 Longing watches have won 10 World's Fair Grand Prizes, 28 gold medals, and more honors for accuracy than any other timepiece. Longing, the world's most honored watch, is made and guaranteed by the Longing Wittemaw Watch Company. It's time for the Longing Chronoscope, a television journal of the important issues of the hour, brought to you every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday. A presentation of the Longing Wittemaw Watch Company, maker of Longing, the world's most honored watch, and Wittemaw, distinguished companion to the world-honored Longing. Good evening. This is Frank Knight. May I introduce our co-editors for this edition of the Longing Chronoscope? Mr. William Bradford Huey, editor of the American Mercury, and Mr. Henry Haslett, editor of the Freeman and contributing editor for Newsweek Magazine. Our distinguished guest for this evening is the honorable Estes Kefauver, United States Senator from Tennessee. The opinions expressed are necessarily those of the speakers. Senator Kefauver, the members of our Chronoscope audience, of course, remember you, sir, from your sensational crime investigations. They know that you are the vigorous Tennessean who now aspires to the Democratic nomination for the presidency. And tonight our audience will appreciate the views on some of your political views. Now, sir, if you are running for the Democratic nomination, what is your present criticism? What is your principal criticism of the Democratic administration that now exists? Mr. Huey, I think I may make this very clear in the beginning that I'm running on my own. I think that we have had two great and fine Democratic administrations. I have supported the foreign policy and the economic and social program of both President Roosevelt and President Truman. You are a new dealer and a fair dealer. Well, I don't classify myself as on the dealers. I believe in progress. And if you want to say a new dealer, a fair dealer, I believe that the American people have made great advancement both in our foreign policy and in our domestic policy under the last two Democratic administrations. You want to know why I'm running for president? I feel that, of course, every American boy aspires to run. I want to do what I can to see that we continue on with an aggressive foreign policy that we do not abandon our place of leadership in the world. Also, I'm very much interested in seeing that we continue to have our social and economic gains. I do want to place additional emphasis upon the necessity of taking affirmative action in the effort against corruption. I want us to see the federal government taking more leading part with Congress and the executive department and leadership in that respect. And also, I feel that we must get on a sounder financial basis that we cannot go on year after year on basis of deficit financing. And I think, Mr. Hoover, that there's room for youth. I don't call myself young because I'm not, as you know. But I think there is room for new ideas and younger people in both of our political parties. Well, Senator, I take it, then, that if there are two issues between you and the president, one of them is that you don't feel that there has been sufficiently drastic dealing with the corruption issue, or sufficiently adequate dealing with it, and that you are a little worried about the spending program. I think in fairness, we should say that a great deal has been done, I think, both in government and out in this effort. But I think in Congress and in the executive department in our country, generally, at all levels of government, that we ought to place more emphasis upon the effort against the racketeer and the wrongdoer. Because, of course, I have had a more intimate familiarity with the condition in the country today than perhaps some other people. So it does impress me as being something that we must take action all along the line and at every level of government and among our people. Well, you think that is the leading issue, and you would see it? I'm not trying to draw issues between Mr. Truman and myself, or between anyone else and myself. I'm running because I feel that I have the qualifications that I've had the experience and that I have the ideas for the future of America, which the American people want and which will appeal to the voters of America. Well, Senator... But of course there are differences, as you have pointed out. On basic philosophy, though, since our people must make some choices in 1952, on basic philosophy, you approve most of what was done domestically and in foreign policy in the Roosevelt administration and also in the Truman administration. Yes, that's right, Mr. Truman. And as a political figure, you want to extend the philosophy of the Roosevelt and Truman administrations. Generally, that's true, and I want to see them carried on vigorously. I think I do have some minor points of difference as to our foreign policy. But I think that we have done well in maintaining and carrying out our position of leadership in the world in the interest of peace. You are not a pretty... I think that we did a... I think in the United Nations and in the Atlantic pack that we have done things that were necessary along that land. And you are not concerned with our being overextended abroad. You believe that we do have commitments abroad and that we must continue to spend large sums of money abroad and that we must continue to station American troops abroad and be generally concerned, greatly concerned with what goes on in the rest of the world. Yes, I do. I think that we have to share our part of responsibility along with the other nations of the North Atlantic. I think that we must join other free people in the interest of peace. I think that we must build toward a system of collective security that's going to reverse the trend of war every 25 years. As to the exact commitments as to how much we should spend on military aid abroad or economic assistance, I have a feeling frankly that over a long period of time, unless we get into an actual war, or unless the condition