Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Posted: 11/14/2003 9:21:22 PM EDT
Not to mention heavy-handed government, but I ran across this quote from him while on DU.

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."--FDR



Wow, did he miss the point of America, or what....
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:26:20 PM EDT
It's a well known fact he was a closet Socialist.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:28:00 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/14/2003 9:30:16 PM EDT by raven]
FDR has a point in that quote. People forget how close to the edge the West and liberal societies came to in the 1930's. Thank god Hitler invaded the USSR instead of teaming up with them to fight against the free world.

That aside, I dont think FDR did a very good job of leading the country through the Depression, and it only took 10 years from the birth of Social Security for the seeds of its destruction to be sown by the Baby Boom.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:31:57 PM EDT
Holy crap -

Someday you will figure out that not all people believe precisely what you do and you have to take the bad with the good.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:41:56 PM EDT
I really dont give a rats ass about what he did with the BIG exception to his hunting. He was one, very lucky man. He was fortunate enough to hunt all over the world with little to no regulations. His 1909 safari is a classic example of safaris of days past.
Safaris that will never be had again.

If you enjoy hunting, I suggest you rent the movie, "In the Blood".


From the net:
"Gripping tale of hunter and hunted. Documents two African safaris: the first led by President Roosevelt in 1909, the second by his great grandson nearly 80 years later. Features TR's Holland and Holland rifle and rare film footage of the 1909 safari. Intense, powerful, provocative, breathtaking. Establishes the key role of hunting in the conservation of wildlife"



CH
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:42:28 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:43:56 PM EDT
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:48:02 PM EDT
[feeling stupid]I guess my slisdexia kicked in!!![/feeling stupid]
CH
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 9:54:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By ZRH:
Holy crap -

Someday you will figure out that not all people believe precisely what you do and you have to take the bad with the good.



Precisely my ass.

Try exact opposite.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 10:02:31 PM EDT
IMHO, after having studied the Fella in college, the only really good thing about his presidency was his leadership abilities, especially as far as the war was concerned. While not every decision was right, a leader must always have a plan of action, wheter right or wrong, or the cause will crumble.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 10:40:56 PM EDT


Some people join cults that believe spaceships will take them to heaven when they drink the Koolaid. Some folks think that an unconstitutionally large federal nanny state is a good thing and worship FDR as their god.

You can't control what people believe. Just fight for your right to control what you believe.

Link Posted: 11/14/2003 10:50:55 PM EDT
Even our greatest hero has a few skeleton in the closets. No hero is with out sin.
Link Posted: 11/14/2003 11:00:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
Not to mention heavy-handed government, but I ran across this quote from him while on DU.

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."--FDR

Wow, did he miss the point of America, or what....



No, did you?

Link Posted: 11/14/2003 11:20:43 PM EDT

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
Not to mention heavy-handed government, but I ran across this quote from him while on DU.

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."--FDR

Wow, did he miss the point of America, or what....



No, did you?


Word...




Link Posted: 11/15/2003 4:38:11 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2003 4:40:47 AM EDT by TRW]
OMG. FDR is definately revered in certain circles here in upstate NY. I live about 10 miles from Hyde Park.

I think he is the WORST president we have had in the entire history of this country. He was a socialist and started the concept of "if there is a problem, the government will solve it" attitude that continues to grow and continues to grow the size of government.

I'm helping my wife produce the musical Annie for the local community theater here and having read the script numerous times, I really want to gag. According the liberals who penned this script:

- The depression was all Herbet Hoovers fault and not the result of a cyclic economy
- FDR is the all-wise, all-knowing, fatherly figure of a president that will lead this country out of the depression and into prosperity

Choke me with a fu<kin spoon!!!

There is even a song in the musical where a bunch of bums thank Herbert Hoover for their plight.

A recent book now spins the theory that FDRs socialist policies actually prolonged the depression.

Now...try finding that book in a Hyde Park bookstore....NOT!!!! I can't even find Ann Coulters bestsellers in my local library.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 8:00:13 AM EDT

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
Not to mention heavy-handed government, but I ran across this quote from him while on DU.

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."--FDR

Wow, did he miss the point of America, or what....



No, did you?




You claim to support RKBA, yet think the government should be stronger than the people?

