Tube City Online

September 09, 2007

Briefly Noted

"Inauspicious night for birth of a Nation."

That's the headline on Bob Dvorchak's story in Sunday's Post-Gazette (motto: "That smudgy gray thing your grandma reads").

They're referring to the "Steeler Nation," of course.

But you don't suppose that the headline writer realized they were also making reference to one of the most infamously racist movies of all time, do you?

I suppose it's better than the alternative headline. I heard the story was originally called "Triumph of the Steeler Will."

(Rimshot.)

Posted at 12:00 am by jt3y
Filed Under: History | No comments | Link To This Entry

September 07, 2007

To Everything, Turn, Turn, Turn



The ongoing installation of new traffic lights on the west end of the Jerome Avenue Bridge will end a long-standing tradition known to anyone who learned to drive in McKeesport.

I'm referring to the notorious "Port Vue Left."

A Port Vue Left is similar to the famous "Pittsburgh Left," where the first car at a red light trying to make a left turn punches the gas as soon as the light turns green.

But a Port Vue Left describes a left turn made at one particular intersection: The west end of the Jerome Avenue Bridge where Ramp One and Romine Avenue meet West Fifth Avenue.

In fact, a Port Vue Left can only be made by drivers heading outbound from Downtown toward Port Vue --- hence the name.

The green light for outbound drivers on the bridge is advanced by several seconds. And when the light goes green, drivers headed toward Port Vue stomp the accelerator and peel off toward Romine Avenue, no matter where they're stopped on the Jerome Avenue Bridge (even seven or eight cars behind the light) zipping up the wrong lane to make the left turn.

Non-McKeesporters will swear I'm making this up, but I'm as serious as a heart attack. (Or a head-on collision.)

Problems arise when an out-of-town driver doesn't realize what's going to happen, and sits in the left, outbound lane, thinking there's going to be a nice orderly progression when the light turns green.

Then the traffic signal changes, and chaos erupts all around him, like a stampede to the cookie table at a Mon Valley wedding.

And even some natives hesitate, meaning that when inbound traffic gets the green signal a few seconds later, those drivers wind up tangled with one last pokey car headed to Romine Avenue the wrong way.

Alas, the new signals apparently will include a green turning arrow for Romine Avenue, and another beloved tradition, like going to the morgue on prom night and fist-fighting on Tech High Field after McKeesport-Glassport football games, will come to an end.

As a wise man once said: "The moving finger flips, and having flipped, drives on."

. . .

Elsewhere In The News: South Allegheny School District has joined a lawsuit challenging the constitutionality of a bill that divided up students from Duquesne High School between East Allegheny and West Mifflin high schools.

According to Pat Cloonan in the Daily News, the district is concerned about a provision that requires school districts within three miles of Duquesne to give preferential treatment when hiring to teachers laid off from Duquesne High.

Curiously, South Allegheny wouldn't be affected by that provision. As Cloonan points out, it's 3.5 miles away.

But as a former South Allegheny resident, I have to wonder if the school board is more concerned about the precedent the law set.

Because, you see, what if another high school closed in the not-too-distant future, and South Allegheny was compelled by the state to take its students?

Like, say, Clairton High School.

And what does Clairton have in common with Duquesne? G'wan, guess. Winner gets an all-expenses paid trip to Glassport and a 45-rpm recording of "Ebony and Ivory."

. . .

P.S.: A reminder that opinions expressed at the Almanac are mine and mine alone.

. . .

In Other Business: Football game? What football game? What's a football?

Just wait'll next year.

. . .

You Said It: Lots of good comments on the Mo-Fo Excessway essay earlier this week, many of them from Andrea. I wish I shared her optimism that 50 years of highway-centric American transportation policies can be reversed. Call me a bitter, warped cynic.

. . .

To Do This Weekend: It's a music-filled weekend, and if you like to dance, we got some dancin' for you. There's ballroom dancing tonight at 8:30 with the Wally Merriman Trio at Elks Lodge No. 11 on Buttermilk Hollow Road in Lincoln Place. Call (412) 461-3322. At the Palisades, Fifth Avenue and Water Street, Downtown, there's country line dancing tonight and oldies tomorrow. Both of those events start at 8:30 p.m. Call (412) 678-6979.

