or kidnapping of Cuban officials.
- Using biological and chemical warfare against the Cuban sugar industry.
- Planting colorful seashells rigged to explode at a site where Castro liked to go skindiving.
- Trying to arrange for his being presented with a wetsuit impregnated with noxious bacteria and mold spores, or with lethal chemical agents.
- Attempting to infect Castro’s scuba regulator with tuberculous bacilli.
- Trying to douse his handkerchiefs, cigars, tea and coffee with other lethal bacteria.
But all of these efforts failed to assassinate Castro–or overthrow the Cuban Revolution he was heading.
“Bobby (Kennedy) wanted boom and bang all over the island,” recalled Halpern. “It was stupid. The pressure from the White House was very great.”
Americans would rightly label such methods as ”terrorist” if another power used them against the United States today. And the Cuban government saw the situation exactly the same way.
So Castro appealed to Nikita Khrushchev, leader of the Soviet Union, for assistance.
Khrushchev was quick to comply: “We must not allow the communist infant to be strangled in its crib,” he told members of his inncer circle.
BAY OF PIGS, BERLIN WALL, BILL CLINTON, BRUCE GREENWOOD, CARLOS MARCELLO, CIA, CIVIL RIGHTS, CLIFF ROBERTSON, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DAVID HALBERSTAM, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIDEL CASTRO, FRANK SINATRA, ICH BEN EIN BERLINNER SPEECH, INTERNET MOVIE DATABASE, J. EDGAR HOOVER, JAMES MARSDEN, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MAFIA, MALCOM X, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MARTIN SHEEN, MOVIES, NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV, NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY, PT-109, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, ROBERT S. MCNAMARA, SAM GIANCANA, SANTOS TRAFFICANTE, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, SOVIET UNION, THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST, THE BUTLER, THE MISSILES OF OCTOBER, THE RAT PACK, THIRTEEN DAYS, TWILIGHT ZONE, TWITTER, VIETNAM WAR, WILLIAM DEVANE, WILLIAM PETERSEN
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on November 11, 2013 at 12:05 am
November 22, 2013, will mark the 50th anniversary of the assassination of President John Fitzgerald Kennedy.
It’s one of those infamous dates that its eyewitnesses will never forget, in a class with
- December 7, 1941 (Pearl Harbor),
- April 12, 1945 (the death of President Franklin D. Roosevelt and
- September 11, 2001 (Al Qaeda’s attacks on the Pentagon and World Trade Center).
Some have called the Kennedy adminsitration a golden era in American history.

A time when touch football, lively White House parties, stimulus to the arts and the antics of the President’s children became national obsessions.
Others have called the Kennedy Presidency a monument to the unchecked power of wealth and ambition. An administration staffed by young novices playing at statesmen, riddled with nepotism, and whose legacy includes the Bay of Pigs, the Vietnam war and the world’s first nuclear confrontation.
While Americans continue to disagree about the legacy of JFK, there is no disagreement that his Presidency came to a sudden and shocking end just two years, ten months and two days after it had all begun.
The opening days of the Kennedy Presidency raised hopes for a dramatic change in relations between the United States and the Soviet Union.
But detente was not possible then. The Russians had not yet experienced their coming agricultural problems and the setback in Cuba during the Missile Crisis. And the United States had not suffered defeat in Vietnam.
Kennedy’s first brush with international Communism came on April 17, 1961, with the invasion of Cuba at the Bay of Pigs. This operation had been planned and directed by the Central Intelligence Agency during the final months of Dwight D. Eisenhower’s term as President.
The U.S. Navy was to land about 1,400 Cuban exiles on the island to overthrow the Communist government of Fidel Castro. They were supposed to head into the mountains–as Castro himself had done against the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista in 1956–and raise the cry of revolution.
The invasion would occur after an American air strike had knocked out the Cuban air force. But the airstrike failed and Kennedy, under the pressure of world opinion, called off a second try.
Even so, the invasion went ahead. When the invaders surged onto the beaches, they found Castro’s army waiting for them. Many of the invaders were killed on the spot. Others were captured–to be ransomed by the United States in December, 1962, in return for medical supplies.
It was a major public relations setback for the newly-installed Kennedy administration, which has raised hopes for a change in American-Soviet relations.
Kennedy, trying to abort widespread criticism, publicly took the blame for the setback: “There’s an old saying that victory has a hundred fathers and defeat is an orphan….I’m the responsible officer of the Government.”
The Bay of Pigs convinced Kennedy that he had been misled by the CIA and the Joint Chieifs of Staff. Out of this came his decision to rely heavily on the counsel of his brother, Robert, whom he had installed as Attorney General.
The failed Cuban invasion–unfortunately for Kennedy–convinced Soviet Premier Nikita S. Khrushchev that the President was weak.
Khrushchev told an associate that he could understand if Kennedy had not decided to invade Cuba. But once he did, Kennedy should have gone all the way and wiped out Castro.
Khrushchev attributed this to Kennedy’s youth, inexperience and timidity–and believed he could bully the President.
On June 4, 1961, Kennedy met with Khrushchev in Vienna to discuss world tensions. Khrushchev threatened to go to nuclear war over the American presence in West Berlin–the dividing line between Western Europe, protected by the United States, and Eastern Europe, controlled by the Soviet Union.
Kennedy, who prized rationality above all else, was shaken by Knhrushchev’s unexpected rage. Emerging from the conference, he told an associate: “It’s going to be a cold winter.”
Meanwhile, East Berliners felt the door was about to slam on their access to West Berlin, and a flood of 3,000 refugees daily poured into West Germany.
Khrushchev was clearly embarrassed at this clear showing of the unpopularity of the Communist regime. In August, he orderd that a concrete wall–backed up by barbed wire, searchlights and armed guards–be erected to seal off East Berlin.
That same year, when tensions mounted and a Soviet invasion of West Berlin seemed likely, Kennedy sent additional troops to the city in a massive demonstration of American will.
Two years later, on June 26, 1963, during a 10-day tour of Europe, Kennedy visited Berlin to deliver his “I am a Berlinner” speech to a frenzied crowd of thousands.