You DO realize the point of the 2nd Amendment, right?

You know, resistance to tyranny? That the government can NEVER become stronger than the people?
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 9:00:42 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2003 9:01:14 AM EDT by llanero]

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

You know, resistance to tyranny? That the government can NEVER become stronger than the people?



...ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power.

Well, "people" and "private power" can be considered as two different critters.
An all powerful military-industrial complex or an all powerful legally elected megalomaniac, like ol' 88 himself, are examples of the type of "private powers" that FDR feared.
Any consolidation of power that upsets the balance between the executive, judiciary and legislative branches of government is most definately a threat to democracy.

That being said:

FDR was president during the most difficult times this country had faced since the Civil War (I suppose some here would argue that Lincoln launched the crusade for a "unconstitutionally large federal nanny state")--he HAD act radically stave off disaster and stave it off he did and he was adorated for it. Much like Lincoln.

Now, years later, as memories of the incredible hardships and poverty of the Great Depression fade as well as those of the man that led this country out of that dark period, it seems it is finally safe and fashionable to bash FDR (much like Lincoln--"Lincoln the racist" was a popular topic on campus a few years back).

Let me tell ya--the few old timers left who had to eat'possum and carp during the thirties will never bash FDR. And those that endured the yoke of slavery sure as hell never bashed Lincoln.

What's next for the next couple of generations of Americans as the memories of the injustices of segregation fade? Why, the bashing of JFK (he's a Democrat, Catholic, AND Teddy's brother--the perfect target fot neo-con history revision!) because he gave state's rights a near-coup de grace, thus continuing the march of the "unconstitutionally large federal nanny state".
But remember, anyone who had to find a "colored only" restroom, drinking fountain, restaurant, club, diner, laundry service or barber, will never bash JFK.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 9:05:54 AM EDT

Originally Posted By TRW:
A recent book now spins the theory that FDRs socialist policies actually prolonged the depression.




Just as there are a multitude of books out there that spin the theory that the US gun culture actually increase crime.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 9:44:26 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2003 9:46:47 AM EDT by wetidlerjr]

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:

Originally Posted By wetidlerjr:

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
Not to mention heavy-handed government, but I ran across this quote from him while on DU.

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."--FDR

Wow, did he miss the point of America, or what....



No, did you?




You claim to support RKBA, yet think the government should be stronger than the people?

You DO realize the point of the 2nd Amendment, right?

You know, resistance to tyranny? That the government can NEVER become stronger than the people?



I don't claim to support the RKBA, I DO support it but that isn't the point. FDR simply said that no private group (private meaning "not public") should control this nation but rather the public should control it through the democratic processes of the republic. We, the people (the public) should control the government. If you read something else into what he said then you have just as much right to be wrong as anyone. You might want to study the context in which the speech was given. You may want to say FDR was a socialist and I probably wouldn't disagree but this quote is not the one to back that view. You're reaching.


Link Posted: 11/15/2003 10:13:30 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Combat_Jack:
IMHO, after having studied the Fella in college, the only really good thing about his presidency was his leadership abilities, especially as far as the war was concerned. While not every decision was right, a leader must always have a plan of action, wheter right or wrong, or the cause will crumble.



see sig line.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 10:33:57 AM EDT


"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."--FDR

Wow, did he miss the point of America, or what....



Yes, he did, and magnificently. One of our worst presidents.

Notice how to redefine "liberty" as the dominance of the (democratic) State he conflated "private power" with "ownership of government." Says who? This is shoddy reasoning - born of a belief that government, through the sanctity of "democracy" has a preemptive claim on all power to start with. Which is certainly not a view consistent with the Founders': government exists, with invoilate limits, primarily to protect the unalienable rights of individuals.

But I've always read that quote as the typical socialist fear of obsolescence. Notice, they still do it today - cry "Fascism!" when people are free, and busy achieving what the state, through fiat, cannot.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 10:49:59 AM EDT
I think the point was that if any one group has too much power, that is bad for liberty as it could easily lead down the path to tyranny.