Meanwhile, our friends at The Well Ministries host their seventh-annual All-Day Gospel Sing from 12 to 9 p.m. tomorrow at the bandshell in Renziehausen Park. A children's hour starts with a puppet show at noon, followed by local groups and artists like Gail Perney, Chalice, Betty Riecks, Abraham's Promise, George Brletic, and many others. In case of rain, the concert will move to First Church of the Open Bible, 719 Union Ave. Call (412) 664-9355 or visit the Well Ministries website.

Finally (whew!) West Mifflin Community Day starts at 12 p.m. tomorrow at West Mifflin Area High School on Commonwealth Avenue near Kennywood Park. There will be a parade, a car cruise, live music and fireworks at 8:30 p.m. Call (412) 464-1918.

Posted at 12:00 am by jt3y
Filed Under: default | No comments | Link To This Entry

September 06, 2007

Charter Schooled

Our topic today is the City of McKeesport's Home Rule Charter (PDF file), which states:

No person who holds any compensated appointive City position shall make, solicit or receive any contribution to the campaign funds of any political party or any candidate for public office or take any part in the management, affairs or political campaigns of any political party, but he may exercise his rights as a citizen to express his opinions and to cast his vote.


That seems pretty clear, right? And the penalties prescribed are tough: If found guilty, violators are subject to a fine and forbidden from holding any city office for five years.

Except that, er, one city employee is already serving as an elected official (Mark Holtzman, deputy police chief, is a school director and ran unsuccessfully for district magistrate). And several others (recreation director Jim Brown, police officers Joe Lopretto and Chris Halaszynski, and administrator Steve Kondrosky) are candidates for school board in November.

Not surprisingly, this has landed the city in court; local political activist and school director Dave Donato has filed a lawsuit calling on Mayor Jim Brewster to uphold the charter and remove these employees if they refuse to drop out of the race.

Last night, city council voted 5-1 to place a referendum on the ballot to amend the charter and allow city employees to seek any public office except mayor, city council, city controller, or district justice. They could still run for school board. Councilor Paul Shelly cast the lone "no" vote.

. . .

Also not surprisingly, I have an opinion. Several, actually.

First, I don't like provisions that block employees from seeking public office. I don't like term limits, either. If you want to block someone from winning public office, we have a mechanism: It's called the ballot box.

Brown, Lopretto, Halaszynski and anyone else should have the right to run for any office. Whether they should serve is up to the voters. If you don't like them, run against them or vote against them.

But the charter is crystal clear, and the city shouldn't selectively enforce any provisions. And while I respect council's effort to change the charter, amending it ex post facto (or is it nunc pro tunc?) to keep these school board candidates within the letter of the law leaves a bad taste.

Shelly thinks so, too. He writes on his blog that the resolution passed last night all but admits the city charter has been violated, and that amending the charter while litigation is pending is "ill-timed" at best.

Shelly also calls the resolution "self-serving": "It says to me that the Mayor and this Council, of which I am a part, are fearful of city employees running against us, yet it is OK for them to run against (almost) anyone else."

. . .

Maybe I'm naive, and maybe I've spent too much time with local elected officials over the years, as a reporter and a community volunteer, but I don't see any deep-seated corruption. (It doesn't sound like Mr. Shelly does, either, and I should note that we have been exchanging emails about this topic for some time.)

Personally, I see a couple of things:

  1. The people who are likely to pay the most attention to local politics are the ones who work in local government. As the Almanac has lamented before, most people pay thousands of dollars in taxes every year to their school district and city, borough or township government, but they don't pay attention to what those bodies do until something goes wrong.
  2. There is a shortage of good, qualified candidates. I can name two local boroughs that have to appoint councilors almost every two years because not enough people run for the open seats.


Add (1) and (2) and you get local employees running for local office. It's natural: They have a knowledge of the issues and a vested interest in local affairs.

