Are There No More Wayne Morses?





Mr. Beres, a graduate of Northwestern's Medill School of Journalism, was sports information director at Northwestern, and later at the University of Oregon. He served three years on Oregon's Interreligious Committee for Peace in the Middle East. He also has been a member of the Oregon Greek Orthodox Committee for Peace & Justice.

HNN FUND RAISING DRIVE
If you like the service HNN provides, please consider making a donation.

No Senate voice is in greater need of being heard today than that of Wayne Morse of Oregon. Unfortunately for the country, Morse-- known as the "Tiger of the Senate"-- has been dead more than a quarter century. He still is remembered and honored in his home state, where The Morse Award for Integrity in Politics is given by the Morse Corporation Board in Eugene. (Disclosure: I'm a member of the board.) It keeps alive the ringing words of the man who gave Oregon and the nation a memorable voice of political independence.

Now that voice and its spirit are memorialized in a new short play, "An American Gadfly," with the unexpected effect of shedding light on motivations of the Bush administration. Written by Portland playright, Charles Deemer, the play's contemporary impact was not part of the writer's original design. Built around statements of Morse during his 24 years in the Senate, it demonstrates that the more things change, the more they stay alike.

An Oregon actor read the Morse lines when the 40-minute one-man show was premiered this spring in the original Morse family home, now a National Historical Site in Eugene. But irony and coincidence shared top billing with him. What is striking is the way Morse's statements of four and five decades ago address events of today as pointedly as they did issues in his own time. His caustic, often angry words seem to draw parallels between the Eisenhower election of 1952 and that of George Bush in 2000, and might be as well suited to the war in Iraq as they were to that in Vietnam. In the following excerpts, Morse's words appear in capital letters.

Morse was elected to the Senate as a Republican, as a Democrat, and in his most natural identity, an Independent. It was as a Republican that he in 1952 became the first in his party to endorse Ike, the war hero. EISENHOWER WAS ATTENDING TO THE BUSINESS OF NATO IN EUROPE WHILE BOB TAFT WAS RUNNING AROUND THE COUNTRY TALKING AS IF HE HAD THE REPUBLICAN NOMINATION WRAPPED UP.

He had met Ike, and was impressed. I'VE HAD THE OPPORTUNITY TO CROSS-EXAMINE GEN. EISENHOWER MANY TIMES WHEN HE APPEARED BEFORE THE ARMED SERVICES COMMITTEE. I FOUND HIM TO BE HONEST WITHOUT EXCEPTION, AND A MAN OF GREAT INTEGRITY.

He felt otherwise about the man with whom Ike shared his ticket. THE RUNNING MATE IS DICK NIXON, HAND-PICKED BEHIND CLOSED DOORS BY GEN. EISENHOWER HIMSELF. BUT YOU CAN'T TELL ME THE TAFT PEOPLE AREN'T BEHIND THIS. DICK NIXON IS DESPISED IN EVERY UNION HALL IN THE COUNTRY.

He made his feelings known when he called to congratulate Nixon. I THINK THE PLATFORM TAKES US BACK 50 YEARS. IT MAKES McKINLEY LOOK LIKE A LIBERAL. THE ENTIRE CIVIL RIGHTS PLANK STRIKES ME AS WEASEL-WORDED DOUBLE-TALK.

Morse's view of Eisenhower changed because Ike agreed with military advisers who were convinced war with the Soviet Union was inevitable. I NOW HAVE SERIOUS DOUBTS ABOUT THE WISDOM OF PUTTING A MILITARY MIND IN THE WHITE HOUSE. ALL I HEAR IS DOUBLE-TALK AND POLITICAL MUSH. ADLAI STEVENSON (who lost to Eisenhower) SOUNDED LIKE A STATESMAN COMPARED TO HIM.

The party system discouraged Morse. YOU DON'T HAVE TWO PARTIES IN THIS COUNTRY. YOU'VE GOT A COALITION OF REACTIONARY REPUBLICANS AND REACTIONARY DEMOCRATS WHO ARE RUNNING AMERICAN POLITICS, IRRESPECTIVE OF WHAT PARTY LABEL THEY WEAR.

