Monday, May 28, 2012
Republican Presidents Herbert Clark Hoover, Calvin Coolidge, and Warren G. Harding stood for peace!
Republican President Herbert Hoover stood for peace. Republican President Herbert Hoover stood for peace. He explained in his inaugural address: " "Those who have a true understanding of America know that we have no desire for territorial expansion, for economic or other domination of other peoples. Such purposes are repugnant to our ideals of human freedom. Our form of government is ill adapted to the responsibilities which inevitably follow permanent limitation of the independence of other peoples. Superficial observers seem to find no destiny for our abounding increase in population, in wealth and power except that of imperialism. They fail to see that the American people are engrossed in the building for themselves of a new economic system, a new social system, a new political system all of which are characterized by aspirations of freedom of opportunity and thereby are the negation of imperialism. They fail to realize that because of our abounding prosperity our youth are pressing more and more into our institutions of learning; that our people are seeking a larger vision through art, literature, science, and travel; that they are moving toward stronger moral and spiritual life—that from these things our sympathies are broadening beyond the bounds of our Nation and race toward their true expression in a real brotherhood of man. They fail to see that the idealism of America will lead it to no narrow or selfish channel, but inspire it to do its full share as a nation toward the advancement of civilization. It will do that not by mere declaration but by taking a practical part in supporting all useful international undertakings. We not only desire peace with the world, but to see peace maintained throughout the world. We wish to advance the reign of justice and reason toward the extinction of force. "The recent treaty for the renunciation of war as an instrument of national policy sets an advanced standard in our conception of the relations of nations. Its acceptance should pave the way to greater limitation of armament, the offer of which we sincerely extend to the world. But its full realization also implies a greater and greater perfection in the instrumentalities for pacific settlement of controversies between nations. * * * "Our people have determined that we should make no political engagements such as membership in the League of Nations, which may commit us in advance as a nation to become involved in the settlements of controversies between other countries. They adhere to the belief that the independence of America from such obligations increases its ability and availability for service in all fields of human progress. * * * "It is impossible, my countrymen, to speak of peace without profound emotion. In thousands of homes in America, in millions of homes around the world, there are vacant chairs. It would be a shameful confession of our unworthiness if it should develop that we have abandoned the hope for which all these men died. Surely civilization is old enough, surely mankind is mature enough so that we ought in our own lifetime to find a way to permanent peace. Abroad, to west and east, are nations whose sons mingled their blood with the blood of our sons on the battlefields. Most of these nations have contributed to our race, to our culture, our knowledge, and our progress. From one of them we derive our very language and from many of them much of the genius of our institutions. Their desire for peace is as deep and sincere as our own. "Peace can be contributed to by respect for our ability in defense. Peace can be promoted by the limitation of arms and by the creation of the instrumentalities for peaceful settlement of controversies. But it will become a reality only through self-restraint and active effort in friendliness and helpfulness. I covet for this administration a record of having further contributed to advance the cause of peace." Herbert Hoover was a man of peace, and not a "wartime President". The Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Hal Rogers administration has American soldiers in 130 countries, attacked Iraq while it was at peace with its neighbors, has lost over 4,000 American military service personnel's lives in Iraq and Afghanistan, and maintains an American Army of occupation in Afghanistan. Yes, compared to President George W. Bush, President Herbert Hoover looks better and better. There are those today who would denounce the foreign policy of President Herbert Hoover as "extremist", "leftist", and "liberal". Do you want to stand with the morally bankrupt foreign policy of Bush-Cheney-Rumsfeld-Hal Rogers in supporting the continued American military occupation of Afghanistan? Or would you prefer to stand with the foreign policy in the Middle East principles of Republican President Herbert Hoover and Democrat Kenneth Stepp? Herbert Hoover ended the American military occupations of the small Latin American countries maintained by his predecessors; Herbert Hoover was the type of President that ended American military occupations, not the type of President that invaded weaker countries and started military occupations. The principles of Herbert Hoover and of Kenneth Stepp require ending American military occupations of other nations. Let's bring the troops home. Let's end the American military occupation of Afghanistan by January 8, 2012. Vote for Kenneth Stepp for U.S. House of Representatives for the Kentucky Fifth District. Who Stands With Republican