. . .

I wish this had been handled with more finesse. The city could have amended the charter, and then these folks could have run without a cloud over their heads.

Instead, we got a lawsuit (all too common under the administration of Brewster's predecessor), finger-pointing, and allegations that Our Fair City is being run just like it was in the "bad old days."

. . .

That brings me to one last allegation. A few White Oak council members are throwing a fit because all seven of the candidates for McKeesport Area School Board in November are from the city. Council President Ron Massung is threatening legal action and has twice publicly accused Brewster of "trying to take over the school board."

If White Oak's political leaders are concerned about representation, they need to organize and get borough residents to run in two years. Or they need to draft a referendum to elect McKeesport Area school directors by district, just as school directors in East Allegheny and Woodland Hills are elected.

And I agree with a remark Brewster made to Eric Slagle of the Post-Gazette: "It's a slap in the face to the citizens of McKeesport suggest that we would do something detrimental to the community of White Oak. White Oak is a community we need to prosper."

I like Brewster. I happen to like most of the people in local office right now. I think the city and the region are moving in the right direction again after several years of floundering.

There are some very well-intentioned people in local government.

But this episode is not their finest moment.

And we all know what the road to hell is paved with.

(more)

Posted at 12:00 am by jt3y
Filed Under: Good Government On The March, Politics | No comments | Link To This Entry

September 05, 2007

Rhymes With Pretzel



When I was growing up, one of our neighbors in the Liberty Manor section of Liberty Borough had not one, but two, Edsels. (Alert Reader Tim will know who I'm talking about, I bet.) Maybe this early exposure to abject failure explains my present warped personality, and my love for "lost causes."

Well, in case you missed the news coverage (Wired, The Detroit News, The Washington Post, etc.), yesterday was the 50th anniversary of "E-Day" ... Sept. 4, 1957, the day that Ford Motor Company unveiled its new car division, the Edsel, the worst new product introduction in American history.

Many of the feature stories that appeared yesterday commented on how "ugly" the Edsel supposedly was. The Edsel wasn't ugly at all by 1958 standards. In fact, the early reviews of the styling were overwhelmingly positive. When the car was shown to dealers for the first time in the summer of 1957, they gave it a standing ovation; reportedly some Ford executives wept for joy.

In contrast to most 1958 cars, the Edsel didn't have fins, it didn't have gaudy-looking two-tone paint, and most importantly, it wasn't larded with chrome. For a look at some truly ugly cars, try the 1958 Oldsmobiles and Buicks. Legendary General Motors styling chief Harley Earl was forced into retirement over those monstrosities; the company's products were greeted with such hoots of derision that GM went into a crash program to completely redesign its 1959 models.

But Buick survived and thrived, and Oldsmobile did, too, until recently.

The name gets a lot of blame, too. "Edsel" was the name of Henry Ford's only son. Before his death at an early age from stomach cancer, he was widely revered in Detroit for saving the Ford Motor Company from insolvency as his father became increasingly irrational. (One of the major freeways in Detroit is still named for Edsel Ford.)

Sure, "Edsel" isn't a great name for a car, but consider some of the others. "Oldsmobile" had "old" in the first three letters! "Chevrolet" is a French name that isn't pronounced the way it's spelled. "Plymouth" was named after a brand of twine used by farmers. (You can look it up.)

The Edsel tanked for other reasons --- mostly rotten quality control and a severe worldwide recession that knocked the pins out from under the car market.

Despite the folklore, the name and the styling of the Edsel were the least of the problems. They got the blame from Ford employees desperate to salvage their own reputations. As the saying goes, "Success has 1,000 fathers, but failure is an orphan."

. . .

McKeesport had an Edsel dealer, naturally. John P. Mooney Co. on Fifth Avenue at Hartman Street had been the city's Packard dealer for years until that one-time luxury make began its quick slide to oblivion in the mid-1950s.

At the time, independent car companies like Packard, Studebaker, Hudson, Nash and Willys were withering under a massive sales onslaught from the "Big 3," GM, Ford and Chrysler.