FDR must have done a few things right as he was president the longest of anyone. Sadly I'm not sure if he envisioned what were intended to be temporary measures to rescue the economy and prevent pestilence, would become permanent institutions and entitlements.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 12:51:00 PM EDT
the US and FDR rightly realized that plunging the US into War with Japan at that time was the wrong war at the wrong time. The Japanese could have given the US a run for it's money in the Pacific. the US would have been alone and was even less prepared than the future Allies were. And those Allies would not have joined in.Highly unlikely the US people would have wanted a war at that point.

Like it or not FDR did in fact recognize that Hitler was the problem and Europe was where the war was going to have to befought.. Like it or not FDR did a lot of good things in addition to many of the things that many people hate. He dragged the US into more preparation for the coming war. He saw the US as getting into it and frankly did things that should have dragged us into the European war sooner than it happened. Pearl Harbor was a major mistake by the Japanese. The Germans and Italians then declared Was on the US. Another major mistake. FDR was able to make the ETO the destination for most of the US effort not the Pacific. Had the Germans and the Italians not declared war the US people would have forced the major US effort to be in the Pacific, likely consigning Europe to the Commies eventually.
And without TVA, WPA and some of the other programs which were probably socialist much of the South and southern plains would have continued to be the poverty pit it was.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 1:06:50 PM EDT
FDR is responsible for a program which still has the potential to destroy this country.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 1:22:11 PM EDT
While I don’t have strong feelings about FDR one way or another, I’ll agree with him in the above quote.

I certainly don’t like the idea of, say, Bill Gates actually running this country out of Redmond, Oregon!!
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 1:33:01 PM EDT

Originally Posted By 199:
While I don’t have strong feelings about FDR one way or another, I’ll agree with him in the above quote.

I certainly don’t like the idea of, say, Bill Gates actually running this country out of Redmond, Oregon!!



That's just plain silly. Stop listening to the anti-business bias in the meadia and hollywood. How much infulence does Microsoft have in your day to day life? How much influence does the Federal Government have?
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 2:44:05 PM EDT
By coincidence, I was thinking this morning about the great deception of FDR's socialist agenda. I believe that he simply (and accurately) saw the hardship of the Great Depression as an opportunity to implement a socialist program he wanted anyway, but which would never have been accepted by the public but for the contrast between their present misery and the pie-in-the-sky FDR promised them. The best example is Social Security. People would have their money in gov't "accounts" [yeah, right] to provide for their old age, beginning at 65. Wanna guess what Americans' life expectancy was in 1933? You got it: 65. It was, for most people, a promise of exactly nothing.

His greatest sin (in every sense of the word) was ginning up the court packing scheme. That, more than anything else, started the decline of Constitutional gov't in this country. I piss on his memory. (Well, I would if I could figure out how.)
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 3:08:30 PM EDT

Originally Posted By Q3131A:
... Stop listening to the anti-business bias in the meadia and hollywood. ...


If you wish, replace the Bill Gates example with Barbara Streisand, the New York Times, the AFL/CIO, or such.

The fundamental issue being addressed by FDR is an elected versus a non-elected government.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 6:55:14 PM EDT

A lot of monday morning quarterbacks present on this thread! Did anyone here actually experience the great depression? I seriously doubt it. And the ranks of World War II vets are getting thinner with each passing year.

My Father grew up dirt poor in Texas during the depression. He joined the Civilian Conservation Corps and had a job, meals, and a tent to live in. Plus sent money home to his struggling parents.

Was FDR a socialist? Maybe. But, given the times and circumstances, he accomplished some great things. Leading the US to victory in World War II and putting poverty stricken Americans to work during the depression probably could have been done by any run-of-the-mill US president... but then we will never know that, will we?

Panzer Out

Link Posted: 11/15/2003 7:02:34 PM EDT
He was a very good president in very bad times.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 7:36:26 PM EDT

Originally Posted By llanero:
FDR was president during the most difficult times this country had faced since the Civil War



What if the reason that "these were the most difficult times this country has faced" were because ROOSEVELT was president. Why is he the cure and not the cause?? There you go believing the liberal propaganda about how great he was and how much he did for this country.

I didn't grow up during the depression but my grandparents did. They hated Roosevelt. They saw him for what he was, a socialist.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 7:46:51 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2003 7:50:08 PM EDT by LWilde]
Take it from a long time, hard core conservative...FDR was the right man for the times.