In his independent mode, Morse felt like a political outcast, a status that suited him, including where he sat in the Senate chamber. THE REPUBLICANS DISOWN ME. THE DEMOCRATS HAVE NOTHING TO OFFER ME. I'LL BRING MY OWN CHAIR TO THE SENATE AND SIT IN THE AISLE. I'M NOT SURE WHICH POLITICAL CONVENTION I'LL GO TO. MAYBE I'LL HAVE MY OWN. I COULD HOLD IT IN A PHONE BOOTH. I RESERVE THE RIGHT TO BE INDEPENDENT, NO MATTER WHAT PARTY I'M AFFILIATED WITH.

He had prices to pay. PHONE CALLS TO MY WIFE, MIDGE, AT ALL HOURS, RANGED FROM THREATS OF VIOLENCE TO VILE PORNOGRAPHY. CLASSMATES CHARGED MY DAUGHTERS WITH TREASON. LIFELONG FRIENDS PHONED OR WROTE THEY NEVER WANTED TO SEE US AGAIN-- ALL BECAUSE I FOLLOWED MY CONSCIENCE.

The environment and access to information were issues in his time, too. THE PRESIDENT SIDED WITH ECONOMIC PIRATES TO BEGIN A SYSTEMATIC AND COMPLETE GIVEAWAY OF THIS COUNTRY'S VALUABLE NATURAL RESOURCES, AND THE REPUBLICAN PRESS WAS CONDUCTING A VIRTUAL NEWS BLOCKADE AGAINST LETTING THE AMERICAN PEOPLE KNOW WHAT WAS GOING ON. THEY WILL TRY TO MAKE MONSTERS OUT OF THOSE WHO TRY TO PREVENT THIS GIVEAWAY PROGRAM OF THE PEOPLE'S TREASURE. OUR PATRIOTISM WILL BE ATTACKED.

In 1955, the safety of Formosa was at stake, and tiny islands of Matsu and Quemoy, just off the Chinese mainland, were the pawns. SO WHO IS THE REAL AGGRESSOR AND THE REAL THREAT TO PEACE? WHO IS BEHAVING LIKE AN INTERNATIONAL BANDIT? WE HAVE NO BUSINESS MAKING THESE UNILATERAL RESOLUTIONS WHEN WE SHOULD BE TAKING THE ENTIRE DILEMMA TO THE UNITED NATIONS.

Morse saw merit in fighting for losing causes. GREAT GOOD CAN BE ACCOMPLISHED BY ENTERING FIGHTS AND ESPOUSING POLICIES EVEN THOUGH THEY, AT THE MOMENT, WILL BE UNSUCCESSFUL. IT WAKES PEOPLE UP. IT MAKES THEM THINK. OUR GREAT CANCER IS THAT POLITICIANS DON'T ENTER FIGHTS, AND DON'T BATTLE FOR POLICIES UNLESS THEY BELIEVE THEY CAN WIN.

Morse said he was told by President John Kennedy just before his assassination in 1963: "I'VE COME TO THE CONCLUSION YOU PROBABLY ARE NOT WRONG IN YOUR CRITICISM OF OUR INVOLVEMENT IN VIETNAM. I WANT YOU TO KNOW I'M IN THE MIDST OF ANALYZING AN INTENSIVE STUDY THAT CONCERNS, IN PART, AN ANALYSIS OF YOUR SENATE SPEECHES ON VIETNAM." THAT WAS MY LAST MEETING WITH HIM. I DON'T KNOW WHAT HAPPENED TO THAT STUDY. I DO KNOW VIETNAM DIDN'T DISAPPEAR. BEFORE LONG, LYNDON JOHNSON WAS TURNING AROUND AND OUTGOLDWATERING THAT TRIGGER-HAPPY MADMAN, BARRY GOLDWATER.