Hudson and Nash merged into American Motors and survived by refocusing their efforts on small cars ... namely, the Rambler. Willys dumped its slow-selling car line and put all of its money into four-wheel-drive Jeep trucks and what would call today the SUV.

Packard and Studebaker merged, too, but instead of finding a "niche" like AMC and Willys, they tried to go head-to-head with the "Big 3," and lost their shirts.

Many of the new Edsel dealers, like Mooney in McKeesport, had been Studebaker-Packard dealers, and were desperate to swim away from the rapidly sinking company.

The arrival of the new Edsel franchise must have seemed like salvation. Finally, they would be selling cars backed by a healthy corporation and would own a franchise which (they thought) had a long future.

By 1962, Mooney was selling Volkswagens and the Edsel was a punchline to a thousand jokes.

. . .

Edsel seemed like salvation to Ford Motor Company at first, too. For years, the industry said, Ford's primary job was making customers for General Motors.

In the 1920s, GM President Alfred P. Sloan hit on the formula that spelled the company's success for the next 50 years. Instead of competing against each other, GM's different divisions --- Chevrolet, Pontiac-Oakland, Oldsmobile, Buick and Cadillac --- would each compete in a certain price range, with Chevy at the low end and Caddy at the top.

To save money, the divisions would share hidden components and many substructures, but outwardly, styling would be as different as possible. Chevrolet customers who wanted to move up could buy a Pontiac, but they'd still be in a GM car.

When Walter P. Chrysler took over Maxwell Motors Corp. and renamed it for himself, he copied the same formula. Soon Chrysler Corp. had the same kind of model range --- with Plymouth at the low-price end, followed by Dodge, DeSoto, Chrysler and Imperial as the premium brand.

But until World War II, Henry Ford was in charge at Ford Motor Company, and he wouldn't hear of any of this. In fact, he wouldn't discontinue the Model T until the car was totally obsolete and losing customers to Chevy and Plymouth.

Ford did purchase the Lincoln Motor Car Company and made it a luxury division. And in 1939, it introduced the Mercury as an upscale Ford. But Mercury was frankly only a very small step up from Ford, and there was still a huge price gap between the most expensive Mercury and the cheapest Lincoln.

Consequently, Ford customers who wanted to move up didn't buy a Lincoln. They bought a Dodge or an Oldsmobile.

Henry Ford's penury and refusal to introduce modern technologies nearly caused the company's collapse during World War II, just when the Army and Navy needed its production capacity. Henry's grandson was brought home from the war to salvage what was left.

By the mid-1950s, Ford Motor Company was finally making money again, and was ready to plug the price gap. The decision was made to move the Mercury upmarket to the Buick price range, and introduce a new lower-middle-priced car. That car became the Edsel.

. . .

A variety of factors plagued the Edsel's debut. First, the car didn't live up to its hype. Ford put on an expensive, extensive publicity blitz for Edsel for a year before the car's debut. When it turned out to be just another average-looking car, people were disappointed.

Second, any new product is likely to have problems. Unfortunately, in Edsel's case, the excitement and hype meant that all of the early quality control problems were magnified.

It didn't help that relatively small numbers of Edsels were being built on assembly lines that were handling much larger numbers of Fords and Mercurys. Stories spread of Edsels going out the door with the wrong parts attached, or missing key pieces altogether.

Finally, the most severe recession of the postwar years caused widespread layoffs and tightened the credit supply. The new-car market collapsed, and practically everyone's sales went down --- except AMC and Volkswagen, because they were selling economy cars. (Rambler sales nearly doubled from 1957 to 1958.)

. . .

Under those circumstances, the Edsel's 1958 production run of 63,000 isn't so bad. The new division nearly tied Chrysler and was ahead of Lincoln, Studebaker, DeSoto and many other established makes.

By then, however, Ford President Robert McNamara (who later became defense secretary and led the escalation of the Vietnam War) had decided to kill the Edsel.

