 It's time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A presentation of the Lawn Jean Wittner Watch Company, maker of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. Good evening. This is David Ross. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope? Mr. William Bradford Huey and Mr. Henry Haslett. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the Honorable John Sherman Cooper, Senator-elect from Kentucky. Senator Cooper, we're very happy to welcome you to the Chronoscope this evening. I'd like to begin by asking you, because of your experience in the UN, whether you think there's any chance for a truce in Korea now? Well, as of the moment, and immediately, I do not think so. Of course, there's always hope, but I don't look forward to any immediate truce. Frankly, I've never felt that the Russians won't a truce. I think their action in the UN in recent days on the resolution, the Indian resolution, is good proof of that. I'm not giving up hope, though. General MacArthur says that he thinks he has a clear and definite solution to the problem. Do you think in view of that, that General Eisenhower ought to consult with him now? Well, of course, that's the question for General Eisenhower. I would guess that he would find out what his plan is. I think he would do that. Well, what steps do you think can be taken to put pressure on the Chinese communists to want a truce? Well, I think you've always got to think of this Korean question as part of the larger difficulties between Russia and the rest of the world. And that you start out by knowing it's a difficult problem, a very long problem, because we are the real force there. I believe that we have got to have the strength in Korea, which will give the greatest influence to our position. So what are some of the steps that would increase our strength, Senator, do you think? Not knowing myself what the military dispositions are there, I'm not certain as to how much should be added. But if we're to convince Russia and Russia primarily that they cannot win, that they must adjust the position in Korea, then I think we've got to have the strength. Further, I certainly favor the proposition of General Eisenhower that as quickly as we can, we build up the strength of the South Koreans. And then I would urge strongly that every bit of influence that we can bring to bear upon the other members of the United Nations should be brought to get from them added military strength, added economic strength. Well, Senator Cooper, our viewers of course tonight are thinking about the USS Helena out in the Pacific and all of this meeting that's going on out there. Now, sir, first of all, why do you think all of these cabinet members are being rushed out to see General Eisenhower and carried aboard by helicopter and so forth? Well, it's a good operation. Well, it doesn't seem a little melodramatic to you. No, I don't think so. I think it's very practical. In the first place, everybody is interested in Korea. He's just been there. He's got whatever information that he could get there. And I think it's with his experience that he has got new information and perhaps a much clearer viewpoint. Mr. Dulles has been in Washington conferring with the State Department and he has their views. And now they meet together and has a chance to bring together those different viewpoints. But from very practical viewpoints, I think it would probably be the best opportunity he'll have until he takes the oath of office and perhaps for a long time after that, to get as many of his advisors together and have the chance to confer without interruption. Well, they're talking about other things besides Korea then. I would think so, yes. Well, sir, one of the things that makes you interesting to our viewers, I'm sure, is that you're a Republican who's just been elected to the Senate down in Kentucky and I believe that you are the only Republican that was elected to the Senate in a state that did not vote for Eisenhower. Is that correct, sir? Well, that is true, but it just lacked a few votes of voting for Eisenhower out of about a million votes. Mr. Stevenson carried Kentucky by only 700 votes. And yet, though Stevenson carried the state, you were elected to the Senate by what was your majority? About 29,000 votes. Now, let me ask you this, sir. Why were you elected to the Senate? What did you have that General Eisenhower didn't have down in Kentucky? I'd like to make it plain that I probably wouldn't be here on this program if General Eisenhower hadn't been a candidate. But that great sweep of his gave me the chance. But why do you think you ran ahead of the ticket in Kentucky, sir? Is it because you were well known? Well, I have. This makes the third race I've made for the Senate in six years. And of course, they do know me. And I would hope that I was in the Senate two years and I hope they approved of my record there. You are. That I was on the ground making a fight all the time. General Eisenhower came into Kentucky one day. We could have got him back. He would have carried Kentucky. But for about eight or nine months, I was on the ground every day making the fight. Well, now, the Republican Party, is it strong in Kentucky and is it a growing party there? One of the things that questions I'm always asked is, and you are a Republican from Kentucky. Actually, Kentucky has a rather strong Republican Party. Out of about a million registered votes, we have a registered vote of about 425,000 registered Republicans. And we cast consistently a good Republican vote. Since 1900, we've had five out of the 15 governors. But you're about the first Republican that's been sent to Congress by Kentucky in 25 years. Weren't you in 1946? Well, in 1946, I was the first one who had been elected to the Senate in 25 years. Well, coming from a border state as you do, sir, and from a state that