Personally I loath his politics. He was pretty damn far left...but he also had a lot of very good qualities...most importantly, the ability to get the country in the right frame of mind to fight the Depression. (Note that I did not say WIN...that had to wait until December 7, 1941! The war actually ended the Depression because it put all of us back to work or in the service.)

Take yourself back to 1932...do a bit of serious study and you will see why most of America loved the guy and why the Free World did too. The entire World was mired deeply in the worst Depression in history. 25% of all Americans were out of work...people were literally starving in the gutters. The farmers were going bust by the thousands and the factories of the midwest and east were closing up. Basically, the entire world was in a deep funk.

Hitler, Mussilini, Stalin, and Tojo were leading the "Isms" as they murdered or enslaved millions around the World. Communism in fact, was on the verge of spreading throughout the entire Free World...with only British and American capitalism stopping it cold as an economic system...although the theory is still taught with great gusto on our own campi.

Basically, the country was headed down the crapper and FDR, a great believer in Keyensian economics decided to make the United States federal gubmint the incredibly great monster it is today! He and his liberal pals actually believed that if the private sector could not our would not put Americans back to work...the the Feds would. In truth...and FOR THE TIMES ONLY...the idea bears some merit. I disagree most strongly with that paradigm now...since our private economy is roaring along but...then? I think that some serious pump priming was necessary by the boyz in DC.

There were a bunch of other things FDR did...some good and some pretty crappy...like having that lesbian socialist for a wife sticking her schnoz into our biz all the time...but I guess history does repeat itself. Why do y'all think Miz Hillary sees herself as Eleanor?

Finally, FDR was a very good war president. When you consider the gigantic war machine he had to ensure got built up, the allies he had to keep on the team, the prima donna generals and admirals he had to stroke, and the reality that only if he could somehow get America into the war, would civilization be saved from the terror of Nazism and Facism, you begin to realize the immense task he faced before and during the war. Remember, when the draft bill passed, it did so by only ONE vote in the Senate. Most of us were deeply isolationist back then...and FDR knew that if we remained so, it could eventualy lead to our ultimate destruction.

Anyway...like him or not, FDR surely will go down in history as one of the great presidents. Not necessarily a bravura performance in the long haul...but certainly a great man.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 8:50:19 PM EDT
I dunno if i could ever forgive FDR for increasing the size of the government so much, but I gotta give him credit for leading us through a world war. Even if his politics were completely wrong, he was a good leader in wartime I suppose..
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 11:14:52 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/15/2003 11:15:38 PM EDT by FLAL1A]

Originally Posted By panzersergeant:

A lot of monday morning quarterbacks present on this thread! Did anyone here actually experience the great depression? I seriously doubt it. And the ranks of World War II vets are getting thinner with each passing year.



This wins the Henry Ford Cup for most obtuse statement of the month. By your reasoning, not only is the judgment of history (which must always be made by "Monday morning quarterbacks") pointless, no one has the moral authority to make it unless he lived through the time in question. Thus no one is entitled to any opinion about the events surrounding the American Revolution or the Civil War, and in another 50 years no one will have the right to pass judgment on the events surrounding WWII.

The fact is that FDR used the national anxiety over the Great Depression to sneak in a permanent program of "reformation" of the American government, which has nearly killed Federalism and grossly distorted the vision of the Founding Fathers. There is no excuse for this. Maybe the CCC was a great idea (although I am by no means convinced that Roosevelt did anything toward ending the Depression which was actually effective, unless you count getting into WWII; I don't think that governments have the ability to manipulate economies to that degree. Whoever's in charge when the cycle turns up just claims that his program worked); even so, there was no excuse for making the underhanded, permanent, systemic changes that were made in that tim. Following in the steps of Esau, the hungry Democratic voters of the Great Depression traded our Constitutional birthright for a bowl of soup.
Link Posted: 11/15/2003 11:34:48 PM EDT
It's all about what price you put on freedom.


Link Posted: 11/16/2003 4:22:39 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FLAL1A:

Originally Posted By panzersergeant:

A lot of monday morning quarterbacks present on this thread! Did anyone here actually experience the great depression? I seriously doubt it. And the ranks of World War II vets are getting thinner with each passing year.