He criticized his fellow senators who (all but one) voted for the Gulf of Tonkin Resolution that he opposed. YOU HAVE NO RIGHT TO CALL YOURSELVES LIBERAL. THERE'S NO OTHER BONAFIDE LIBERAL IN THE SENATE EXCEPT MY COLLEAGUE FROM ALASKA. YOU'VE LET YOURSELVES BECOME JELLY-BELLIED PUPPETS OF THE ADMINISTRATION!

He said the president should be administrator of the people's will. FOREIGN POLICY BELONGS TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE, NOT TO THE PRESIDENT. UNDER OUR CONSTITUTION, ALL THE PRESIDENT IS IS THE ADMINISTRATOR OF A PEOPLE'S FOREIGN POLICY.

How democracy dies. FICTION, PROPAGANDA, CONCEALMENT OF BEHIND-THE-SCENE DIPLOMATIC ACTIVITIES AND A SHROUD OF GOVERNMENT SECRECY WITHHOLD THE FACTS FROM THE PUBLIC.

He challenged President Johnson about "psychological habituation" to war. MR. PRESIDENT, THIS ARTICLE DISCUSSES THE TECHNIQUES EMPLOYED BY THE GOVERNMENT TO REDUCE OPPOSITION TO THE WAR IN VIETNAM.

Why there is so much anti-U.S. feeling in the world. ARE WE SURPRISED AT ALL THE CRITICISM BEING SHOT AT US FROM ALL AROUND THE WORLD? DOES IT REALLY COME AS ANY SURPRISE THAT WE ARE BECOMING THE MOST FEARED COUNTRY IN THE WORLD? I DON'T CARE IF PEOPLE DON'T WANT TO HEAR THIS. IT'S THE TRUTH !

Secret to last winning election. EVERY DAILY NEWSPAPER IN OREGON ENDORSED MY OPPONENT, BOB DUNCAN. BUT WE WON BECAUSE WE GAVE THE PEOPLE OF OREGON THE FACTS ABOUT THIS WAR.

There is a way to win the peace. PEACE CAN BE WON AND MAINTAINED ONLY IF WE CONVINCE FREEDOM-LOVING PEOPLE ELSEWHERE IN THE WORLD THAT THE RULE OF REASON, PROCEDURES OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE, AND THE RELINQUISHMENT OF SELFISH INTERESTS ARE ESSENTIAL. THESE MUST BE SUBSTITUTED IN THE THINKING OF PEOPLE EVERYWHERE IN PLACE OF EMOTIONAL NATIONALISM THAT STILL DOMINATES THE WORLD.

Wayne Morse left the Senate after 24 years when defeated at the polls by Robert Packwood, whose legislative legacy was in strong contrast to his predecessor's. He was campaigning to regain his seat when he died at 73 in 1974. His words testify to his unselfish commitment to justice and public service. But his most fitting eulogy was spoken by an independent man of courage centuries before him:

"I am that gadfly which the gods have attached to the State. You think you might easily strike me dead. Then you would sleep on for the remainder of your lives, unless the gods in their care of you sent you another gadfly." Socrates in his own defense.

Do the gods no longer care?



comments powered by Disqus

More Comments:


L. Afler - 5/25/2003


If tax cuts always "work", why were interest rates so high under Reagan and so low under George H.W. Bush and Clinton ?


Ralph E. Luker - 5/24/2003

Bill,
You forgot to include Jay Rockefeller. I can't go along with your set-asides, but, if I did, your calculus tells me that men are working themselves to death to provide for their widows. We'd be better off if we banned the SUV and more people read Hegel for recreation.


