Baraboo weekly news. [volume] (Baraboo, Wis.) 1912-197?, 1912-08-15
Politics Here
Discussed.

| for publishing the article from the Chi
cago Tribune and for your invitation
to the use of your columns for the ex-
preston of opinions, even though they
may not coincide with your own.
Since none of our local papers
champion the cause of the Progressive
party, it is certainly generous of that
one which allows subscriber TO. Not
to infer that the other papers would
not allow the privilege, indeed, have
no doubt they would.
If can change one vote to the Pro-
gressive cause, shall not be disap-
pointed. Easily satisfied you think?
Cut out an easy task for myself? I am
not so sure of it. Why? Because
most of your readers, Messrs. Editors,
have already determined to support
the progressive cause, those who have
not are not easily convinced.
Let me explain: A man who says
he will not vote the progressive ticket
because the present eader of that party
fought too hard for the nomination,
is not likely to be convinced that there
is anything to fight for. He is the
kind who, when boy, hoovered dis
mayed on the edges of "the fight. ="
1t it proved real fight he ran to "tell
teacher"
Roosevelt fought Mr.. Taft too hard,
disgr Aced himself, disgraced the Ma
tion"-that is, for the moment, the
popular thing to say. Many say it be-
cause they heard some one else say it.
1t has become bromidic. Iwant some
of my friends who repeat this trite rea-
son to state what it was Mr.. Roose-
welt said that disqualified him for the
presidency. | have read everything I
could of his speeches and here is the
worst can recall. He said Mr.. Taft's
position was one of "tiabby &C
quiesence" to boss rule. It was true,
but perhaps Mr.. Roosevelt ought not
to have said it. It was perhaps Inn
polite of him. But is it, or any of the
other similar things he is reported to
have said, sufficient reason for not vot-
ing for him?
But admitting that at least for nice
people who never can endure any
thing extreme, or strenuous, and who
never became intensely in earnest
about anything, admitting that Roose-
welt does do things in an extreme way,
that he is very, very strenuous and
that he is very much in earnest, can
we not forgive him if, in the heat OF
the battle, he is waging against those
reactionary policies which, if con-
tinued, every thinking man must
know will result in the gravest of con-
sequences to our Nation, can we not
forgive him for having said rather
harsh thing of Mr.. Taft?
This sounds like an ap logy for
Roosevelt, and so is, an apology to
these who lead sucu "sofL" lives that
We must apoog re TO them for ST ting
the truth 100 biuntly. The very force OF
Ro 'st ve't's statements prejudice timid
people-to these his advocates
must apologize. Not so TO those of
courage and stout hearts. To those ii
matters not if he seals spade "a
spade", if he says Mr.. Taft that be
"means well weakly
| was talking with a man the othei
day who said, 81 have no use for Mr..
Roosevelt" "What?" said I, 81
thought you were great admirer of
his" eyes, [ was a year ago, bat
since he criticised Taft he lowered his
dignity IL have no use for him." "Do
you think Taft above criticism, don't
you think bis attitude is contrary to
the will of the people and antagonistic
to the best interests of the country"
"Well, don't know but what it is,
but | can't stand for Roosevelt, not
since he made such a fight against
Taft even though Taft was wrong"
There you have it. If you will take
the trouble to find out why your
friends raise their hands deprecatingly
when you mention Roosevelt, you will
generally find it is through timidity
and mere prejudice. But so with all
of them. OF these others, with your
kind permission, Messrs. Editors, [
will have something to say in another
issue.
The march of progress of the race
has not been TO the "tune of min
uet."
Sincerely Yours,