The practical, frugal McNamara didn't like fancy cars. The Edsel project had been proposed before he had taken over the company, by executives who he eventually forced out of Ford Motor Company, and he was against it from the very start.

Instead of upscale cars, McNamara believed compacts were the wave of the future, and if Ford was going to bring out a line of small cars, it needed the money and resources that were committed to the Edsel. The new brand was expendable.

In late 1958, McNamara forced Edsel Division to merge with Mercury and Lincoln, and the brand was de-emphasized. In November 1959, he finally killed it altogether. (The announcement leaked out in the Ford Foundation's annual report.)

In 1960, the year that McNamara was named defense secretary, Ford introduced its compact car, the Falcon. It was a roaring success, and a slightly upscale version called the Comet was introduced. It, too, was successful, with 116,000 sold in the first, abbreviated model year.

Ironically, the Comet was originally supposed to be sold as an Edsel; the earliest cars even carried Edsel serial numbers. If Edsel had hung on for another few months, the Comet might have saved the division, but it didn't happen.

. . .

So, in about 1,400 words, that's the story of the Edsel. If you're inclined to learn more, I highly recommend Thomas Bonsall's book Disaster in Dearborn: The Story of the Edsel, which is one of the best books I've ever read about the automotive industry in the 1950s. In fact, it's one of the best books I've ever read about business, period --- and it's got a lot of photos.

As for John P. Mooney Co., it eventually moved to Long Run Road (Route 48) and enjoyed two decades of success as a Volkswagen dealer. The building is presently the home of Bob Massie Toyota.

Other than those two Edsels I used to see in Liberty Borough, I don't know of any other restored Edsels in McKeesport or its suburbs. But I'm willing to bet there are a few.

After all, if you live the Mon Valley, you have to be willing to love the unlovable, to find virtue where other people only find things to mock --- and to root for the underdog. Luckily, the Edsel story has a happy ending; the cars are highly collectible today.

Edsel: The official car of the Mon-Yough area? No, but it could be, kids, it could be.

Posted at 12:00 am by jt3y
Filed Under: History | No comments | Link To This Entry

September 04, 2007

Build The Mo-Fo Already

I came to a reluctant epiphany on I-79 last week. It's something I didn't want to admit, but in my corroded, embittered heart, I know it to be true.

The Mon-Fayette Expressway has to be built.

Yes, I have questioned the idea, and I agree with the Angry Drunken Bureaucrat, who calls it "the Mo-Fo Excessway." I think the highway's negatives are very, very high.

But it doesn't matter, because people like high-speed, limited-access highways. They have for 75 years. And until they are forced by circumstances to use some other form of transportation, they will continue to prefer driving their personal cars on limited access highways.

. . .

No Alternative: Sorry, but I don't see any viable alternatives:

  • Light-Rail: I love light-rail. I think Port Authority missed the boat (bus?) by not building a high-density light-rail line instead of the East Busway. In a highly traveled corridor like the one between Downtown Pittsburgh, Oakland and the East Hills, light-rail would rock; it excels at moving masses of people from Point A to Point B.

    But it stinks when lots of small numbers of people are making lots of trips to a variety of different points. That's why it's no substitute for a limited-access, high-speed highway in the Mon-Yough area.


  • 'Heavy Rail': I love trains, too. But the railroads that own most of the tracks in the Mon Valley (CSX and Norfolk Southern) don't want passenger trains on their lines.

    Amtrak was created specifically so freight railroads wouldn't have to run passenger trains any more. Wondering why Amtrak trains always seem to run late? By law, freight trains have priority; Amtrak trains are only tenants on the tracks, and as any train buff tell you, the freight railroads don't miss many opportunities to screw up Amtrak.


  • Buses: Buses combine the joys of traveling in a crowded, smelly elevator with the inconvenience of getting your grandpa to drive you to work. Nobody willingly gives up a car to ride the bus. The bus is a public necessity because many people cannot drive, but it is not a highway alternative.


  • Maglev: Don't make me laugh. Maglev Inc. has wasted public and private money for almost 20 years without producing so much as a Lionel train. I have become firmly convinced that maglev, at least in Pennsylvania, is a perpetual motion machine powered by hot air.


