Gobbler
Sir:
Don't go on calling Russia's peace campaign, phony [TIME, Sept.11], since it isn't. Russia sincerely wants to gobble up her neighbors peacefully.
ERIC ARAGUARI Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
Red Blood, Pink Ink & Ham
Sir:
... It is refreshing to see honest, positive and effective action taken against vicious and deadly Communist infiltration of our American Republic. Such sincere, upstanding, red-blooded Americans as Benjamin Schultz and his Joint Committee Against Communism, together with Theodore Kirkpatrick and Counterattack [TIME, Sept.11], certainly should make all of us proud--especially when they base their actions on the good old American principle that a person is guilty until he proves himself innocent . . .
The actions of these people suggest a positive action we could all take to rid this wonderful country of filthy Communism. Each loyal citizen joins together with about ten of his loyal friends to form a Committee of Confidence. Each Committee of Confidence assumes itself innocent of any anti-American sentiments and makes all other committees prove they are not Red tainted.
JOHN E. SEVERSON Duarte, Calif.
Sir:
. . . May I ask what is wrong with . . . the organization of a committee against Cornmunism? The inconsistency of condemning Stalin's actions and yet sympathizing with his friends and agents in this country . . . makes one wonder if there isn't a little pink mixed in with your printer's ink.
HELENE LILLIAN BOOTHE Woodhaven, N.Y.
Sir:
Your story . . . contained the statement that Mary Margaret McBride has been denounced in Counterattack . . . because she has endorsed Polish hams . . .
These hams [are] available in nearly every large food store in the Washington area, and sold as fast as they reach the counter . . . I suggest that our U.S. meat packers learn how to achieve that incomparable flavor.
MRS. FRANK S. MORGAN
Arlington, Va.
Sir:
Congratulations to Kirkpatrick, Schultz, el al., for their courageous attack on Miss Jean Muir. They are setting a noble example for all patriotic Americans, which I, for one, am going to follow.
The first on my personal black list is Robert Montgomery. He is a Republican, and next to Socialists, Baptists and jugglers, I hate Republicans. I have positive inside information that these dangerous subversives are trying to overthrow our Government. Giving up Mr. Montgomery is a considerable sacrifice, because he is a fine actor . .
My two friends, who also hate Republicans, and I are oiling up our mimeograph. If 20 telegrams can get rid of Jean Muir, we can promise that six months from now our televisions will be darkened only by Democrats, and Democrats of the right race, color and religion. We hate lots of people besides Republicans. Some actors may deny our charges, but that won't help them. We don't have to prove anything. All we have to do is write letters and telegrams and make telephone calls to sponsors . . .
LORETTA E. SCOTT McLean, Va.
Poet's Word
Sir:
In TIME, Sept. 4, the author of the article about Britain's New Statesman and Nation used the word clerihew, evidently referring to some sort of writing . . .
I looked in Encyclopedia Britannica, Webster's unabridged dictionary, Thrall's Handbook to Literature, the Oxford Dictionary, and several other smaller references, to no avail. What does clerihew mean?
CONRAD BALLIET JR. Drums, Pa.
-P:A "Clerihew" is a verse of four lines of varying length in which the first two and last two lines rhyme. It gets its name from its inventor, Edmund Clerihew Bentley, author (Trent's Last Case), poet, and contributor to the New Statesman. Sample "Clerihew" from a New Statesman competition:
Johann Strauss Wrote "Die Fledermaus"; But Richard wrote properer Opera. _ED.
Doctors' Draft
Sir:
I would like to comment on the article in TIME, Sept. 11, regarding the drafting of doctors, and on the statement of Robert Ruark, whom you quote as follows: "To beat a draft and knock off a free medical education is quite a feat ... I wouldn't weep for [this group] if they all got drafted on private's pay. They owe us some interest on the loan."
May I point out that ... the Army and Navy trained men in various fields, and the education of doctors was only a small part of the overall training program. In no instance was such training considered to be a loan . . .
Those doctors trained in Army and Navy programs . . . realized that . . . they might be called into the armed forces at any time to serve in non-professional capacities, as many more than half of them were . . . Some, who happened to finish just at the time of the most rapid demobilization after the war, were not required to serve as medical officers, but were separated from the service. This was not the decision of the doctors in question . . .
HUBERT R. ESTES, M.D. Rochester, Minn.
Sir:
... A basic medical education, premedical through internship, takes nine years; specialized training eleven to fifteen years . . . Only a few of the doctors, without military service, received more than two years at "Government expense." Some had five months. Is this medical education at "Government expense?" . . .
Let it be remembered that . . . applicants were encouraged and carefully selected. They came from fighting ships and battlefields as well as universities. These men were subject to military regulations. Court-martial threatened the unruly, . and scholastic failure resulted in immediate reassignment as enlisted personnel. Are only those who carry guns of value to their country? . . .
JOHN E. GUSTAFSON, M.D. W. WAYNE SANDS, M.D. WILLIAM H. JOHNSTON, M.D. Des Moines, Iowa
Sir:
. . . I'm sure that few of us in any field want to leave jobs and family to go to war, and because of the factors which led these people to the field of medicine rather than West Point, they may well want to leave even less. I think that it is only fair to point out that there were ASTP and V12 students in many fields other than medicine and dentistry, but I have yet to hear of a draft of engineers, chaplains, or language students. Because pilots are trained at Government expense, they are not asked to fly at private's pay as has been suggested for us by Mr. Ruark . . .
DAVID H. WALWORTH, M.D.
Topeka, Kans.
Waffle-Bottom Assistance
Sir:
Re: The Capital--Brick Foxholes [TIME, Sept. 11]:
The Honorable Clarence Cannon is quite right, i.e., there is no danger of attack. And the Very Most Honorable E. T. Miller is even more right, i.e., the 40,000 Washington waffle-bottoms should be fired. This figure should have about a million more included, covering Federal Government waffle-bottoms all over the country.
In case of atomic warfare with Russia (which will come just as soon as Russia has a good stock of atom bombs), Washington, D.C. will be the safest place in this country . . . Stalin is no fool; with the one exception of Winston Churchill, he is the smartest man in the world today. He knows he cannot trust his closest associates in the Kremlin, but that he can depend on plenty of assistance from [Washington] . . .
M. W. WEBB Bellaire, Texas
This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.