Bill Heuisler - 5/24/2003

Ralph,
The beamer thing is a joke. Lighten up. What "records" are you checking? Look up recent - 2002 - NYSE stats. Somewhere around 66% of all stocks, 80% of municipal bonds and 40% of futures are owned by senior (60 and over) and retired citizens. As to wealth or net worth, if you set aside the top 1% - Gates' Buffets, Corzines, Kennedys, Heinz's, Turners and the fortune 500 CEOs - the 2000 census showed the wealthiest group by age and sex were widows over 60. Wealth in the US is not steeply distributed. We have the largest middle class in the world as a percent of population and our per capita income is the highest in the world after Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. On a bell curve, the income bulge is nearly perfectly centered and averaging farm, white collar, industrial and service mean incomes (25,000 to 99,000)forms a majority of US citizens as high as 62%. Farm and service incomes stretch it both high and low, but you get the point. Who the hell told you wealth in the US was steeply distributed? Probably another Professor named Snodgrass who drives a VW bus and reads Hegel for recreation. Class envy is a waste of time, an excuse for failure and a passe political ploy. Forget it.

Speaking of wealth, isn't it a kick when Teddy Kennedy or John Kerry complain about "tax cuts for the rich"?
Bill Heuisler


Ralph E. Luker - 5/24/2003

Bill,
There really aren't that many "profs in a beamer," so I don't quite understand the cause of your resentment. When employed, most of us are not very well paid.
Check your records on who owns wealth in stocks and you'll find that it isn't, by and large, "our fixed-income parents." Wealth in the United States is already steeply distributed and the income tax cut which about to be adopted will distribute it even more steeply.


Bill Heuisler - 5/23/2003

Ralph,
Not to belabor this ad nauseum, but tell me why it makes, "a difference to whom the tax breaks go"? Other than FICA taxes (which should be cut and/or rechanneled into a special fund) no matter who gets the bill, the individual/consumer pays.

You don't do it, but it really irritates me to hear the talking-head naifs discuss how various "Corporations don't pay their fair share" or "Big business doesn't pay enough...". Brilliant.
Does any sentient human think businesses pay taxes? The customer and individual pays all taxes through higher prices and fewer jobs. So, face it, tax breaks must go to those who pay taxes. Excepting SSN, do the poorest 20% of Americans pay income taxes? Okay that leaves out business and the poor. Who's in the stock market these days - our fixed income parents. Do they deserve a double tax, first on their SSN and then on their dividends? No?
What's left, Ralph, but you and me and that Prof in the beamer.
Bill Heuisler


Ralph E. Luker - 5/23/2003

Bill,
You are right about "shrub." I was struggling for a diminutive reference and it came to mind, partly because I hadn't seen it used for a while. I thought sufficient time had elapsed for it to be "retro." As it is, it's only "cliche."
Sorry, but I can't agree about the rest. It makes a difference to whom the tax breaks go.
As for faculty salaries, I am not rightly "defensive." I haven't had a faculty salary -- even a modest one -- for ten years.


Bill Heuisler - 5/23/2003

Ralph,
My purpose was to illustrate how State Universities are failing their mission. Don't be defensive, most Legislative studies agree tuitions are too high and staff and amenities too bloated. Loading a young person with debt so Prof. Snodgrass can drive a beamer seems downright socially destructive to me.

Buffet is correct. But you really should rework your opinion on supply-side economics. Your comment, "...this one will stimulate any economic activity -- any more than shrub's last one did --except to feather already bulging pockets in the private sector." isn't worthy of you. Think about it:
Tax cuts vs tax cuts is specious nonsense; each dollar remaining in the private sector is spent or invested on something, right?
If you really believe a poor widow's dollar is more stimulative than Buffet's dollar you're edging into Marxist-style nonsense.
Do you really believe certain people hoard their untaxed money? Where? Businessmen and investors multiply dollars and taxing points by starting more businesses, hiring more people and buying equipment and machinery. Simple. Each function produces taxable transactions and new taxpayers. This stuff is so basic I'm a little dissappointed to have to remind you.

Is, "shrub" supposed to be clever? Maybe it was all the rage two years ago, but now only diminishes you and your argument.
Bill Heuisler


NYGuy - 5/23/2003

Sorry to disappoint you but after Tim Robbins and the non-violent anti-war crowd one has to be careful someone does not come over and punch me in the mouth. I am a weakling who likes to deal in ideas, but others are inclinded to more violent behavoir. I have already been threatened on this website. Believe me it hurts to be called a coward, particularly when I know I am not able to stand up to bullies. But, life is not fair. We can only do what we are capable of.

