A reader defends my whack at Harry:

Jonah,
In your G-file today you wrote:
Being a Democrat from Missouri, and being Dick Gephardt, it’s not that surprising Gephardt would cater his comments to whatever the politics demand of him. The last president from Missouri had a similar predilection for telling people what they wanted to hear. H. L. Mencken said of Gephardt’s hero: “If there had been any formidable body of cannibals in the country, Harry Truman would have promised to provide them with free missionaries fattened at the taxpayer’s expense.”
I have to disagree. If Harry Truman had focused on public opinion polls he would not have de-segregated the armed forces which opened the door for the Civil Rights Movement. In 1948 Democrats opposed desegregation. He also would not have recognized the State of Israel. He would not have sacked Douglas MacArthur, as he would have acquiesced to MacArthur’s judgment on the conduct of the Korean War. He would not have broken the rail road workers strike.
Harry Truman was a leader first. Like President Bush he relied heavily on his faith, he put great stock in the value of his word and he didn’t tolerate liars. Dick Gephardts only common trait with Harry S Truman is that of party affiliation, but remember that Ronald Reagan was a Democrat when Harry Truman was President. Harry Truman was born in the previous century, went to war at the age 33, married and experienced a significant financial setback by age 38, when he held his first elected office. Reagan also came to politics late in life, but Gephardt has been a politician all his life, aside from a 6 year stint as an Attorney in the Air National Guard, probably as a dodge against being drafted for Vietnam.
No, Jonah, I think you missed the mark on this reference. Harry Truman was not as conservative as we might like, but he does not deserve to be disgraced by being associated with Gephardt. And frankly, it is too late for Gephardt to use Truman as a role model, because Gephardt has chosen Clinton as his lodestone.