This wins the Henry Ford Cup for most obtuse statement of the month. By your reasoning, not only is the judgment of history (which must always be made by "Monday morning quarterbacks") pointless, no one has the moral authority to make it unless he lived through the time in question. Thus no one is entitled to any opinion about the events surrounding the American Revolution or the Civil War, and in another 50 years no one will have the right to pass judgment on the events surrounding WWII.

The fact is that FDR used the national anxiety over the Great Depression to sneak in a permanent program of "reformation" of the American government, which has nearly killed Federalism and grossly distorted the vision of the Founding Fathers. There is no excuse for this. Maybe the CCC was a great idea (although I am by no means convinced that Roosevelt did anything toward ending the Depression which was actually effective, unless you count getting into WWII; I don't think that governments have the ability to manipulate economies to that degree. Whoever's in charge when the cycle turns up just claims that his program worked); even so, there was no excuse for making the underhanded, permanent, systemic changes that were made in that tim. Following in the steps of Esau, the hungry Democratic voters of the Great Depression traded our Constitutional birthright for a bowl of soup.



Opinions are like assholes; everybody has one.

The difference here is that there are a lot of people still around who experienced the times in question, unlike, say, the Revolutionary War.

FDR may have been a leftist socialist, but he was the right man for the times.

Panzer Out
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 5:09:17 AM EDT

Originally Posted By FLAL1A:
Following in the steps of Esau, the hungry Democratic voters of the Great Depression traded our Constitutional birthright for a bowl of soup.




Perfect anology.....
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 5:30:22 AM EDT
fdr meant our government must represent the will of the people and that government must not be subservient to the ultra-rich.

my parents and grandparents were alive during the depression. imagine almost everybody you know out of work and eating whatever they could find (even out of the garbage). consider that you see people who are filthy rich about who, if they are hiring, are paying poverty wages...

anyone who lived during this period will tell you capitalism unrestrained in it's most extreme form has the potential to be just as destructive as socialism, unrestrained in it's most extreme form.

anyone who thinks fdr was a socialist really has no idea what it was like to be "just a regular guy" during the depression... if you are ignorant of history then god help your children if they have to relive it...
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 5:31:30 AM EDT
I think theres a little jealously here ! I can name three "great" democratic presidents right off the top of my head for the twentieth century 1.FDR 2.Wilson 3.Kennedy plus some that meant well but were for the most part misguided like LBJ, Truman.
But what great presidents do the republicAans have? Nixon? Hoover? Coolidge?Ford? all they have is that stupid ronald Reagan! who at best was a boring president for boring times. But that's all they've got so they Deify him like he did something so Great! BAH ! he did nothing really! And don't gimmie that Fall of communism thing cause everyone knows that system imploded on it's own because the people of eastern europe wanted freedom from Stalinist tyranny. At best he can be known as the Deficit pres. cause it tripled under his watch.
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 7:19:51 AM EDT
Whether you love or hate FDR's domestic policies (I count myself as one of the latter), his performance as a wartime president is without peer in American history. FDR's strategic brilliance, political deftness, and the ability to maintain and balance relationships with contentious coalition partners was essential to defeating the Axis powers.
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 7:38:57 AM EDT

Originally Posted By panzersergeant:
Opinions are like assholes; everybody has one.

The difference here is that there are a lot of people still around who experienced the times in question, unlike, say, the Revolutionary War.



Well, I once met a WWI vet whose outfit was quarantined on a college campus from the time he mustered in until the armistice was signed because of an outbreak of influenza. Based on his experiences, WWI was not a shooting war, and military operations consisted of drill, poker games, and wooing coeds. Applying your reasoning, I'd be well advised to ignore any smartass "historians" who talk about revisionist crap like "Verdun," since they weren't there, right?
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 8:10:02 AM EDT

Originally Posted By Sniper_Wolfe:
Not to mention heavy-handed government, but I ran across this quote from him while on DU.

"The liberty of a democracy is not safe if the people tolerate the growth of private power to a point where it becomes stronger than their democratic State itself. That, in its essence, is Fascism — ownership of government by an individual, by a group or by any controlling private power."--FDR
Wow, did he miss the point of America, or what....



