I have a vague memory of walking with my first grade class to see Ike on a "Whistlestop" tour in downtown Wheaton in 1952. A great president; we need that sort of leadership today, though sadly he probably would not get the nomination from today's GOP.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
With Casey Stengel by his side! Can't get better'n that! Great photos, thanks so much! Got any of Harry?
Fair to say the likes of him would not get the nomination from either party. The D's have their fair share of problems with extremists in thier party.
It would have been nice of Ike to make the sure the RR's had some sort of parity in financing R-O-W enhancements in the manner that the truck and bus companies could expense their fuel taxes that paid for highway construction from the Interstate Highway program.
54light15 Got any of Harry?
Got any of Harry?
wanswheel 54light15 Got any of Harry?
I think I remember being taken to a Garrett, IN stop on Truman's whistle stop tour in 1952 by my parents.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Great color shot of General Eisenhower, presumeably after the war. You didn't see that famous "Eisenhower grin" while hostilities were in progress, not like that. Understandable, considering the pressure he was under.
It was the same with General Pershing during World War One. Wartime photos of Pershing show a pretty stern, cold-faced individual. Once the war was over photos of Pershing smiling and laughing began to surface.
I have to take exception to what was said earlier. Both parties today would kill to have someone like Eisenhower available to them now, trusted, respected, and well-liked by everyone. Presidential politics today seem to be all about superstars (and maybe that began with Eisenhower, who was courted by both parties, by the way) and there just aren't any superstars available right now. We're in a dry spell. I expect that may change at some point but when I don't know.
erikem[snipped - PDN] . . . It would have been nice of Ike to make the sure the RR's had some sort of parity in financing R-O-W enhancements in the manner that the truck and bus companies could expense their fuel taxes that paid for highway construction from the Interstate Highway program.
There was a provocative column* by Gerald F. Seib in The Wall Street Journal one day this past week about the inadequate condition of the US infrastructure. He went on to discuss the inability of Congress to come to an agreement about funding the Highway Trust Fund for its usual 6-year term, instead extending it for just a few months or a year at a time, and the adverse effects that had on planning projects, etc.
Although railroads were not expressly mentioned, my reaction was that it's a blessing in disguise that the rails have to generate their own capital funding - their destiny is in their own hands, and they can be flexible and adjust as business conditions and traffic volumes warrant.
- Paul North.
*"As Infrastructure Creaks, Congress Dithers" - Oct. 5 or 6, 2015:
http://www.wsj.com/articles/as-infrastructure-creaks-congress-dithers-1444060075
Not sure if it's available for free, or behind a "pay wall". - PDN.
One might wonder what would have happened if railroads had been deregulated at the same time the Interstate highway system was being built...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Deregulation in the mid-1950's would likely have been a big help, intermodal and unit trains would have gotten a quicker start. The higher capacity cars for unit trains would have been a strong incentive to upgrading the track for handling the higher axle loads.
Paul: My comment about "parity" was more in respect to the tax treatment of paying for R-O-W. My thoughts were that the RR's would still use their own money for line improvements, but would be able to expense them as opposed to capitalizing them. IIRC, you posted some WW2 PRR ads where they pointed out that they had to pay taxes on the money set aside for the wear and tear on the track.
As for the likes of Ike, it does take a rare combination of leadership, judgement, grasp of the situation and understanding of politics to reach a 5 star rank. Perhaps the most important part of the job is knowing how to set priorities. Ike was also very good at knowing when to keep his mouth shut, e.g. keeping quiet about knowing the USSR only had six operational ICBM's in early 1960 despite the clammering from a senator from Massachussets in regards to a "missile gap".
Nimitz might have made for a great president as well, though he would have loathed the self promotion required in running for office.
When it comes to rating recent Presidents... I like Ike (well enough), but...
I'm just wild about Harry!
The America these men represented (1945-1960) was at the height of its power and influence...and we older white guys are nostalgic for it. But like the buffalo, it isn't coming back and we need to adjust accordingly.
W.B. Yeats might have been speaking of our own times when he wrote:
"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;
Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,
The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere
The ceremony of innocence is drowned;
The best lack all conviction, while the worst
Are full of passionate intensity."
Great pictures of Harry- do you think the Secret Service would let kids sit on the roof like that today? Could that be a Secret Service agent in the right foreground wearing a bow tie? You know who would have made an excellent president? General George C. Marshall. Wish there were guys like that running for prime minister of Canada and that's a fact!
As has already been mentioned, many of these folks would have been too moderate for today's political climate. But that's exactly what we need - someone dead in the middle, or close to it.
It's been said that had JFK been alive today, his politics would have made him a Republican.
As a believer that people, as a general rule, get the government they deserve, I would note that America didn't fare badly in the Reagan-Bush years of 1981-1992, either. In the years since, some people would see a failure of consistency on the part of voters, veering from Bush I to Clinton to Bush II to Obama on the basis of ... what, exactly?
We always hear that the next election is pivotal, the most important, etc., and we will be hearing that from both sides again this year. It ain't necessarily so, of course. But, over time, a democracy's greatness surely does depend on wise choices by the electorate.
Do we have what it takes? To me, 2016 will furnish a clue.
tree68 As has already been mentioned, many of these folks would have been too moderate for today's political climate. But that's exactly what we need - someone dead in the middle, or close to it. It's been said that had JFK been alive today, his politics would have made him a Republican.
The problem I am seeing from both parties is that the candidates have to be so 'radical' to get the parties nomination that they can't get to the center where more of the general election votes are.