Anyway, as you suggest trading barbs will get neither of us anywhere so I bow to your cool headedness.

Cheers

PS That was another good line, thanks.


Ralph E. Luker - 5/23/2003

Whatever you say, courageous anonymous one.


NYGuy - 5/23/2003

Ralph;

You are quite right. Your desire to be a gadfly,a bug that has a stinger but no brain, makes it impossible to exchange ideas.

By the way if you put more than one sentence together you can form paragraphs. However this requires content and courage to stand behind what you believe. If you have something to say why don't you put it into words and not hide behind a false sense
of being above the fray.

As Truman said "If you can't stand the heat get out of the kitchen". Of course your one sentence contributions are too precious for this board to miss. So I am sure your words of wisdom will try to dominate this website for a long time. I wait with expectation at the fountain of all knowledge.


Ralph E. Luker - 5/23/2003

NYG, Let's not exchange insults. Both your and my time are too valuable for that.


NYGuy - 5/23/2003

Ralph;

You prove my point. Your response, unlike prior ones which had a touch of originallity, and humour is completely devoid of content and represents the arrogance which ones expects from a non productive member of society. It produces nothing useful for this board or this country, except to show the arrarogance of your profession. Unable to respond you come back with a weak arguement of surrender. Not unexpected, but typical.

That is what most Americans understand from this type of meaningless response, and as a result we still have those who understand the greatness of this country and are capable of contributing to and making this a great country, and represent the true backbone of our country. Thus making the majority of us able to enjoy the benefits of this freedom. However, I for one defend your right to say nothing. It is called freedom of speech.


Ralph E. Luker - 5/23/2003

NYG,
You have reverted to your primitive self. If what you say is correct and if I were you, I would not waste my valuable time talking to us.


NYGuy - 5/23/2003

Ralph:

The answer is simple, except for a few crooks, businesses produce jobs and products to help strengten our country. As we now read, college professors don't like this country, (Yale, Coumbbia, Stamford, etc) and sow seeds of discontent over students who are at their mercy. As a result we have those who contribute nothing to our economy and growth except to undermine this great country. Meanwhile, they only work 8-9 months per year, vs. those workers who are the very bedrock of our country and who work 11-11 1/2 months per year. This elite class make no worthwhile contribution to society, believe in their own propaganda, etc., and think they are above criticism. The difference is between these parasites on society and the brave men at the world trade center who have always been the background of our ccontry.

The best one can say is that this useless class of windbags are what makes this country great, since it permits the know nothings to be free and their voices to be heard, even if they are not original and have to copy from others.



Ralph E. Luker - 5/22/2003

Bill,
Why would you find it shocking that some tenured professors make six figure salaries? That is chickenfeed compared to salaries in the corporate world. I don't hear you ranting about the outrageous salaries, benefits, and golden parachutes going to corporate executives -- often with no corrolation whatsoever to whether they've kept the books honestly and the corporation profitable.
As you know, there are tax cuts and there are tax cuts. Warren Buffet scoffs at the likelihood that this one will stimulate any economic activity -- any more than shrub's last one did --except to feather already bulging pockets in the private sector. If you want to stimulate the economy, he suggests, suspend social security withholdings for two years. That would put real money in the hands of people who would spend it. That's called stimulating the economy. Olympia Snowe for President!


NYGuy - 5/22/2003

Ralph:

Touche. Good response.

Cheers


Bill Heuisler - 5/22/2003

Derek,
Watch your back, keep safe and let us know what's happening when you can.
Best, Bill


Bill Heuisler - 5/22/2003

Ralph,
You bring up two pieces of madness:
U. of AZ has just spent 19 million to "attract research and keep competitive". This year they raised in-state tuition $1000.00.
Tenured profs making six figures, expensive in-house textbooks reprinted/reissued yearly and grand new buildings going up like mushrooms, but the original Arizona Charter says the UofA
purpose was to educate young people in AZ for as little cost as possible. College student debt has become a scandal.