Actually, I think you missed the point. He was referring to people like Wm. Randolph Hearst who controlled so many newspapers he about controlled the news. The same with a few indidviduals with shipping and the like. These few people were becoming more powerful than the elected government.

FDR was a great leader who recognized that a great people will not let the dumbest of us suffer. Even those who revile social security forget that survivor benefits are paid to the wives and children of men who die young. This was especially important before women were accepted into the workplace.

Its easy to criticize without knowing the facts but that reflects more on person doing the criticizing.



Link Posted: 11/16/2003 8:33:08 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/16/2003 9:34:12 AM EDT by RichinCM]

Originally Posted By FLAL1A:
Following in the steps of Esau, the hungry Democratic voters of the Great Depression traded our Constitutional birthright for a bowl of soup.



To paraphrase Josef Stalin, if you starve people to the brink of death and then give them some food, they will do whatever you want.
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 8:50:36 AM EDT
T-stox...

I think theres a little jealously here ! I can name three "great" democratic presidents right off the top of my head for the twentieth century 1.FDR 2.Wilson 3.Kennedy plus some that meant well but were for the most part misguided like LBJ, Truman.
But what great presidents do the republicAans have?
Nixon? Hoover? Coolidge?Ford? all they have is that stupid ronald Reagan! who at best was a boring president for boring times. But that's all they've got so they Deify him like he did something so Great! BAH ! he did nothing really! And don't gimmie that Fall of communism thing cause everyone knows that system imploded on it's own because the people of eastern europe wanted freedom from Stalinist tyranny. At best he can be known as the Deficit pres. cause it tripled under his watch.



It would seem that DU is returning the favor. We shouldn't be surprised however, for trolling begets trolling.

Link Posted: 11/16/2003 9:10:50 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/16/2003 9:28:56 AM EDT by LWilde]

Originally Posted By t-stox:
I think theres a little jealously here ! I can name three "great" democratic presidents right off the top of my head for the twentieth century 1.FDR 2.Wilson 3.Kennedy plus some that meant well but were for the most part misguided like LBJ, Truman.
But what great presidents do the republicAans have? Nixon? Hoover? Coolidge?Ford? all they have is that stupid ronald Reagan! who at best was a boring president for boring times. But that's all they've got so they Deify him like he did something so Great! BAH ! he did nothing really! And don't gimmie that Fall of communism thing cause everyone knows that system imploded on it's own because the people of eastern europe wanted freedom from Stalinist tyranny. At best he can be known as the Deficit pres. cause it tripled under his watch.



Are you REALLY as poorly informed and ignorant of facts as you appear to be...or are you just a ridiculous troll?

Clearly you know NOTHING of Ronald Reagan and are a VERY poor student of history. Please note, I am NOT saying you're a poor student of foolish liberal propaganda...on the contrary, you are mouthing their silly lies like a pro.

Go back and make a real study of the Reagan presidency. Go to your nearest college library and READ! Study the Cold War and how Reagan really ended it, after decades of wussy waffler presidents let the Soviets off the hook never had a vision. Reagan had a vision of a free world without the Soviets. He made that vision come true. THAT is also what pisses off you liberals too...your great socialist example is finally history. Now, you have to go to American campi to learn how to be good little socialists.

In about six months, if you really study hard and ignore the liberal tripe, you will come to understand the true greatness of the man.

On the other hand, since you are most likely a moronic liberal troll and in deep fear of the truth, you will ignore my counsel and advice and continue to make silly statements that identify you for what you are: just another ignorant liberal living in fear of the truth about the Greatness of Ronald Reagan.

Link Posted: 11/16/2003 9:13:19 AM EDT

Originally Posted By t-stox:
I think theres a little jealously here ! I can name three "great" democratic presidents right off the top of my head for the twentieth century 1.FDR 2.Wilson 3.Kennedy plus some that meant well but were for the most part misguided like LBJ, Truman.
But what great presidents do the republicAans have? Nixon? Hoover? Coolidge?Ford? all they have is that stupid ronald Reagan! who at best was a boring president for boring times. But that's all they've got so they Deify him like he did something so Great! BAH ! he did nothing really! And don't gimmie that Fall of communism thing cause everyone knows that system imploded on it's own because the people of eastern europe wanted freedom from Stalinist tyranny. At best he can be known as the Deficit pres. cause it tripled under his watch.