JFK adddresses crowds at the Berlin Wall
“There are many people in the world who really don’t understand, or say they don’t, what is the great issue between the free world and the Communist world,” orated Kennedy. “Let them come to Berlin.”
Standing within gunshot of the Berlin wall, he lashed out at the Soviet Union and praised the citizens of West Berlin for being “on the front lines of freedom” for more than 20 years.
“All free men, wherever they may live,” said Kennedy, “are citizens of Berlin. And therefore, as a free man, I take pride in the words, ‘Ich ben ein Berlinner.'”
2012 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ALEXANDER THE GREAT, ANITA PERRY, ANN ROMNEY, BARACK OBAMA, CBS NEWS, CNN, FACEBOOK, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, PLUTARCH, RICK PERRY, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In History, Politics on November 8, 2013 at 12:09 am
On September 20, 2012, Ann Romney appeared on Radio Iowa to help her husband, Mitt, carry the state.
Many Republicans feared that Romney had forfeited his chance for victory in November. His videotaped comments to wealthy donors–in which he dismissed “47%” of Americans as non-tax-paying government dependents–had drawn criticism from both Republicans and Democrats.
So when the interviewer asked Ann to respond to Mitt’s Republican critics, she was ready.
“Stop it. This is hard,” she said, in a tone that sounded like an angry mother defending her son’s slipping grades at a PTA meeting.

Mitt and Ann Romney
“You want to try it? Get in the ring. This is hard and, you know, it’s an important thing that we’re doing right now, and it’s an important election.”
Then she aimed her ire at those Americans who hadn’t yet accepted her husband as the Coming Messiah.
“And it is time for all Americans to realize how significant this election is and how lucky we are to have someone with Mitt’s qualifications and experience and know-how to be able to have the opportunity to run this country.”
Click here: Ann Romney defends Mitt – Anderson Cooper 360 – CNN.com Blogs
Maybe Ann simply felt her husband deserved uncritical loyalty from his fellow Republicans. Or maybe she felt mounting dismay at seeing her chances of becoming First Lady going down the toilet.
After all, on April 16, she and Mitt had given a joint interview to ABC News that pulsed with hubris.
Asked if he had anything to say to President Barack Obama, Mitt replied: “Start packing.” As if the most powerful leader of the Western World should snap to attention at Mitt’s command.
And Ann gushed: “I believe it’s Mitt’s time. I believe the country needs the kind of leadership he’s going to offer… So I think it’s our turn now.”
Click here: Mitt Romney Tells President Obama to ‘Start Packing’ | Video – ABC News
So now, after a series of potentially fatal gaffes by her husband, it may be that Ann feared it wasn’t their turn after all.
During a May 17 private fund-raising event, Mitt Romney addressed a roomful of wealthy donors. Toward the end of his remarks he scorned “entitlements” for those Americans who didn’t belong to the privileged class:
“Well, there are 47% of the people who will vote for the president no matter what….
“Who are dependent upon government, who believe that they are victims, who believe that government has a responsibility to care for them, who believe that they’re entitled to healthcare, to food, to housing, to you name it.”
But the Romneys aren’t the only members of the pampered set to feel entitled to holding the most powerful office in the world.
Earlier in 2012, Anita Perry, the wife of Rick Perry–Texas Governor and Presidential candidate–had indulged in her own moment of self-pity.

Rick and Anita Perry
She said she knew what it was like to be unemployed–because her son had resigned from his job at Deutsche Bank to campaign for his father.
“He resigned from his job two weeks ago because he can’t go out and campaign with his father because of SEC regulations,” she said in a Pendleton, S.C. diner on October 14, 2011.
“My son lost his job because of this administration,” she added.
But only a day earlier, Anita Perry had said that her son had eagerly resigned to help his father run for President.
“So, our son Griffin Perry is 28. He loves politics, and he just couldn’t wait. He said ‘Dad, I’m in! I’m in! I’ll do whatever you need me to do. I’ll resign my job. I’ll do what you need me to do,‘” recalled Anita Perry.
There is a difference between voluntarily resigning from a job and being involuntarily terminated from it.
Nor was the voluntary resignation of her son Anita Perry’s only complaint.
“We are being brutalized by our opponents, and our own party,” she had told a South Carolina audience on October 13, 2011. “So much of that is, I think they look at [Rick] because of his faith.
“He is the only true conservative–well, there are some true conservatives. And they’re there for good reasons. And they may feel like God called them, too. But I truly feel like we are here for that purpose.”
Perhaps the final word on the revealed character of these entitled would-be rulers belongs to Plutarch (c. 46 – 120 AD), a Greek historian and biographer. In the foreward to his biography of Alexander the Great, he wrote:
And the most glorious exploits do not always furnish us with the clearest discoveries of virtue or vice in men; sometimes a matter of less moment, an expression or a jest, informs us better of their characters and inclinations, than the most famous sieges, the greatest armaments, or the bloodiest battles whatsoever.
It is well to remember such truths when assessing the characters of our own would-be Alexanders–and those who would be their queens.
ABC NEWS, ABRAHAM LINCOLN, ALAMO, CENSORSHIP, CHRISTIAN RIGHT, CIVIL WAR, CNN, COUNTDOWN, DAVY CROCKETT, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, GEORGE ORWELL, GETTYSBURG ADDRESS, HISPANICS, HISTORY, JEFFERSON DAVIS, JIM BOWIE, JOSEPH STALIN, LAVRENTI BERIA, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MSNBC, RACHEL MADDOW, RELIGION, SCHOOLS, SLAVERY, SOVIET UNION, TEXAS, TEXTBOOKS, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, THOMAS JEFFERSON, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics on November 7, 2013 at 12:16 am
“The problem with writing about history in the Soviet Union,” went the joke, “is that you never know what’s going to happen yesterday.”
The same can now be said about writing history under the new guidelines of the Texas Board of Education.