  • Water Taxis, Car-Sharing, Bike Trails, Etc.: Sure, and why not personal jet-packs or self-propelled auto-gyros, too? Or giant pneumatic tubes to shoot people from McKeesport to the airport, where friendly dragons will fly us to Candy Land?


. . .

Highways Are Rotten, But...: I can think of 1,000 reasons why highways are bad ideas:

  • They Squander Oil: Not only do we need oil to run the cars and trucks, we need oil to pave the darn highways. It's really wasteful.


  • They're Maintenance Headaches: As Joe Grata pointed out in the Post-Gazette a few weeks ago, whenever we build new roads or bridges, we leave the old ones intact. Thus we keep increasing our maintenance headaches and adding to the infrastructure we have to maintain. For that reason ...


  • They Squander Tax Money: This should be obvious. We keep adding maintenance burdens faster than revenues can match them; liquid fuel taxes don't cover a fraction of the cost of building, maintaining, and providing emergency services for highways.


  • They Enable Sprawl: Building highways allows population to disperse thinly throughout an area, which requires more infrastructure, which wastes more oil and tax money.

    As Braddock Mayor John Fetterman has noted, highways also destroy a sense of community by allowing the "haves" (people with cars) to get further away from the "have-nots."


But it doesn't change the basic equation. People still like to drive on highways. Given a choice between working, living and shopping in places with highways, and places without highways, Americans overwhelmingly choose the former.

. . .

'Peak Oil': Depending on which alarmist you prefer, we have 20, 30, 40 or 50 years before pumping oil out of the ground and turning it into fuel becomes too expensive, and the current car-based economy collapses.

Human beings are very bad at looking at long-term consequences. Their thinking is, "In 50 years, I'll be dead." So: Arguing against highways on the basis of the long-term negative consequences might make you feel morally superior, but it won't convince the vast American public to move to a place without highways.

And if we wait 20, 30, 40 or 50 years to build the Mo-Fo, hoping that something else will come along, McKeesport, Duquesne and Clairton will be dead, too.

. . .

Get Here From There: I tell people that it takes me only about 15 minutes to get from Pittsburgh to McKeesport or most other places in the Mon Valley. I might as well give directions for driving from Jupiter to the Moon.

They don't want to hear about Irvine Street or Camp Hollow Road or Commercial Avenue. They want to know: "What exit do I take?" And to most non-natives, getting to McKeesport from the Parkway East seems like a terrible ordeal.

The last best hope for the Mon-Yough area is to serve as a bedroom community for people who work in Downtown Pittsburgh, Oakland, Monroeville, Cranberry, McMurray and elsewhere.

We have an abundance of inexpensive housing. We have recreational, cultural and educational institutions; we have hard-working people; we have beautiful vistas to see.

But because we don't have a major highway, 95 percent of the people who might like to relocate their family or their business to the Mon Valley never even visit.

. . .

By Any Other Name: My fellow expressway skeptic ADB actually floated an interesting idea last week as an alternative to the Mo-Fo: "acquire all the properties in the right of way, move them 50 ft. back and build a four-lane neighborhood boulevard."

I like it, even if the idea was meant sarcastically (the Bureaucrat also suggested that we "throw in a light rail line down the middle and give everyone a gold sovereign").

But when it comes right down to it, it's still a highway. Less objectionable in many ways, but still a highway. (And eventually, it would start to look like McKnight Road.)

So I'm gagging as I'm writing this, but I know it's true, and you do, too:

We are wasting time by looking for non-existent alternatives that may never come. Elected officials: Find a way, and just build the damned expressway.

OK, commenters. Now tell me I'm full of it.

(more)

Posted at 12:00 am by jt3y
Filed Under: Mon Valley Miscellany | No comments | Link To This Entry

September 03, 2007

Happy Labor Day



Above: United Mine Workers Vice President Philip Murray, Allegheny County Common Pleas Court Judge Michael Musmanno, railroad fireman Clinton S. Golden and other backers of the Steel Workers' Organizing Committee lead the union's first mass meeting from atop a coal truck at the McKeesport city garbage dump, June 21, 1936.