The tenor of your comment is instructive. You cite jealousy while denigrating another President that set the ground work for the greatest economic boom since the 60s. Can you cite the great accomplishments of these giants of the Democrat party? A quick summary:

Wilson - got us involved in WWI, which set the groundwork for WWII. Established the
Federal progressive income tax (Communist Manifesto, Second Plank). Created Federal Reserve Bank.

FDR - imposed multiple unconstitutional social programs. Broke the independence of the Supreme Courtby intimidation (pack the court, anyone?). Seized privately owned gold without compensation to shore up the value of the dollar. Signed GCA '34. Initiated the first peacetime military draft in US history.

Kennedy - bagged Marilyn Monroe. Enjoyed the economic ride started by Eisenhower.

LBJ - signed GCA '68. Declared War on Poverty, which has so far cost more than WWII and is nowhere close to victory, unless destroying the economy is considered victory.

The guys on the (D) side had their share of incompetence:

Carter - gas crisis, Iran hostages,

Clinton - incompetent foreign policy. Reinstated draft registration.

On the (R) side of the aisle:

T. Roosevelt - built Panama Canal. won Nobel Peace Prize for mediating Russo-Japanese War. Established foreign policy precedent of peace through superior firepower...

Coolidge - kept the expansion of government power in check by doing nothing. Results in a major economic boom.

Eisenhower - quietly guided the country to a peacetime economic boom. Expanded out defense capabilities to match the Soviet threat. Established the interstate highway system. Cut the draconian WWII progressive (communist) taxes.

Nixon - got us out of the Vietnam mess created by Kennedy and Johnson. Ended the involuntary draft.

Reagan - ended the Cold War by starting an arms race he knew the USSR couldn't finish. The Iron Curtain didn't fall until the Soviet troops were withrawn. He also fixed many of the problems with GCA '68. He let people keep more of what they earned by overhauling the income tax code, which resulted in the start of good econimic times.
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 9:33:10 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 11/16/2003 9:36:36 AM EDT by RichinCM]

Originally Posted By llanero:
I suppose some here would argue that Lincoln launched the crusade for a "unconstitutionally large federal nanny state")--he HAD act radically stave off disaster and stave it off he did and he was adorated for it. Much like Lincoln.

The "disaster" you speak of was his chances for reelection. It's not a sure thing when you lose a third of the country on your watch, especially when that third provides the majority of revenue for the government. Slavery had been in existence in the US for over 200 years. There was no need to act radically on it and the consequences of his actions have been felt for over 100 years. I'm sure it will be all better once you start paying your slave reparations tax.

"Lincoln the racist" was a popular topic on campus a few years back.

Depends on how you use the term. He considered blacks primitive and planned to send them back to Africa. That is well documented. You need to go back on campus and do some reading.

What's next for the next couple of generations of Americans as the memories of the injustices of segregation fade? Why, the bashing of JFK (he's a Democrat, Catholic, AND Teddy's brother--the perfect target fot neo-con history revision!) because he gave state's rights a near-coup de grace, thus continuing the march of the "unconstitutionally large federal nanny state".

JFK acts like a Republican of today. I don't recall hom doing anything to promote expansion of Federal power. So what did JFK do for civil rights? Did he talk about them or enact specific legislation? There's a big difference between a promise made and a promise kept. The big obstacle on enacting civil rights legislation was due to the Southern Democrats.

Link Posted: 11/16/2003 9:36:41 AM EDT

It would seem that DU is returning the favor. We shouldn't be surprised however, for trolling begets trolling.

i assure you i'm not a troll.. ok maybe i am but i'm not some DU "plant". go ahead ask me anything about firearms in general i'll probably know it. i did'nt join arf to spout liberal BS but i don't tow some "conservative party line" either. I belive in freedom for Individuals who's activities do not harm others but I also belive that the govt(meaning the people) has a duty to HELP the needy, poor elderly and children. it's plain to me, that original hippie said it all, #1 "render unto Ceasar" which means pay your Taxes! #2 "if you would be perfect., go , sell what you possess and GIVE TO THE POOR (ya know, Welfare BUMS) ,and you shall have treasures in heaven"


AMEN!
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 10:01:07 AM EDT
AWW crap! while i'm writing one reply three more posts come in that demand my attention!
T. Roosevelt - built Panama Canal. won Nobel Peace Prize for mediating Russo-Japanese War. Established foreign policy precedent of peace through superior firepower... first off he was a "GREEN" president who belived in conservation unlike all modern (R)'s and he was not really a "modern republican" in any sense of today's conserveative ideology so I don't know why you'd include him you might as well include Lincoln as the best "Republican" as well!!