The changes to the state’s history textbooks were opposed by historians and civil rights leaders. The new curriculum presents history from a right-wing perspective and de-emphasizes the role of blacks, Hispanics and other minority groups.
The board’s decision will affect students living outside Texas because of the state’s major impact on the nation’s textbook publishers.
Because the Texas textbook market is so large, books assigned to the state’s 4.7 million students often become bestsellers, decreasing costs for other school districts and leading them to buy the same materials.
“The books that are altered to fit the standards become the bestselling books, and therefore within the next two years they’ll end up in other classrooms,” said Fritz Fischer, chairman of the National Council for History Education, a group devoted to history teaching at the pre-college level.
“It’s not a partisan issue, it’s a good history issue.”
The new version of history given Texas students will:
- Celebrate the free market;
- Minimize the role of labor movements; and
- Give greater prominence to conservative figures like Phyllis Schlafly.
Additional changes will include:
- Students will now study Confederate President Jefferson Davis’ inaugural address alongside President Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address.
- Upton Sinclair’s book The Jungle, which documented the horrors of working conditions in the meatpacking industry and led to calls for greater regulation, has been removed from the list of suggested readings.
- The Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.’s “Letter From a Birmingham Jail,” has also been removed.
- Thomas Jefferson’s name has been removed from a list of the country’s great thinkers because he advocated the separation of church and state.
- In a sop to the Christian Right, references have been added to “laws of nature and nature’s God” to a section in U.S. history that requires students to explain major political ideas.
- The word “democratic” has been removed in references to the form of U.S. government, and this will now be described as a “constitutional republic.”
- A reference to the Second Amendment right to bear arms has been added to a section about citizenship in a U.S. government class.
- Economics students will be required to “analyze the decline of the U.S. dollar including abandonment of the gold standard.”
- The names or references to important Hispanics throughout history also were deleted, such as the fact that Tejanos died at the Alamo alongside Davy Crockett and Jim Bowie.
- All references to “capitalism” have been replaced with “free enterprise.”
- U.S. “imperialism” no longer exists; there is only “U.S. expansionism.” Only the Europeans are guilty of “imperialism,” just as only the Soviets committed “aggression.”
- In a rare setback for the radical Right, the slave trade will not be renamed the “Atlantic triangular trade.”
At one time, Americans believed that such wholesale rewriting of history could happen only in the Soviet Union. A classic example of this occurred in 1953, within the Great Soviet Encyclopedia.
Lavrenti Beria had been head of the NKVD, the dreaded secret police, from 1938 to 1953. In 1953, following the death of Joseph Stalin, Beria was arrested and executed on orders of his fellow Communist Party leaders.

Lavrenti Beria
But the Great Soviet Encyclopedia had just gone to press with a long article singing Beria’s praises.
What to do?
The editors of the Encyclopedia wrote an equally long article about “the Berring Straits,” which was to be pasted over the article about Beria, and sent this off to its subscribers. An unknown number of them decided it was safer to paste accordingly.
In the 1981 film, “Excalibur,” Merlin warns the newly-minted knights of the Round Table: “For it is the doom of men that they forget.”
Forgetting our past is dangerous, but so is “understanding” it incorrectly. Deliberately omitting events and persons from the historical record–such as Thomas Jefferson and Martin Luther King–can be as lethal to the truth as outright lying.
Stalin, for example, ordered the deletion of all references to the major role played by Leon Trotsky, his arch-rival for power, during the Russian Revolution.
Similarly, requiring students to study Confederate President Jefferson Davis’ inaugural address alongside President Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address should be seen for what it is: A thinly-veiled attempt to legitimize the most massive case of treason in United States history.
(The Civil War started on April 12, 1861, when Confederate artillery opened fire on Fort Sumter, a United States fort in Charleston Harbor. Fort Sumter surrendered 34 hours later.
(At least 800,000 Southerners took up arms against the legally elected government of the United States.)
The late broadcast journalist, Edward R. Murrow, would have referred to this as “giving Jesus and Judas equal time.”
All of which simply proves, once again, that the past is never truly dead. It simply waits to be re-interpreted by each new generation–with some interpretations winding up closer to the truth than others.
ABC NEWS, ANCIENT ROME, BANKS, BARACK OBAMA, BUSINESS, CBS NEWS, CEOS, CNN, DODD-FRANK ACT, FACEBOOK, JONATHAN ALTER, JULIUS CAESAR, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, TEA PARTY, THE CENTER HOLDS: OBAMA AND HIS ENEMIES, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER
In Bureaucracy, Business, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 29, 2013 at 12:58 pm
Why do so many CEOs hate President Barack Obama?
It isn’t because they’re being over-taxed and -regulated,d as so many on the Right would have you believe.
According to a January 16, 2013 story published in Bloomberg:
- U.S. corporations’ after-tax profits have grown by 171% under Obama.
- This is more than has existed under any President since World War II.
- Corporate profits are now at their highest level, relative to the economy, since the government began keeping records in 1947.
- Profits are more than twice as high than during Ronald Reagan’s Presidency.
- They are more than 50% greater than during the late-1990s Internet boom.
Click here: Corporate Profits Soar as Executives Attack Obama Policy – Bloomberg
So if money isn’t the issue, what is?
In a word: Ego.
Jonathan Alter, author of The Center Holds: Obama and His Enemies, provides some eye-opening insights into relations between the President and business leaders.