BaltACDThe problem I am seeing from both parties is that the candidates have to be so 'radical' to get the parties nomination that they can't get to the center where more of the general election votes are.
'Xactly.
I think what I like about Ike was his leadership qualities. I've read that early on in WWII, Eisenhower was summoned to meet with General George Marshall, asking his opinions on how to proceed and eventualy win the war. Ike got the job because he identified the problems and laid out a plan for untimate victory. Marshall said that everyone else just made him a laundry list of the problems. If you need reassurance of Ike's leadership, you only have to read the statement he had prepared for the press if D-Day had failed. He was ready to take full responsibility for his choices, his plan and his actions. We don't see that in our leaders anymore....or in our politicians. Train related: The guy seemed to like trains. Every picture you see of him on a train, he has a great big smile.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Murphy Siding: You might be very interested to read what President Truman wrote about Dwight Eisenhower's behavior toward Gen. Marshall during the McCarthy era. I'm afraid that, when given a chance to speak out against McCarthy's outrageous claims & lies about Gen. Marshall, Mr. Eisenhower fell absolutely silent.
Not very leadership-like.
I find it fascinating to read or hear people's interpretation on what's happening, and how there is so much difference in how different people view the same events.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
NKP guy Murphy Siding: You might be very interested to read what President Truman wrote about Dwight Eisenhower's behavior toward Gen. Marshall during the McCarthy era. I'm afraid that, when given a chance to speak out against McCarthy's outrageous claims & lies about Gen. Marshall, Mr. Eisenhower fell absolutely silent. Not very leadership-like.
He knew the value of restraint. McCarthy's empire soon collapsed. I remember when he was criticized for not intervening in a strike. The way I see it, he let both sides see what it was like to be without money for a while.
Concerning General Eisenhower and Joe McCarthy, I remember a quote from Ike saying he "wasn't going to get down in the gutter and roll around with him." I suppose Ike was wise enough to know that sooner or later McCarthy was going to go too far and self-destruct. And so it proved.
Eisenhower (as president) also fended off ideas of attacking the Soviet Union that came from the more hard-core anti-communist factions in the government saying "If they (the Soviets) want to keep up with us, and they do, they'll have to educate their people, and in so doing they'll sew the seeds of their own destruction." Pretty good call on his part.
One of my favorite Eisenhower quotes is "You know, I never would have gotten as far as I did if I hadn't learned to hide my own ego!"
Euclid A radical is the last thing this Republican Party wants to nominate. We have a president that is more radically far left than any previous president, and a Republican Party leadership that has decided to never cross him. If anything, this unending appeasement by the Republican Party is the issue that is causing the current turmoil in the Party. Much of the Republican constituency wants the Party to stand up and fight back. Would that be too radical? Traditionally, the two parties have been the home of the two competing philosophies of liberalism and conservatism. But this Republican Party has recently staked out a new home as being slightly to the right of Obama because they have concluded that any friction with him will get them thrown out of office. They would rather be #2 in Washington than be out of office. Traditionally, there has always been a battle between the two parties. Today, that has changed, and the larger battle is between the Republican Party leadership who appease, and its base who want to fight back against a far left agenda.
I love reading posts by people who live in an alternate reality. All that appeasment must be how they earned the title: "The party of no".
Dave
Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow
Photo thanks to Barndad Doug
September 15, 1948
"The spirit of a nation alone is not enough to preserve its position or even its freedom. Physical and inventive strength in its industrial structure, able to produce and deliver at all times all that is needed for the security and betterment of its people – that too is essential. And beyond that is demanded the will never to be content with the imperfect, always to be seeking improvement and increase in the ability to do every job well. Consequently, I am pleased to be here to witness a concrete evidence of the railroad industry's response to this twin necessity. For the 20th Century Limited is more than merely a train. To America and to the world, it symbolizes the forward looking attitude, the daring, and the vision that have characterized our country and its people in all their undertakings.
"Indeed it is a symbol of even a greater thing. It is a shining example of what can be accomplished by the partnership of ingenuity, brains, management and labor when freely and voluntarily associated together for the accomplishment of a definite purpose. I earnestly believe that you see pictured here today the future of America."
Phoebe VetI love reading posts by people who live in an alternate reality.
Perhaps that best explains the endless threads of his about oil trains and braking systems as well as the PTC extension? Consistent at least.
Anyone besides me noticed how good Ikes 1945 uniform looks compared to what the Army's wearing now?
Army uniforms had a classic look back in those days. I can't figure out why they got away from it.
Firelock76 Anyone besides me noticed how good Ikes 1945 uniform looks compared to what the Army's wearing now? Army uniforms had a classic look back in those days. I can't figure out why they got away from it.
We aren't involved in 'classic' conflicts these days.
BaltACD Firelock76 Anyone besides me noticed how good Ikes 1945 uniform looks compared to what the Army's wearing now? Army uniforms had a classic look back in those days. I can't figure out why they got away from it. We aren't involved in 'classic' conflicts these days.
Quite true, but I wasn't taking about the present day camoflage combat uniforms, just the Class "A's."
I've got no problem with the combat uniforms, trust me. Whatever's comfortable and helps the troops get the job done is fine with me.
schlimmPerhaps that best explains the endless threads of his about oil trains and braking systems as well as the PTC extension? Consistent at least.
The realities of the every-day world are lost to those with utopian dreams of perfection.
Norm
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.