Coolidge - kept the expansion of government power in check by doing nothing. Results in a major economic boom. WRONG! the boom of the 20's was a post WWI phenonomina, while Europe had blown itself to bits and all their manpower pushing up Poppy's america filled in the gap and began producing for the world

Eisenhower - quietly guided the country to a peacetime economic boom. Expanded out defense capabilities to match the Soviet threat. Established the interstate highway system. Cut the draconian WWII progressive (communist) taxes. Again wrong! the 50's was again a post-war boom economy as thousands of Gi's returned to work in "Levittown" and europe again was reduced to ashes, who was our economic competition? Germany? Japan? and I'm glad you mention him because he isn't revered like Reagan is by Conservatives because he warned of military indutrial complex and overspending a military budget (unlike reagan)

Nixon - got us out of the Vietnam mess created by Kennedy and Johnson. Ended the involuntary draft. Nixon ? are you kidding? not even gonna go there

Reagan - ended the Cold War by starting an arms race he knew the USSR couldn't finish. The Iron Curtain didn't fall until the Soviet troops were withrawn. He also fixed many of the problems with GCA '68. He let people keep more of what they earned by overhauling the income tax code, which resulted in the start of good econimic times. again total malarkey! Gorbachev and the will of the people to be free ended the cold war not bancruptcy of the state by overspending on GUNS which actually made the soviets money! As to good times? what good times? remember the 81-82 recession? remember the Crash of '87? remember how Japan owned our asses? Remember how all industrial jobs fled to third world countries? what were you in a coma?
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 10:10:27 AM EDT

Originally Posted By panzersergeant:

A lot of monday morning quarterbacks present on this thread! Did anyone here actually experience the great depression? I seriously doubt it. And the ranks of World War II vets are getting thinner with each passing year.



So if we want to talk about the Depression and WWII, we had to live through them?
Link Posted: 11/16/2003 10:18:11 AM EDT

Originally Posted By LWilde:


Basically, the country was headed down the crapper and FDR, a great believer in Keyensian economics decided to make the United States federal gubmint the incredibly great monster it is today! He and his liberal pals actually believed that if the private sector could not our would not put Americans back to work...the the Feds would. In truth...and FOR THE TIMES ONLY...the idea bears some merit. I disagree most strongly with that paradigm now...since our private economy is roaring along but...then? I think that some serious pump priming was necessary by the boyz in DC.



FDR was NOT a believer in Keynes! Keynes wrote his magnum opus, The General Theory of Employment Interest and Money in 1936 as a result of his study of the world's economic problems at the time. Keynes made several trips to Washington to consult FDR on how to turn around the economy. FDR pretty much ignored Keyenes, which frustrated the economist enormously. FDR was not that smart, intellectually. He took some Keynesian steps but nowhere near the scale that was needed. WWII necessitated those steps, and the enormous war effort and the leaps in government spending and borrowing to finance it was what led us out of the depression, just as the brilliant Keynes said it would.




Finally, FDR was a very good war president. When you consider the gigantic war machine he had to ensure got built up, the allies he had to keep on the team, the prima donna generals and admirals he had to stroke, and the reality that only if he could somehow get America into the war, would civilization be saved from the terror of Nazism and Facism, you begin to realize the immense task he faced before and during the war. Remember, when the draft bill passed, it did so by only ONE vote in the Senate. Most of us were deeply isolationist back then...and FDR knew that if we remained so, it could eventualy lead to our ultimate destruction.

Anyway...like him or not, FDR surely will go down in history as one of the great presidents. Not necessarily a bravura performance in the long haul...but certainly a great man.



He did an outstanding job with the war, and did everything he could to get the US involved on the right side.

Arrow Left Previous Page
Page / 2
Top Top