President Coolidge on Afghanistan? Who stands with the principles of Republican President Calvin Coolidge on Afghanistan? President Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Hal Rogers try to pin labels on themselves and on Kenneth Stepp. Who stands for the principles concerning American relations with Afghanistan, as stated by Republican President Calvin Coolidge? Let's look at the record. In his inaugural address, President Coolidge said: "We have never any wish to interfere in the political conditions of any other countries. Especially are we determined not to become implicated in the political controversies of the Old World. With a great deal of hesitation, we have responded to appeals for help to maintain order, protect life and property, and establish responsible government in some of the small countries of the Western Hemisphere. Our private citizens have advanced large sums of money to assist in the necessary financing and relief of the Old World. We have not failed, nor shall we fail to respond, whenever necessary to mitigate human suffering and assist in the rehabilitation of distressed nations. These, too, are requirements which must be met by reason of our vast powers and the place we hold in the world. * * * "It will be well not to be too much disturbed by the thought of either isolation or entanglement of pacifists and militarists. The physical configuration of the earth has separated us from all of the Old World, but the common brotherhood of man, the highest law of all our being, has united us by inseparable bonds with all humanity. Our country represents nothing but peaceful intentions toward all the earth, but it ought not to fail to maintain such a military force as comports with the dignity and security of a great people. It ought to be a balanced force, intensely modern, capable of defense by sea and land, beneath the surface and in the air. But it should be so conducted that all the world may see in it, not a menace, but an instrument of security and peace. * * * "America seeks no earthly empire built on blood and force. No ambition, no temptation, lures her to thought of foreign dominions. The legions which she sends forth are armed, not with the sword, but with the cross. The higher state to which she seeks the allegiance of all mankind is not of human, but of divine origin. She cherishes no purpose save to merit the favor of Almighty God." The America of Calvin Coolidge and of Kenneth Stepp "seeks no earthly empire built on blood and force. No ambition, no temptation, lures her to thought of foreign dominions. The legions which she sends forth are armed, not with the sword, but with the cross." The America of President Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and their rubber-stamp Hal Rogers is referred to as "the empire" by the President of Venezuela, has troops stationed in 130 nations, is engaged in a never-ending war--as recognized by the American Legion, and maintains an army of occupation in Afghanistan and the Middle East which has costed over 4,000 American servicemen's lives. Which of these two philosophies is your philosophy? Do you agree with the traditional American approach to foreign policy in Iraq of President Calvin Coolidge and Kenneth Stepp? Do you agree with "the empire" approach to foreign policy in Iraq of Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Hal Rogers that has costed over 4,000 American armed forces servicemen's (and women's) lives in the Middle East? Concerning U.S. military occupation of Afghanistan, please stand with the policies of President Calvin Coolidge and Kenneth Stepp. Bring the troops home in 2013; elect Kenneth Stepp to the U.S. House, Kentucky Fifth District in November. Who Stands With Republican President Harding on Afghanistan? Who stands with Republican President Harding on Afghansitan? You have all heard President Bush, Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Hal Rogers try to pen labels upon themselves, and upon Kenneth Stepp. Let's look at the record. In his 1921 inaugural adress, Republican President Warren G. Harding spoke about foreign policy as follows concerning America's role in international affairs: The Chief Executive praised the "wisdom of the inherited policy of non- involvement in Old World affairs." Since the United States did not want to be "entangled," it "can be a party to no permanent military alliance," nor political or economic commitment impairing our national sovereignty. The American Republic, the speaker safely insisted, wanted no world "super government." Republican President Warren Harding would not have allowed United States troops to be sent to Iraq during peacetime. Republican President Warren Harding would have brought the troops home if he had found American troops in Afghanistan when he became President. Kenneth Stepp agrees with Warren Harding that the United States can be a party to no permanent military alliance nor political nor economic commitment impairing our national sovereignty, and a party to no world "super government". If you want a world "super government" trampling upon the United States Constitution and sending American troops to die in a never-ending war in the Middle East, then vote for the Republican rubber stamp Hal Rogers; but if you stand for the ideals of Kenneth Stepp and Republican President Warren Harding of "wisdom of the inherited policy of non- involvement in Old World affairs" (except for NATO, which Kenneth Stepp supports) then you will vote Democratic and vote for Kenneth Stepp, the Democratic candidate for U.S. House of Representatives, KY-05.