has a strong Republican Party, what do you think of the Republican Party's chances of making the South a real two-party system in the South? My state is, as you said, a border state. And in that category, you could class West Virginia, Missouri, Oklahoma, and I think even Tennessee. I think that all of those states, those four states have possibilities to become Republican states, or at least to be in a position where they could turn Republican majorities much more often. And I think there that's a problem of getting more enters from the outside, from the end Kentucky, and these border states, and then the parties in those states watching their leadership, having good programs and doing their best to develop their own party. I think the situation in the South is different. While our state is not typically a Southern state politically, we have some of the same problems. We have the problem of not having local and state administrations, which give you continuity. What I think can be done in the South is to take advantage of the Eisenhower victory, to take into the leadership some of the Democrats who voted for General Eisenhower, to take into that leadership even more importantly, the young people who came under his banner this year. Senator, although you were a Republican, you have been serving as a delegate on the UN, haven't you, under the appointee of the Truman administration? Yes, I served as a delegate in 1949. And because of your experience there, I'd like to ask you some questions about the UN. First, do you think the United Nations is a success? Well, it's not a success in the terms that people have hoped. I think it's had a success. I think it's great success is that it's been an estimate which has held together the nations, who are members other than the satellite, nations and Russia, and kept them pretty generally up on together as against Russian domination and aggression. Well, hasn't one of its chief effects been to act as a sounding board for Russia and propaganda against the United States? Yes, it's given Russia a forum. It's also given the United States, Great Britain, smaller countries a forum. Also, it has given the other nations of the world, at least the representatives are there, a chance to see the Russians, to hear them, and to analyze their propaganda. And I think that's been of definite value. Well, sir, our viewers, I'm sure, would like to have your views on what the Republican Party is likely to do on domestic issues on January the 20th. First of all, sir, do you believe that the Republican Party will reduce taxes? I think it will take the steps which will lead to reduction of taxes. I think reduction of taxes depends on what happens in Korea. Do you think that the Republican Party will attempt to repeal any of the so-called social legislation that's been built up by the new and fair deals? In detail, there may be specific laws that will be repealed. In general, I think the general programs of social security, of the wage in our law, some labor legislation, general social programs will be maintained, but they'll be examined and analyzed. When you come from a state that has a considerable labor vote, do you think that there'll be more strikes under Republican administration than there have been? I have the belief that there will be fewer strikes, and I think we've already seen some evidence of that since the election that some strikes are being settled. The reason I say that is I believe that when labor knows, and capital as well, but I think particularly labor, because I think it's generally understood that they've had, I think, a stronger advocate, and the merits always should provide when they know now that they've got to do what they say they want to do, bargain collectively, then you're going to have better chances for agreement. Well, I'm sorry, sir, our time has happened. Thank you for being with us. Thank you very much. The opinions you've heard our speakers express tonight are entirely their own. The editorial board for this edition of the Longing Chronoscope was Mr. William Bradford Huey and Mr. Henry Haslett. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable John Sherman Cooper, Senator-Elect from Kentucky. Under any Christmas tree, it's the little packages which intrigue. What can it be, we say? And this Christmas, many hope that in one like this, there'll be a Longing, the world's most honored watch. Truly, throughout the world, no other name on a Christmas watch means so much as the name Longing. In the whole world, there are few watches to equal Longing in quality and none of such great renown. Among the finest watches of the world, Longing alone has won 10 World's Fair Grand Prizes, 28 Gold Medal Awards, and so many honors for accuracy. Now, if this Christmas you wish to give the gift of great prestige, why not a Longing? Every Longing watch is superlative in styling, superb in finish, unsurpassed for faithful timekeeping. Yet unbelievably, you may buy and proudly give a Longing watch this Christmas for as little as $71.50. Longing, the world's most honored watch. The world's most honored Christmas gift. Premier product of the Longing Wittner Watch Company since 1866, maker of watches of the highest character. We invite you to join us every Monday, Wednesday and Friday evening at this same time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, a television journal of important issues of the hour. Broadcast on behalf of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Wittner, distinguished companion to the world-honored Lawn Jean. This is David Ross speaking for your regular host, Frank Knight, reminding you that Lawn Jean and Wittner watches are sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jewelers who proudly display this emblem, agency for Lawn Jean Wittner watches. Tuesday nights, they're suspense on the CBS television network.