called unsinkable. once the lookout bells were sounded, the lookout sighted an iceberg ahead, they struck the bells three times. ding, ding, ding. which is a warning saying that there s some object ahead. doesn t mean dead ahead, it means ahead of the ship. it doesn t say what kind of obje object. what the lookout then did, he went to a telephone nest and called down to the officer on the bridge to tell them what it is that they saw. and when the phone was finally answered, the entire conversation was, what do you see? and the response was, iceberg right ahead. and the response from the officer was, thank you. samuel helper on the truths and myths of that night, sunday at 4:00 p.m. eastern. part of american history tv this weekend on c-span3. martin luther king is a man, of all the people i ve met and talked with and spent time with over the years, is a man that i most the american individual that i admire most of all, of all of them. for me, he is my personal hero. w
commissioner jerry patterson, the person ultimately responsible for making this program happen. it s always a pleasure to be among people who understand the importance and the need to save texas history. a year ago before this meeting, my wife, tara, and i were eating dinner the night before. someone asked us what we were doing in town. we said, we re here for the save texas history symposium. they said, why does texas history need saving? and so many things flooded through my head at that point that i didn t really know how to answer. all i could think about was how all of us work the museums, the archives, the libraries, the general land office, the texas historical commission and we fight for funds to preserve the materials to support scholarship, to make them accessible, to publish them and to bring the fruits of that scholarship to the classroom through all the teachers and the education work that we do. so i really didn t have a good answer for the person at the dinner
peacetime draft that roosevelt helped initiate and get through congress as well. but ultimately, as the campaign progressed, willkie did make an attack on the president. he said the president is plotting and planning to send america into war. in other words, willkie wasn t an isolationist, but, of course, he was opposed to america getting involved in the war. as he saw the election slipping away from him, he did make the argument that you can t vote for roosevelt or you ll get into war. anyone know how roosevelt responded? didn t he pretty much promise that he wouldn t send anybody to war? he absolutely promised, we re not going to get involved in the war. i m not going to send american boys to die in an overseas war, establishing, not for the first time, but further ratifying a fundamental premise that every time it s 100% guaranteed that a president says i m not getting involved in a war during a campaign, what does he do immediately after? gets us involved in a war. wo
roosevelt or you ll get into war. anyone know how roosevelt responded? did he pretty much promise that he absolutely promised, we re not going to get involved in the war. i m not going to send american boys to die in an overseas war, establishing, not for the first time, but further ratifying a fundamental premise that every time it s 100% guaranteed that a president says i m not getting involved in a war during a campaign, what does he do immediately after? gets us involved in a war. woodrow wilson, world war i. franklin roosevelt, world war ii. lyndon johnson, the vietnam war. george w. bush, the wars in afghanistan and iraq. you name it, every president who s disclaimed any desire to get america involved in a war somehow manages immediately or shortly after the presidency to do just that to get america involved in the war. just switch here for one moment. do we have the slide up? i don t know why i m getting that thing. willkie gave roosevelt a bit of a run for his m