As for, "the Bush administration's fiscal irresponsibility." why are we constantly reeducating Historians - of all people - about the stimulative effects of Tax Cuts. In the Twenties, the Sixties and the Eighties, broad Tax Cuts dramatically increased Government Revenues. Supply-side economics has always worked, always. Why do Liberals resist tax cuts if historically Govt. Revenue increases? Is it the lack of control, Ralph? Or do Liberals just object to private (rather than public) spending.
The fiscal irresponsibility lies with the Snowes of the Party for not learning from history.
Bill Heuisler


Ralph E. Luker - 5/22/2003

NYG: He is keeping me safe from all those WMDs he hasn't been able to find in Iraq?


NYGuy - 5/22/2003

Derek:

Good luck to you and safe return. We all have to do what we believe in and that is admirable.

I am sorry about your view on anonominity, but it is part of debate. I watched many anti-war protesters march behind masks of GW. They still got their message across. This is a board of ideas, so the name is not critical. I do agree that name calling is wrong whether one uses his/her name or not.

Goodspeed. I share your hope for world peace. No matter which side one is on, killing people is madness.


NYGuy - 5/22/2003

He is also keeing you safe. We are both lucky.


Ralph E. Luker - 5/22/2003

NYG:
Don't bother to take a reality check, but your Republican President is making "big spending" Democrats look like pikers.


Derek Catsam - 5/22/2003

Bill and company --
I'll be off hnn for awhile. Without getting into too many details (for obvious reasons, I should hope) I am off to the Middel East (seriously)on a fellowship to participate in what I hope is an important antiterrorism seminar-cum-workshop that will have a huge hands on component. Hopefully I'll return with all of my limbs attached. Everyone of late has been emailing and calling trying to dissuade me given some recent events, but I am more afraid of being afraid of doing what I think is important and can have an effect than I am that something bad will happen. I never served in the military but I have always hoped that my work in places like southern Africa and Northern Ireland and now this can be my tiny little contribution to peace and, as important, to justice.

Take care --
Derek


NYGuy - 5/22/2003

Ralph

Do you really have so little faith in this country that you expect a multiyear depression.

Look at the bright side, if that happens the democrats will spend us to prosperity. After all it is there money for redistributing wealth. Hmm. Where have I heard that before.


Ralph E. Luker - 5/22/2003

Bill, If the Republican Party tent is big enough to have included a California fund-raiser who was a double agent for the mainland Chinese government, you'd think it would be large enough to have included both Jim Jeffords and John McCain. Hold Trent Lott's leadership blunders responsible for the loss of Jim Jeffords. As Andrew Sullivan observes in current postings, we have a very strange Republican Party when McCain, Voinovich, Chaffee, and Snowe are flayed for challenging the Bush administration's fiscal irresponsibility. It will saddle young voters with a national indebtedness far beyond anything we have known and compounding the problem of personal indebtedness assumed in college loans.


Bill Heuisler - 5/22/2003

Derek,
Jeffords is peculiarly loathesome in my opinion. He used his Republican constituency (and their money) to get elected and then, without waiting even a decent interval, succumbed to the Dems and their promises about chairmanships and milk subsidies.
Now the subsidies are gone, the Dems out of power and Jeffords is not only a user and a turncoat, but he's a lousy politician.

My guess, he won't run again after seeing the polls in 05. After all, Democrat voters dislike treachery as much as anyone.