Mayor George H. Lysle had forbid the union organizers from meeting anywhere else in town.


. . .

"The enormous concern of the future is to divide its profits, not among hundreds of idle capitalists who contribute nothing to its success, but among hundreds of its ablest employees, among whose abilities and exertions success greatly depends." --- Andrew Carnegie, 1902

. . .

"It is important to this people to grapple with the problems connected with the amassing of enormous fortunes, and the use of those fortunes, both corporate and individual, in business.

"We should discriminate in the sharpest way between fortunes well-won and fortunes ill-won; between those gained as an incident to performing great services to the community as a whole, and those gained in evil fashion by keeping just within the limits of mere law-honesty. ...

"More important then aught else is the development of the broadest sympathy of man for man. The welfare of the wage-worker, the welfare of the tiller of the soil, upon these depend the welfare of the entire country; their good is not to be sought in pulling down others; but their good must be the prime object of all our statesmanship.

"Materially we must strive to secure a broader economic opportunity for all men, so that each shall have a better chance to show the stuff of which he is made.

"Spiritually and ethically we must strive to bring about clean living and right thinking. We appreciate also that the things of the soul are immeasurably more important.

"The foundation-stone of national life is, and ever must be, the high individual character of the average citizen." --- Theodore Roosevelt, 1906

. . .

"The problem of wealth will not down. It is obviously so unequally distributed that the attention of civilized man must be attracted to it from time to time. He will ultimately enact the laws needed to produce a more equal distribution." --- Andrew Carnegie, 1906

. . .

"We will try not only to secure a better economic position in life through processes of collective bargaining, but we will strive to supplement those efforts through the usages of improved social legislation and measures that will be of material value to our people as well." --- Philip Murray, 1936

. . .

"You express sympathy for a wage raise. I am sure the men appreciate the 'sympathy of management.' But when a steel worker goes to the clothing store, he is unable to cash the sympathy of management for a new suit of clothes, a dress for his wife, or shoes for his children to go to school." --- Philip Murray letter to Benjamin Fairless, president of Carnegie-Illinois Steel, 1936

. . .

"We are not communistic in theory, practice or deed. We are ordinary citizensÑmembers of a trade unionÑassuming the responsibility of trying to help our country and the people living in this country. This is our task.

"The SWOC has neither the time for, nor is interested in, any 'isms' other than unionism and Americanism. We are dedicated to American institutions. We are organizing American workmen into American unions. When that is done, America will be able to function for the benefit of all the people." --- Philip Murray, 1938

. . .

"True compassion is more than flinging a coin to a beggar; it is not haphazard and superficial. It comes to see that an edifice which produces beggars needs restructuring. A true revolution of values will soon look uneasily on the glaring contrast of poverty and wealth.

"With righteous indignation, it will look across the seas and see individual capitalists of the West investing huge sums of money in Asia, Africa and South America, only to take the profits out with no concern for the social betterment of the countries, and say: 'This is not just.'" --- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., 1967

. . .

"You work three jobs? Uniquely American, isn't it? I mean, that is fantastic that you're doing that." --- George W. Bush, 2005

. . .

Sources: George Swetnam and Helene Smith, The Carnegie Nobody Knows (Greensburg, Pa: McDonald-Sward Publishing Co., 1989); Theodore Roosevelt, letter to Elihu Root, May 20, 1904; Roosevelt, The Man with the Muck-Rake, speech of April 14, 1906; Vincent Sweeney, The United Steelworkers of America: Twenty Years Later (Pittsburgh: United Steelworkers of America, 1956); Martin Luther King, Jr., Beyond Vietnam: A Time to Break Silence, speech of April 4, 1967; George W. Bush, President Discusses Strengthening Social Security in Nebraska, speech of February 4, 2005.

Posted at 12:00 am by jt3y
Filed Under: History, Politics | No comments | Link To This Entry

Archives

Next Archive

Previous Archive