He notes, for example, that even before taking office as President in 2009, Obama pushed through Congress the second $350 billion portion of the $700 billion Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP)
And he stablilized the almost-wrecked American financial system with stress tests and regulatory reforms.
So Obama believed that business CEOs would be grateful for his efforts on their behalf.
And what did the President get in return?
- The rise of the Tea Party, angered by government bailouts to mega-corporations–and the subsequent loss of a Democratic House of Representatives; and
- Ingratitude and resentment from the very CEOs whose corporations he had saved.
CEOs visiting the White House often believed the President didn’t take them seriously.
For example, many of them wanted a tax amnesty on their overseas earnings. And Obama would ask: How will the government make up for the lost Treasury revenues that would come from such a huge tax break?
Many CEOs thought he was not taking them seriously.
Obama was in fact being serious, and was hoping that his greed-obsessed visitors would help him find an answer that would satisfy both parties.
What the President apparently didn’t understand was this: Most CEOs weren’t used to being dealt with on an equal basis.
They were used to people cowering before them, or instantly agreeing with anything they said.
For Obama, who had taught Constitutional law at the University of Chicago from 1992 to 2004, such intellectual querys were routine. He had enjoyed the cut-and-thrust of such exchanges with his law students.
But his law students had not been billionaires with billionaire-sized egos.
One Wall Street CEO charged that Obama regarded intellectuals as a cut above political operatives–and two cuts above businessmen.
As Alter writes: “Being worth a billion dollars wasn’t going to get the President…to believe that your insights were better than anyone else’s.”
Obama was angered that many CEOs felt that nothing should change–even after the excesses of greed-fueled banks almost destroyed the nation’s economy in 2008.
Thus, bank CEOs had furiously opposed the Dodd-Frank bank re-regulations that had been imposed to prevent a recurrence of such abuses.
Obama felt that bankers were ungrateful for his pushing through the second part of the TARP program that had saved their corporations from the CEOs’ own self-destructive greed.
As Alter sums up: “The complex psychology of business confidence was only partly about their tax rates and the threat of regulation; the real problem was personal.
“They [businessmen] had an intuitive sense that Obama didn’t particularly like them, and they responded in kind.”
These are not the kinds of insights you’ll get by reading the highly sanitized bios of corporate chieftains.
As a result, during the 2012 Presidential race, Mitt Romney received nearly $150 million, or more than 15% of his total money raised, from New York. Which meant mostly from Wall Street.
“We got a lot of Barack Obama’s Wall Street money,” said Spencer Zwick, Romney’s finance director, after the campaign.
A passage from Finley Hooper’s classic Roman Realities puts an ancient-world spin on Obama’s relations with wealthy businessmen.
Assessing the reasons for why so many patricians hated Julius Caesar, Hooper writes:
“Caesar…like a teacher, seemed always to be directing affairs in a world of children–chiding one, patting another–yet too far above them all to care about hurting any.
“To less gifted men, however, his aloofness, even if mixed with kindness, was thought to be patronizing. They could not believe that in his heart he really cared about them.
“Caesar never bothered to ask for another man’s opinion. He lacked the tact by which a talented person might reasure others that they have worth, too.
“Pardons, jobs or favors did not completely satisfy the recipients’ craving for attention….
“Caesar…was a supreme egotist wrapped up in his own sense of well-being and good service to the state.
“…For all his experience and sophistication, he had never learned how ungrateful men can be–especially those who feel ignored.”
It has been President Obama’s bad luck–like that of Julius Caesar– to find himself at odds with powerful men whose profits he has greatly expanded.
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ANN COULTER, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, EDWARD R. MURROW, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE W. BUSH, GLENN BECK, HARRY S. TRUMAN, IRVING WALLACE, JOHN MCCAIN, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, NBC NEWS, NEWT GINGRICH, OSAMA BIN LADEN, REPUBLICANS, RICHARD NIXON, RUSH LIMBAUGH, Sarah Palin, SEAN HANNITY, SPIRO AGNEW, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TREASON
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 28, 2013 at 12:00 am
In 1964, bestselling novelist Irving Wallace dared to imagine the then-unthinkable: The elevation of the first black President of the United States.
Wallace’s hero is Douglas Dilman, a moderate who tries to rule as a color-blind President. But he is repeatedly confronted with the brutal truth about himself–and his critics: He is black, and they cannot forgive him for it.

Irving Wallace
Dilman’s fictional Presidency is marked by white racists, black political activists, and an attempted assassination. Later, he is impeached on false charges for firing the racist Secretary of State.
Wallace’s1964 novel, The Man, appeared 44 years before Barack Obama’s election.
Fast-forward to the Presidency of Barack Obama and you find:
- In September, 2009, Joe Wilson (R-SC) yelled “You lie!” during Obama’s health care speech to Congress.
- In January, 2010, an effigy of President Barack Obama was found hanging from a building in Plains, Georgia.
- In December, 2011, Brent Bozell, who runs the right-wing Media Research Center, called Obama to “a skinny, ghetto crackhead.”
- In December, 2011, Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner (R-Wisc.), said of Michelle Obama: “She lectures us on eating right while she has a large posterior herself.”
- In January, 2012, Mitt Romney’s son, Matt, said his father might release his tax returns “as soon as President Obama releases his grades and birth certificate and sort of a long list of things.”
- In February, 2012, right-wing columnist Ann Coulter offered: “Voters with forty years of politically correct education are ecstatic to have the first Black president. They just love the idea even if we did get Flavor Flav instead of Thomas Sowell.”
- In May, 2012, a flatbed truck drove through new York holding a trailer with eight mannequin-like bodies hanging on nooses. One of the figures resembled President Obama, with a sign on the truck reading: “Obama Is Onboard, Find Out Why. Visit YouTube.com And Search Keyword PatriotPhipps.”