We agree on anonymous cheap shots, but how do you enforce any other system than HNN's and keep the free wheeling fights?
Bill


Derek Catsam - 5/21/2003

Bill --
Wanna bet whether or not Jeffords gets reelected by the voters you presume that he betrayed? Jeffords feels that the GOP betrayed him, and thus that he had to change parties. And in any case, it is not as if all the Dixiecrats turned coat in 1948 -- there have been former Democrats turning Republican throughout the past five decades. I say good riddance to the majority of them. Let the GOP deal with the racists in their ranks.
Meanwhile it's good to see that both sides have their gutless anonymous posters. I hate them on both sides, and think if they are too cowardly to give their names they ought not to write at all. Some on the right claim that their very careers are at stake, which is dubious at best and beside the point -- just don't write at all. And have you also noted that as heated as you and I get, at least knowing names eventually tempers things? Or at least allows us at the end of the day to close the door as you would with most friends or colleagues with whom you have passionate but honest disagreements? Anonymity coupled with namecalling is too frequently the stock in trade of these twits.


Bill Heuisler - 5/20/2003

Ralph,
You've got a point, but aren't we talking about smug - and even celebratory - hypocrisy here? Dixiecrats followed constituents and were reelected. Morse wound up alone; Jeffords will survive neither betrayed Republicans nor contemptuous Democrats. Like McCain in my state, ego-blind men will nurse personal destinies rather than represent their political partisans - constructing disaffection and eventually losing the primal Party voter.

No? Name a recently victorious maverick, from Teddy to Ross to Patrick B. Spoilers, cursed by erstwhile fans for ultimately Pyrrhic gestures. Politicians depend on core constituents and desert them at great peril. Morse was issue-driven, Jeffords seems a vacuum, but both flouted an implicit contract for a hapless, short-term purpose. And, since when do do Repubs fete Graham/Campbell-types for their integrity, for God's sake?

Good luck in your new endeavor, by the way.
Bill Heuisler


Bill Heuisler - 5/20/2003

Mr. Smectymnuus,
Always remember, Truth like a bastard comes into the world never without ill-fame to him who gives her birth. Note: Morons may be unable to develop intellectually beyond the age of ten, but we usually can remember our names.
Bill Heuisler


truth - 5/20/2003

Bill, you're a moron.


truth - 5/20/2003

Bill, you're a moron.


Ralph E. Luker - 5/20/2003

Bill, If party switching is disloyalty, would you please chase all the dixiecrats back into the Democratic Party.


Bill Heuisler - 5/20/2003

New York Guy and Elderly Greek Guy,
You both nailed it. George Beres' piece is no accident; it fits with incessant Leftist attempts to be relevant while wrong on almost everything and disdainful of nearly everyone.

This Barbara Lee press release, 4/25/02, says it all.

"Congresswoman Barbara Lee (D-CA) was today named as the recipient of the Wayne Morse Integrity in Government Award for 2002. Congresswoman Lee, Senator Russell Feingold, (D-WI), and Senator James Jeffords, (I-VT) were the three finalists chosen from an original list of seven nominees. Final selection was made by a blue ribbon national committee of former holders of the Morse Chair in Law and Politics at the University of Oregon."

Can you believe these hypocrites? Jeffers, Lee and Morse all betrayed the voters who elected them. Integrity in Government? Ask Morse's Republican constituents. Ask Jeffers' Vermont Republicans. None of them get it: When voters elect you, you're supposed to represent them - that's integrity.
Bill Heuisler


NYGuy - 5/19/2003

Herodotus great going, four for four. The play book is always the same, start with some type of pseudo introduction and then cheapen the author and insult the audience by betraying a small angry mind. Keep up the good work. Maybe someday we will get some respectable writing on history, not a diatribe by politically motivated hacks.


Herodotus - 5/19/2003

An interesting piece. It is important to learn about the legislative leaders this country has had as much as it executives.

However, at the conclusion of my reading the piece I remain puzzled about something Mr. Meres says at the beginning about the one-man performance.

"Now that voice and its spirit are memorialized in a new short play, "An American Gadfly," with the unexpected effect of shedding light on motivations of the Bush administration. "

I did not see any revelatory information about the motivations of the Bush administration in these quotations. They are all about events that occurred during the tenure of Senator Morse. These quotations may be apt in light of the events of the past five months, but as to the motivations of the current administration they do correspond.

Subscribe to our mailing list