gets worse, that we are going to have to trim down even our defense spending so that we will not be bankrupting ourselves. In our armed services committee, we have seen a great deal of waste both in military spending abroad and in the handling of our armed services here. You're on a lost dog committee there. I'm on the so-called Lyndon Johnson committee. That's right. Well, let me get this clear, sir. So basically, you feel that the country would be better off in 1952 by electing another Democratic administration so that you could continue to carry on what's been put in motion by Roosevelt and Truman. Yes, that's a good... I certainly do, Mr. Huey. I think that we should have another Democratic administration. Of course, I hope that I have a part in it, but I think it's very vital for the country that we do elect a Democrat. Because we do have a philosophy, I think the general course that we have been going is all right, is in the public interest. I don't know which direction and the way of foreign policy we would go if we had a Republican administration. And I think the fact that the Republican party generally has opposed the economic and social gains, the resource development that we have had in the country, although many of them have favored it, but as a party they have opposed it, would not speak well for the future of those programs under a Republican administration. Well, Senator, most of the people who discuss your candidacy say that you face opposition within the Democratic party from two ends. Now, the Southern Democrats are supposed to think that you're too much in favor of the fair deal, and some of the administration Democrats feel that you have been taking too drastic a position or on the question of corruption. Now, would you like to comment on that? Yes, I certainly would, Mr. Hazlett. That's quite true. I do face opposition from both in the South and both in the North. All of it points out that I think it's going to be very difficult for us to have any president who will meet the exact formula of any section of the country. And I think that any section that expects that is just not looking at it from an overall viewpoint. I feel that my position is one that does take into consideration the various parts of the country. And that's what I'm going to present to the people. I think they will understand that no section of the country can have a man just exactly like the one they want. Why do you think the president first took his name out of the primaries of New Hampshire and then decided to put it back in again? Have you any theory on that? Well, Mr. Hazlett, I have enough trouble keeping up with my own difficulties without trying to guess or speculate about somebody else's. All I know is that I read in the paper that Mr. McKinney felt that for organizational reasons that the president should go back in the New Hampshire primary. I think the idea being that the political organization there might suffer if he didn't allow his name to remain on the primary. But I never exactly understood how that was true. Well, as a final question, Senator Keefo, for what do you think are the chief issues that will be decided by the voters in the coming campaign? Are you talking about the presidential? I'm talking about the presidential campaign, yes, not the primary campaign. I think the general thing is the issue is the one of foreign policy. Are we going to go on and strengthen and better our foreign policy and follow through with our position of leadership? Or are we going to turn back and hedge and go to some extent back to isolation? I think that's on one side. I think on the other side that the American people are going to believe that the Democratic Party can be better trusted to carry out our social and economic program than the Republican Party. I think on those two things will be an issue. Of course, a big issue in government at this time is cleaning up any crime and corruption, taking leadership in the interest of battle against the cartel of crime. Thank you very much, Senator Keefo, for being with us tonight. I'm afraid our time is up. Well, thank you, Mr. Haslitt. The editorial board for this edition of the Lawn Jean Chronoscope was Mr. William Bradford Huey and Mr. Henry Haslitt. Our distinguished guest was the Honorable Estes Keefo, United States Senator from Tennessee. Neither the eye nor the camera can determine a winner at the events in the Winter Olympics at Oslo. The winner is determined by the world-honored watch Lawn Jean, the watch of first choice for timing championship sports in all fields. Now why? There is one reason and one reason alone, the greater accuracy of Lawn Jean watches of all types. Examine the records of the accuracy trials at the great government observatories and you will find proof of this statement. That is why championship sports in all fields throughout the world choose Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, for official timing, why national and international sports and contest associations have named Lawn Jean as the facial watch. Among these are the American Automobile Association, the American Power Boat Association, and the National Aeronautics Association. Just so, it's the greater accuracy of Lawn Jean watches of all types that has made Lawn Jean the first choice with discriminating men and women everywhere. So if you wish to buy the quality watch of all the world, either for yourself or as a gift, you too should choose Lawn Jean, premier product of the Lawn Jean Witner Watch Company. Lawn Jean, official watch, Olympic Winter Games of 1952. Join us every Monday, Wednesday, and Friday evening at this same time for the Lawn Jean Chronoscope, the television journal of the important dishes of the hour, broadcast on behalf of Lawn Jean, the world's most honored watch, and Witner, distinguished companion to the world's honored Lawn Jean. Sold and serviced from coast to coast by more than 4,000 leading jurors who proudly display this emblem. Agency for Lawn Jean Witner watches. This is Frank Knight speaking. This is the CBS Television Network.