- In May, 2012, Patrick Lanzo, a bar owner in Paulding County, Georgia, posted a sign reading: “I do not support the nigger in the White House.” In 2009 he posted a sign that read, “Obama’s plan for health-care: nigger rig it.” Lanzo advertises his establishment as a “Klan bar.”
- Throughout the 2012 Presidential campaign, Newt Gingrich repeatedly called Obama “the greatest food stamp President in American history.”
- Obama has been portrayed as a shoeshine man, an Islamic terrorist and a chimp. The image of his altered face has been shown on a product called Obama Waffles in the manner of Aunt Jemima and Uncle Ben. He has been repeatedly depicted with a Hitler forelock and mustache.
- Among the protest signs they have brandished by Tea Party members: “Obama’s Plan: White Slavery,” “The American Taxpayers are the Jews for Obama’s Ovens,” and “Obama was Not Bowing [to the Saudi King] He was Sucking Saudi Jewels.”
- Other Tea Party posters: “Imam Obama Wants to Ban Pork” and “The Zoo Has An African Lion, and the White House Has a Lyin’ African.”
- Tea Partiers have chanted at Obama: “Bye, bye, Blackbird” and “Kenyan go home!”
- During the Republican-imposed government shutdown–October 1-17, 2013–Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas) told Obama: “I cannot even stand to look at you,” The incident occurred when Obama met with lawmakers to try to find a resolution to the shutdown.
- On October 13, 2013, anti-Obama protesters gathered at the World War II memorial in Washington, D.C. They weren’t protesting the government shutdown but the President who refused to cave in to Republican demands to de-fund the Affordable Care Act.
- One speaker was Larry Klayman of Freedom Watch, a Right-wing advocacy group. Said Klayman: “I call upon all of you to wage a second American nonviolent revolution, to use civil disobedience, and to demand that this president leave town, to get up, to put the Quran down, to get up off his knees, and to figuratively come out with his hands up,”
- On October 14, 2013, while Republicans were threatening to drive the country into bankruptcy by refusing to raise the debt ceiling, Sarah Palin posted on Facebook her “secret plan” to impeach President Obama:
- “It’s time for the president to be honest with the American people for a change. Defaulting on our national debt is an impeachable offense, and any attempt by President Obama to unilaterally raise the debt limit without Congress is also an impeachable offense.”
- In short: If the Republicans force the country into default, Obama should be impeached. And if the President finds a way to avoid default, he should be impeached.
- In October, 2013, Rep. Doug Lamborn (R-Colorado) said that being associated with President Obama would be similar to touching a “tar baby.” Specifically:
- “Even if some people say, well the Republicans should have done this or they should have done that, they will hold the president responsible. Now I don’t want to even have to be associated with him. It’s like touching a tar baby and you get, you get it, you know… you are stuck and you are part of the problem now and you can’t get away.”
Perhaps Irving Wallace believed that, by the millennium, America would be ready for a black President. If so, he sadly proved a far better author than prophet.
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANN COULTER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE W. BUSH, GLENN BECK, HARRY S. TRUMAN, IRVING WALLACE, JOHN MCCAIN, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SPIRO AGNEW, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 25, 2013 at 12:00 am
On March 9, 1954, Edward R. Murrow, the most respected broadcast journalist in America, assailed the “smear-and-fear” tactics of Wisconsin Republican Senator Joseph McCarthy.
The forum was Murrow’s highly-rated documentary series, “See It Now.” The truth of Murrow’s remarks has outlasted the briefness of that 30-minute program.
They could have been applied to the “lie and deny” methods of the Presidency of Richard M. Nixon.
And to the Red-baiting attacks made by Republicans against President Bill Clinton.
And to the ongoing character assaults made by right-wingers against President Barack Obama.
“We must not confuse dissent with disloyalty,” warned Murrow in that broadcast. “We must remember always that accusation is not proof and that conviction depends upon evidence and due process of law.

Edward R. Murrow
“We will not walk in fear, one of another. We will not be driven by fear into an age of unreason, if we dig deep in our history and our doctrine, and remember that we are not descended from fearful men—not from men who feared to write, to speak, to associate and to defend causes that were, for the moment, unpopular….
“We can deny our heritage and our history, but we cannot escape responsibility for the result. There is no way for a citizen of a republic to abdicate his responsibilities….
“We proclaim ourselves, as indeed we are, the defenders of freedom, wherever it continues to exist in the world. But we cannot defend freedom abroad by deserting it at home….
“Cassius was right. ‘The fault, dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves.’”
After Obama announced the death of Osama Bin Laden, most of the Republican slander-peddlers momentarily fell silent.
Still, the legacy of hate and fear-mongering goes on.
There is a good reason for this: Republicans have found, repeatedly, that attacking the patriotism of their opponents is an effective vote-getter:
- It hurtled Dwight Eisenhower into the White House and Republicans into Congress in 1952 and 1956.
- It elected Richard Nixon President in 1968 and 1972.
- It gave control of the White House to Ronald Reagan in 1980 and 1984.
- It gave it to George H.W. Bush in 1988.
- And even though Bill Clinton won the Presidency in 1992, it gave Republicans control of the Congress in 1994.
- It gave the White House to George W. Bush in 2000 and 2004.
- It gave control of the House to Republicans in 2010, thus undermining the financial and healthcare reforms planned by Obama.
And since the 2008 election of Barack Obama as President, Republicans have coupled their traditional “Treason!” slander with both subtle and outright appeals to racism.
Most Republicans refuse to acknowledge this, but author Will Bunch has not been so reticent. In his 2010 book, The Backlash, he writes:
“…The year that had [conservatives] so terrified was 2050. In that year, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, the U.S. population would grow to some 399 million people–but only 49.8% would be white….”

This was given added weight by the 2008 election of Barack Obama:
“The Democratic upstart–and his legion of supporters among the nonwhite as well as the young–was a 9/11-sized jolt to the white masses already so worried about the cultural implications of immigration.
“The year 2050 suddenly wasn’t two generations away but right here knocking on the front door, with a dark face and that scary name: Barack Hussein Obama.
“Like a fire spreading across dry sagebrush, it took no effort for fear of The Other to leap from the Mexicans in front of the Wal-Mart to the man now inside the Oval Office.”
An author who predicted this very scenario was the best-selling novelist, Irving Wallace.
His 1964 novel, The Man, positing the ascent of the first black President, appeared 44 years before Obama’s election.
The plot: The President and Speaker of the House are killed in an overseas building collapse, and the Vice-President declines the office due to age and ill-health. As a result, Senate President pro tempore Douglas Dilman suddenly becomes the first black man to occupy the Oval Office.
His Presidency is marked by white racists, black political activists, and an attempted assassination. Later, he is impeached on false charges for firing the racist Secretary of State.

A moderate by nature, Dilman tries to rule as a color-blind President. But he is repeatedly confronted with the brutal truth about himself–and his critics: He is black, and they cannot forgive him for it.
Southern Senator Watson, upon learning that Dilman has succeeded to the Presidency, says: “The White House isn’t going to be white enough from now on.”
And Kay Eaton, who lusts for her husband, the Secretary of State, to become President, blames him for not pushing hard enough for it: “You’re just a kingmaker to a jigaboo.”
2008 PRESIDENTIAL RACE, ABC NEWS, ALTERNET, ANN COULTER, AP, BARACK OBAMA, BILL CLINTON, BUZZFEED, CBS NEWS, CNN, COMMUNISM, CROOKS AND LIARS, DAILY KOZ, EDWARD R. MURROW, FACEBOOK, FRANKLIN D. ROOSEVELT, GEORGE W. BUSH, GLENN BECK, HARRY S. TRUMAN, JOHN MCCAIN, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, MICHELLE BACHMANN, MITT ROMNEY, MOTHER JONES, MOVEON, NBC NEWS, NEWSWEEK, NEWT GINGRICH, NPR, OSAMA BIN LADEN, POLITICO, RAW STORY, REPUBLICANS, REUTERS, RICHARD NIXON, RUSH LIMBAUGH, SALON, Sarah Palin, SEAN HANNITY, SEATTLE TIMES, SLATE, SPIRO AGNEW, THE ATLANTIC, THE CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, THE CHICAGO TRIBUNE, THE DAILY BEAST, THE GUARDIAN, THE HILL, THE HUFFINGTON POST, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NATION, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TIME, TREASON, TWITTER, U.S. NEWS & WORLD REPORT, UPI, USA TODAY
In Bureaucracy, History, Politics, Social commentary on October 24, 2013 at 1:50 am
On May 7, 2012, GOP Presidential candidate Mitt Romney attended a town-hall meeting in Euclid, Ohio.
“We have a president right now who is operating outside the construction of our Constitution,” a female attendee told Romney.
As the audience applauded, she continued: “And I do agree he should be tried for treason.
“But I wanna know what you are going to be able to do to help restore balance between the three branches of government and what you’re going to be able to do to restore our Constitution in this country?”
Unlike John McCain, who in 2008 memorably corrected a woman who declared Obama was “an Arab,” Romney didn’t issue such a correction. Instead, he chose to simply address the question.
Since the end of World War 11, Republicans have regularly hurled the charge of “treason” against anyone who dared to run against them for office or think other than Republican-sponsored thoughts.
Republicans had been locked out of the White House from 1933 to 1952, during the administrations of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Harry S. Truman.
Determined to regain the Presidency by any means, they found that attacking the integrity of their fellow Americans a highly effective tactic.
During the 1950s, Wisconsin Senator Joseph R. McCarthy rode a wave of paranoia to national prominence. On February 9, 1950, he claimed:
“The State Department is infested with communists. I have here in my hand a list of 205—a list of names that were made known to the Secretary of State as being members of the Communist Party and who nevertheless are still working and shaping policy in the State Department.”

Joseph McCarthy
After four years of such frenzied attacks on Congress, the State Department and respected journalists such as Edward R. Murrow, McCarthy finally overstepped himself. He accused the United States Army of being an active hotbed for Communists.
At the Army-McCarthy hearings, McCarthy’s credibility was forever destroyed. He was finally censured by his fellow Senators and disappeared into anonymity, alcoholism and death in 1957.
The fact that McCarthy never uncovered one actual case of treason was conveniently overlooked during his lifetime.
And today, right-wing columnists like Ann Coulter try to rehabilitate his memory–just as right-wingers in Russia still try to rehabilitate the memory of Soviet dictator Joseph Stalin.
Nevertheless, the success of McCarthy’s treason-charged rhetoric proved too alluring for other Republicans to resist. Among those who have greatly profited from hurling similar charges are:
- President Richard Nixon
- His vice president, Spiro Agnew
- Former Speaker of the House Newt Gingrich
- Former Congressman Dick Armey
- President George W. Bush
- Vice Presidential candidate Sarah Palin
- Congresswoman Michelle Bachmann
- Rush Limbaugh
- Glenn Beck
- Sean Hannity
- Bill O’Reilly.
The election of Barack Obama pushed the “treason chorus” to new heights of infamy. With no political scandal (such as Bill Clinton’s affair with Monica Lewinsky) to fasten on, the bureaucracy of the Republican Party deliberately promoted the slander that Obama was not an American citizen.
From this there could be only one conclusion: That he was an illegitimate President, and should be removed from office.
During the 2008 Presidential campaign, Republicans charged that Obama was really a Muslim non-citizen who intended to sell out America’s security to his Muslim “masters.”
And this smear campaign continued throughout his Presidency.
To the dismay of his enemies, Obama–in the course of a single week–dramatically proved the falsity of both charges.
On April 27, 2011, he released the long-form of his Hawaii birth certificate.

The long-form version of President Obama’s birth certificate
“We do not have time for this kind of silliness,” said Obama at a press conference, speaking as a father might to a roomful of spiteful children. “We have better stuff to do. I have got better stuff to do. We have got big problems to solve.
“We are not going to be able to do it if we are distracted, we are not going to be able to do it if we spend time vilifying each other…if we just make stuff up and pretend that facts are not facts, we are not going to be able to solve our problems if we get distracted by side shows and carnival barkers.”
And on May 1, he announced the solving of one of those “big problems”: Osama bin Laden, mastermind of the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, had been tracked down and shot dead by elite U.S. Navy SEALS in Pakistan.
Of course, Obama was only the latest Democratic President to be attacked as “unpatriotic.”
For more than a half-century, Republicans have accused their Democratic opponents of treason to gain and retain political power in America.
ABC NEWS, ADOLF HITLER, AFFORDABLE CARE ACT, BARACK OBAMA, BBC, CBS NEWS, CNN, ENGLAND, FACEBOOK, GOVERNMENT SHUTDOWN, JOHN BOEHNER, NAZI GERMANY, NBC NEWS, OBAMACARE, REPUBLICANS, THE LOS ANGELES TIMES, THE NEW YORK TIMES, THE WASHINGTON POST, TWITTER, WINSTON CHURCHILL, WORLD WAR ii
In History, Military, Politics on October 21, 2013 at 10:21 pm
On October 1, Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) said President Barack Obama told Congressional leaders at a White House meeting that “he will not negotiate.”
Boehner accused Democrats of being unwilling to negotiate key elements of the Affordable Care Act–in return for Republican agreement on a spending bill.
The Republicans were seeking–for now–a one-year delay in the rolling out of “Obamacare.”
Obama, in turn, said that he would not submit to Republican “extortion” and “blackmail.”
He said that the House should pass a “clean” spending bill–one without conditions–that met America’s obligations to its citizens and creditors. Only then would be be willing to discuss possible changes in “Obamacare.”
Republicans countered with slogans such as: “If Obama will negotiate with [Russian President] Vladimir Putin, why won’t he negotiate with Congress?”
Seventy-three years ago, another democratic leader found himself accused of being unreasonable and unwilling to negotiate.
That leader was British Prime Minister Winston Churchill. And those accusing him were among the most powerful men in the Third Reich.

Winston Churchill
This was not a favorable time for Britain.
On September 1, 1939, Adolf Hitler had ordered his Whermacht (army) to invade Poland. In six weeks, Polish resistance vanished and Poland became the first of a series of Nazi vassal-states.
Then, on May 10, 1940, after waiting out the winter, Hitler’s army quickly overran Norway and Denmark.
And then it was the turn of France.
In six weeks, the German army accomplished what it couldn’t during the four years of World War 1. It bypassed the heavily defended Maginot Line and destroyed one French army after another.
The defeated French were forced to sign the armistice in the same railway car they had used in 1918 when they forced Germany to surrender after World War 1.
Although the British had committed their air force and army to defending France, both had been easily swept aside by the Wehrmact and Luftwaffe (air force).
Driven almost literally into the sea, the British evacuated about 338,226 men from the port of Dunkirk. It was a miracle made possible by Hitler’s unexplained halt of the German advance and the arrival of a fleet of civilian and naval vessels from England.
“The battle of France is over,” Churchill warned his countrymen. “The battle of Britain is about to begin.”
But not before Hitler offered his own version of “peace with honor.”
On July 19, the Fuehrer addressed the Reichstag, Germany’s rubber-stamp parliament:
“From Britain I now hear only a single cry–not of the people but of the politicians–that the war must go on….

Hitler addressing the Reichstag
“Mr. Churchill ought, for once, to believe me when I prophesy that a great Empire will be destroyed–an Empire which it was never my intention to destroy or even to harm.
“In this hour I feel it to be my duty before my own conscience to appeal once more to reason and common sense in Great Britain as well as elsewhere.
“I consider myself in a position to make this appeal since I am not the vanquished begging favors but the victor speaking in the name of reason.
“I see no reason why this war must go on.”
The assembled parliamentary deputies and bemedaled generals were convinced the British would accept Hitler’s “generous” offer of peace.
They took it for granted that the British would be grateful for the opportunity Hitler was giving them to get out of the war.
The Fuehrer, they believed, had been truly magnanimous. How could the British be insane enough to turn him down?
Soon enough, they–and the Fuehrer–got their answer.
Correspondent William L. Shirer, waiting to make a broadcast at the CBS studio in Berlin, listened as the BBC introduced one of its own correspondents.
Sefton Delmner, fluent in German, had covered Nazi Germany for years. Although not authorized to speak for the British Government, his response could have come directly from Churchill himself.

Sefton Delmer
“Herr Hitler,” said Delmer in his most deferential German, “you have on occasion in the past consulted me as to the mood of the British public.
“So permit me to render Your Excellency this little service once again tonight.
“Let me tell you what we here in Britain think of this appeal of yours to what you are pleased to call our reason and common sense. Herr Fuehrer and Reichskanzler [Reich Chancellor] we hurl it right back to you, right in your evil-smelling teeth.”
German officials listening to the broadcast in Shirer’s office were stunned.
“Can you make it out?” one demanded of Shirer. “Can you understand those British fools? To turn down peace now? They’re crazy!”
Although devastated by the forthcoming bombing raids of Hitler’s Luftwaffe, England held out.
Months later, it gained two powerful allies: The Soviet Union (invaded by Hitler on June 22, 1941) and the United States (attacked by Japan on December 7, 1941).
In the end, by standing up to Fascist aggression, England and its democracy were saved.
Americans can only hope the same proves true for their country.
BAY OF PIGS, BERLIN WALL, BILL CLINTON, BRUCE GREENWOOD, CARLOS MARCELLO, CIA, CIVIL RIGHTS, CLIFF ROBERTSON, CUBAN MISSILE CRISIS, DAVID HALBERSTAM, FACEBOOK, FBI, FIDEL CASTRO, FRANK SINATRA, ICH BEN EIN BERLINNER SPEECH, INTERNET MOVIE DATABASE, J. EDGAR HOOVER, JAMES MARSDEN, JOHN F. KENNEDY, JOSEPH MCCARTHY, JOSEPH P. KENNEDY, LYNDON B. JOHNSON, MAFIA, MALCOM X, MARTIN LUTHER KING, MARTIN SHEEN, MOVIES, NIKITA KHRUSHCHEV, NUCLEAR TEST BAN TREATY, PT-109, ROBERT F. KENNEDY, ROBERT S. MCNAMARA, SAM GIANCANA, SANTOS TRAFFICANTE, SATURDAY NIGHT LIVE, SOVIET UNION, THE BEST AND THE BRIGHTEST, THE BUTLER, THE MISSILES OF OCTOBER, THE RAT PACK, THIRTEEN DAYS, TWILIGHT ZONE, TWITTER, VIETNAM WAR, WILLIAM DEVANE, WILLIAM PETERSEN
JFK’S LEGACY 50 YEARS LATER: PART THREE (OF TEN)
In Bureaucracy, History, Law, Law Enforcement, Military, Politics, Social commentary on November 13, 2013 at 12:26 amBy October, 1962, the Soviet Union had sent more than 40,000 soldiers, 1,300 field pieces, 700 anti-aircraft guns, 350 tanks and 150 jets to Cuba to deter another invasion.
Nikita Khrushchev, the premier of the Soviet Union, also began supplying Castro with nuclear-tipped ballistic missiles–whose discovery, in October, 1962, ignited the single most dangerous confrontation of the Cold War.
John F. Kennedy during the Cuban Missile Crisis
On October 16, Kennedy was shown photographs of nuclear missile sites under construction on the island. The pictures had been taken on the previous day by a high-altitude U-2 spy plane.
Suddenly, the two most powerful nuclear countries–the United States and the Soviet Union–found themselves on the brink of nuclear war.
At the time, Kennedy officials claimed they couldn’t understand why Khrushchev had placed nuclear missiles in Cuba. “Maybe Khrushchev’s gone mad” was a typical musing.
None of these officials admitted that JFK had been waging a no-holds-barred campaign to overthrow the Cuban government and assassinate its leader.
After being informed of the missile installations, Kennedy convened a group of his 12 most important advisors, which became known as Ex-Comm, for Executive Committee.
Then followed seven days of guarded and intense debate by Kennedy and his advisors. Some of the participants-–such as Air Force General Curtis LeMay-–urged an all-out air strike against the missile sites.
Robert Kennedy, the Attorney General (and the President’s brother) opposed initial calls for an air strike.
It would be, he said, “a Pearl Harbor in reverse.” And, he added: “I don’t want my brother to go down in history as the Tojo of the 1960s.”
Robert F. and John F. Kennedy
Others-–such as Adlai Stevenson, the United States delegate to the United Nations–urged a reliance on quiet diplomacy.
It was Secretary of Defense Robert S. McNamara who suggested a middle course: A naval blockade–-a “quarantine” in Kennedy’s softened term–around Cuba. This would hopefully prevent the arrival of more Soviet offensive weapons on the island.
The President insisted that the missiles had to go–by peaceful means, if possible, but through the use of military force if necessary.
Kennedy finally settled on a maval blockade of Cuba. This would prevent additional missiles from coming in and give Khrushchev time to negotiate and save face.
On October 22, President Kennedy appeared on nationwide TV to denounce the presence of Russian nuclealr missiles in Cuba.
He demanded their withdrawal, and warned that any missile launched against any nation in the Western hemisphere would be answered with “a full retaliatory response upon the Soviet Union.”
Kennedy ordered American military readiness raised to a level of Defcom-2–the step just short of total war.
The United States had about 27,000 nuclear weapons; the Soviets had about 3,000. In a first salvo of a nuclear exchange, the United States could have launched about 3,000 nuclear weapons and the Soviets about 250.
Nuclear missile in silo
On October 28, Khrushchev announced that the missile sites would be destroyed and the missiles crated and shipped back to the Soiet Union.
In return, Kennedy gave his promise–publicly–to lift the blockade and not invade Cuba
Privately, he also promised to remove obsolte Jupiter II nuclear missiles from Turkey, which bordered the Soviet Union. Those missiles were, in effect, the American version of the Russian missiles that had been shipped to Cuba.
The world escaped nuclear disaster by a hair’s-breath.
Khrushchev didn’t know that Kennedy had intended to order a full-scale invasion of Cuba in just another 24 hours if an agreement couldn’t be reached.
And Kennedy and his military advisors didn’t know that Russian soldiers defending Cuba had been armed with tactical nuclear weapons.
If warfare of any type had broken out, the temptation to go nuclear would have been overwhelming.
The Cuban Missile Crisis marked the only time the world came to the brink of nuclear war.
To the Right, it was a sell-out: Kennedy had refused to “take out” Castro when he had the chance, thus allowing Cuba to remain a Communist bastion only 90 miles from Florida.
To the Left, it was a needless confrontation that risked the destruction of humanity.
For Kennedy, forcing the Soviets to remove their misssiles from Cuba re-won the confidence he had lost among so many Americans following the Bay of Pigs fiasco.
It also brought him face-to-face with the brutal truth that a miscalculation during a nuclear crisis could destroy all life on the planet.
He felt he could now move–cautiously–toward better relations between the United States and the Soviet Union.
Ironically, the crisis had the same effects on Khrushchev–who had witnessed the horrors of Germany’s 1941 invasion of the Soviet Union and the subsequent loss of at least 22 million Soviet citizens.
Slowly and carefully, Kennedy and Khrushchev negotiated the details of what would become the Nuclear Test Ban Treaty, which banned nuclear testing in the atmosphere.
Underground tests would continue, but the amounts of deadly strontonium-90 radiation polluting the atmosphere would be vastly reduced.
The treaty was signed between the United States and the Soviet Union on July 25, 1963.
Kennedy considered it his greatest achievement as President, saying in a speech: “According to a Chinese proverb, a jouney of a thousand miles begins with a single step. My fellow Americans, let us take that first step.”
Share this: