# Roosevelt: Cold Water Splashed In His Face!



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

1. Actually....ice water.
Awakened by a bucket of ice water!

Well....An analogy...not an actual ice water bath....._*but far worse.*_
The sudden realization that he had been betrayed by his long time love....Joseph Stalin.



But first.....

Let's go waaayyyy back....to prior to 1933, before his election to the presidency. *The only explanation for Franklin Roosevelt's bizarre behavior involves both the personal, and the geopolitical.*

2. Long before his presidency, and also before the economic downturn engineered by Hoover.....*FDR hated capitalists. A personal hatred....petulance....and not based on ideology!*

*Franklin Roosevelt had a visceral animosity toward businessmen, entrepreneurs, successful capitalists. And he had a way with words, in describing them.  "unscrupulous money changers*..." *the greed and shortsightedness of bankers* and _*businessmen*_," "..rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed through their own *stubbornness and their own incompetence*"  "we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit."  "there must be an end to a conduct in banking and in business which too often has given to a sacred trust the likeness of *callous and selfish wrongdoing."*



Why?
They hurt his feelings.

*a. Not the only rejection, but a significant one, was his attempt to join Porcellian, the oldest and most elite social club at Harvard. Theodore Roosevelt and other members of the Roosevelt family belonged to the club, but Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was president of the Harvard Crimson, never managed to be elected a member. *
*At some time, in his late thirties, he told his relative Sheffield Cowles that this had been "the greatest disappointment in his life". *
*Frances Richardson Keller, Fictions of U. S. History : A Theory & Four Illustrations, p. 116.*

*Porcellian members were future entrepreneurs, businessmen, bankers, and corporate lawyers. *
*And they had rejected Franklin Roosevelt.*

Roosevelt seemed to have a desire to *punish the ones who rejected him*, who could succeed where he failed. As a powerful politician, he could do just that.


 
*b.  Brilliant? *
*Only a  'C to C+' student; not much for homework, study, or research....but he focused on social-political clubs, debates and journalism.*
_Oliver Wendell Holmes observed that Roosevelt had *"a second class intellect.* But a first-class temperament!" _



_It was all about smiles, handshakes, and speeches! 
Sound like a certain contemporary politician? And FDR was without a teleprompter, no less!_



_And so..*.his personal failures and shortcomings fueled his future policies.*_



_But...we've only covered a portion of the motivations of Franklin Roosevelt.  
Next...how he saw himself in the geopolitical realm, and how it determined his anti-American agenda._


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

3. 1929....noted as the start of the Great Depression.
*But....it wasn't.*

 "Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929. It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.... . If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that. But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years."  Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed




4. FDR ran on a platform of *balancing the budget, and cutting spending. *
Really. He promised.

But learning from his pals....and they were *his pals, Mussolini, Stalin, and then Hitler,* who offered an iron fist to the burgeoning recession, and it made him.......envious.

After all.....who couldn't be one of the 'big boys'????




'In 1933, Fascism was celebrating its eleventh year in power, in Italy, and the election of the National Socialists in Germany represented an unmitigated defeat for liberal democracy in Europe’s largest industrialized nation.

At the beginning of the same month, FDR was inaugurated as President. And before Congress went into recess it granted powers to Roosevelt unprecedented in peacetime. From Congressional hearings, 1973: *“Since March 9, 1933, the United States has been in a state of declared national emergency.”  *Freedomsite.net



Immediately....just months into his first term, FDR showed his.....affection....for dictators in a clear and unambiguous manner: he did what previous Presidents and Sec'y of States refused to do: *offer his friendship, and state recognition, to the homicidal murder, Joseph Stalin*


That was *November of 1933*.....well before any hint of WWII, or the need for an ally.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 6, 2016)

FDR cuddled up to Uncle Joe AFTER his Uncle starved 6MM people, including 3MM children to death in the Ukraine

A sicker, more immoral fuck never existed


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

CrusaderFrank said:


> FDR cuddled up to Uncle Joe AFTER his Uncle starved 6MM people, including 3MM children to death in the Ukraine
> 
> A sicker, more immoral fuck never existed





Met with a shrug by our 'rezidents.'

When I pointed out the iniquity of his antecedents, the communists, who slaughtered 100 million men, women and children.....he sneered at the deaths this way:


"Sure it wasn't 100 billion?"
FDR Admiration Society


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

5. A review?


a. FDR hated successful entrepreneurs, because he could not find any way to be successful in business. And.....future capitalists had rejected him in college.


b. In truth, capitalism, after an amazingly successful run, _the Roaring Twenties_, was falling into disfavor in the face of the growing worldwide recession.

FDR saw the gains by Leftists.....and they all were *Leftists: Hitler, Stalin, and Mussolini*.  All were immensely popular, and seemingly successful.....*and FDR wanted to be just like them.*

For whatever reason, perhaps because he was the most ruthless....he chose Stalin as his fav, his BFF.




6. It was *through Roosevelt's tireless efforts that Stalin grew in power*, thrived on Lend Lease, was bequeathed Eastern Europe, kept the allies away via the Normandy approach rather than the more logical advance on Hitler's kingdom through Italy and the Adriatic, and was given free rein in the creation of the United Nations.

Remember, communism is defined as international socialism.....and that's exactly what the United Nations is.
*Roosevelt welcomed Soviet spies* into his administration.....and, once they were publically named as such.........promoted at least one!!!


Any doubt where Franklin Roosvelt's interests were to be found???




7. But....lest any imagine some quid pro quo, some benefit America gained from Roosevelt's obsequious behavior toward Stalin......be disabused.  

Early on, the hints were available to any who cared to look:

 A year and a half after WWII began in Europe, Roosevelt’s Lend-Lease supplied a prodigious amount of war materiel to Russia, ... The temporary congruence of interests was called an alliance, albeit a strange one.* For example, when the Americans tried to find a way that long-range American bombers could land in Russia to re-fuel, so as to bomb deep into Germany, the Russians were found to be suspicious, ungrateful, secretive, xenophobic, unfriendly, in short….a great deal of take and very little give. 
"The Anti-Communist Manifestos: Four Books That Shaped the Cold War," *
by John V. Fleming 



Shouldn't FDR have recognized what this meant????




Even greater revelations to come......that bucket of ice water!


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Get ready to learn things you never were taught in government school:



8. June 16, 1992. George Bush at a White House press event with Boris Yeltsin....

Press: "*do you think there are any POW's in the Soviet Union, Americans?"*
[Americans held as 'prisoners of war'.....in the Soviet Union....*.in 1992!*!!!!]

Yeltsin: "An investigating commission is working, led by Mr. Volkogonov. Many things have been revealed after *the examination of the archives of the KGB and the Central Committee of the Communist Party. But that work is continuing both in the archives and in the places where the POW's were.* We shall try to investigate each individual case."


Bush: "And if any single *American is unaccounted for*, they will go the extra mile to see that that person is accounted for. And I think that's what the American people need to know. I think that's what President Yeltsin has clearly pledged to do. "
George Bush: Exchange With Reporters Prior to Discussions With President Boris Yeltsin of Russia



Get that???

Know about whom they are speaking?????


a. "...the plight of hundreds, *thousands of GIs - World War II officers and enlisted men, survivors of tank battles, airplane crashes, torpedoed shups, and then German prison camps- at that very moment in history looking around at watchtowers and barbed wire of the Gulag and wondering when the hell Uncle Sam would get them out.*

*The answer was never."*

West, "American Betrayal," p. 313.


What????
Roosevelt's best-friend-forever......held Americans as prisoners??????
Stalin???


Ice water....coming right up.


----------



## Syriusly (Jul 6, 2016)

LOL- the amount of historical revisionism by those who despise FDR for leading America to victory in World War 2, for establishing Social Security and the GI Bill and for establishing the Depositor Insurance Act is funny- in a very sad desperate way.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> LOL- the amount of historical revisionism by those who despise FDR for leading America to victory in World War 2, for establishing Social Security and the GI Bill and for establishing the Depositor Insurance Act is funny- in a very sad desperate way.




"....historical revisionism...."
Really?


OK...I know you're begging for a chance to be relevant.....

So....one more chance.

Now....focus like a laser:

Can you find anything in any of my post in this thread, to which you have voluntarily subscribed, that isn't true?




Lot of pressure here...because if you can't do any better than 'is not, issss nootttttttt!!," well, then, you have inadvertently supported everything I've posted.



Waiting.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 6, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> LOL- the amount of historical revisionism by those who despise FDR for leading America to victory in World War 2, for establishing Social Security and the GI Bill and for establishing the Depositor Insurance Act is funny- in a very sad desperate way.


_It's okay, we know Liberals have a hard time accepting the fact that FDR turned a recession into a depression, then extended it greatly. I'm not sure what else people would expect massive business taxes and regulations to accomplish. Compulsory unionism was probably the worst. Do you have any idea how many lawsuits he filed against businesses?_


----------



## TheOldSchool (Jul 6, 2016)

A google search result of "greatest U.S. Presidents"

Good luck finding a list without FDR in the top 5

greatest u.s. presidents - Google Search


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 6, 2016)

TheOldSchool said:


> A google search result of "greatest U.S. Presidents"
> 
> Good luck finding a list without FDR in the top 5
> 
> greatest u.s. presidents - Google Search


_Welcome to government 'education'._


----------



## TheOldSchool (Jul 6, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > A google search result of "greatest U.S. Presidents"
> ...


Welcome to reality


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

TheOldSchool said:


> A google search result of "greatest U.S. Presidents"
> 
> Good luck finding a list without FDR in the top 5
> 
> greatest u.s. presidents - Google Search





Let's pretend you are capable of doing your own analysis, your own thinking, and drawing a conclusion not spoon fed to you by Leftist 'experts.'

I recognize that that pretense is quite a stretch.


But....because I have a guilty pleasure in pummeling dunces like you....
....let's give you the same opportunity I gave the earlier dunce...

Can you find anything in any of my posts in this thread, to which you have voluntarily subscribed, that isn't true?




Lot of pressure here...because if you can't do any better than 'is not, issss nootttttttt!!," well, then, you have inadvertently supported everything I've posted.



Waiting.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 6, 2016)

TheOldSchool said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...


_Politicalchic already introduced you, I had already known for some time how horrible of a president FDR was. He's probably the worst in American history._


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

TheOldSchool said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...




Reality?

Everything I post is real, accurate, true, documented and sourced.


Everything.


That's why it irritates fools who have been voluntarily miseducated their entire lives, and only recognize it when they read these threads.


It's really yourself that you are upset with...because you've been lazy and cowardly your whole life....
....not with your little truth-teller......moi.


----------



## TheOldSchool (Jul 6, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


According to a tiny minority of people using 70 years of spun information, all created using hindsight, yes he's the worst President ever.  

Fun fact... most of those same people think Obama is a secret Muslim who will be declaring martial law any day now.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 6, 2016)

TheOldSchool said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...


_The only reason you could possibly be this ignorant is if you hadn't actually gone back and looked at his policies, and the effects that they had on the economy. One thing he did was make Unionism compulsory in a time that unemployment was extremely high. If FDR actually improved the economy, tell me how increased cost of employees and increased risk when hiring would help said unemployment problem._


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

TheOldSchool said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...





1. So......

....we agree, then, that every single post of mine is 100% true and accurate....

...and recognizing this destroys your most closely held worldviews???


Excellent.



2. "According to a tiny minority of people using 70 years of spun information, all created using hindsight, yes he's the worst President ever."

Let's examine that.
If you believe that expanding the central government far, far beyond the vision of the Founders, and removing the checks and balances of the Constitution are the correct actions of a President, whose oath upon entering the office included...

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the Office of *President* of the United States, and will to *the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."
...well, then, he'd be your choice for best President


3. If you would like to make a strong argument in Roosevelt's favor, you might  use this:*

*           "Who can now imagine a day when America offered no Social Security, no unemployment compensation, no food stamps, no Federal guarantee of bank deposits, no Federal supervision of the stock market, no Federal protection for collective bargaining, no Federal standards for wages and hours, no Federal support for farm prices or rural electrification, no Federal refinancing for farm and home mortgages, no Federal commitment to high employment or to equal opportunity - in short, no Federal responsibility for Americans who found themselves, through no fault of their own, in economic or social distress?"
The 'Hundred Days' of F.D.R.


One should judge the value of material emoluments against the loss of freedom and liberty envisioned in the Constitution.



4. Or...in short....
Which represents the Founders:

a. individualism, free markets, and limited constitutional government.

or 

b. the collective, command and control regulation of private industry, and overarching government that can order every aspect of the private citizen's life....right down to control of his thoughts and speech.




*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

So....in 1992, President *Bush was interrogating Yeltsin about Americans held prisoner since WWII????*



9. But wait.....*how about Roosevelt's special friend, Stalin?? 
He would have helped his bud, Franklin, to release any Americans held in the Soviet Union......wouldn't he?????*

He'd do his pal Franklin a solid.....wouldn't he???



Let's see.....
*March 3, 1945, FDR cables Stalin to request 'urgently' for American teams to evacuate American prisoners of war 'liberated' by the Red Army*


*March 5, 1945, Stalin replied: *_*Nyet.* _
_"...concerning the question of prisoners of war....on the territory of Poland and other places liberated by the Red Army, there are no groups of American prisoners of war...."_ 
"My Dear Mr. Stalin: The Complete Correspondence of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph V. Stalin," by Susan Butler, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. p. 299



Stalin told the British the same thing about 20,000-30,000 British ex-prisoners.  "The Iron Cage," by Nigel Cawthorne, p. 5




FDR......*a bucket of ice water right in the kisser!!!*

Ding! Ding! Ding!  Wake-up Call!!!


Sooooo.....why should Roosevelt have known?
Because *he was warned time and time again!!!!!
*
a. The top diplomat in Moscow, Ambassador Averell Harriman, knew Stalin was lying: he was interviewing American former POWs who had made their way out of German custody.

"Specifically, Harriman stated in the same cable, "I am outraged" that the Soviet Government has declined to carry out the agreement signed at Yalta in its other aspects, namely, that our contact officers be permitted to go immediately to points where *our prisoners are first collected,* to evaluate our prisoners, particularly the sick, in our own airplanes, or to send our supplies to points other than Odessa, which is 1,000 miles from the point of liberation, where they are urgently needed.[21]


Furthermore, Harriman in the same cable stated:

For the past ten days the Soviets have made the same statement that Stalin has made to you, [FDR] namely, that all prisoners are in Odessa or entrained thereto, whereas *I have now positive proof that this was not repeat not true* on February 26, the date on which the statement was first made. This supports my belief that Stalin's statement to you is inaccurate." 
National Alliance of Families - Issue Overview




Poor, poor FDR.....his love not returned!

Splash!!!

Ice water.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Franklin and Uncle Joe...sittin' in a tree......

...then this:


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2016)

*FDR hated capitalists

Y*et FDR's family became wealthy and self sufficient through capitalistic means.. He did not hate capitalism, but he did have a distaste for corporate capitalism and so did the Founding Fathers, yet it was the GOP after the Civil War, up to the first world war that they changed the whole relationship of the corporate identity...Letting corporations run rampant and abusive...allowing their monied interest to direct elections and thus legislation of the US...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Moonglow said:


> *FDR hated capitalists
> 
> Y*et FDR's family became wealthy and self sufficient through capitalistic means.. He did not hate capitalism, but he did have a distaste for corporate capitalism and so did the Founding Fathers, yet it was the GOP after the Civil War, up to the first world war that they changed the whole relationship of the corporate identity...Letting corporations run rampant and abusive...allowing their monied interest to direct elections and thus legislation of the US...




Not word of truth in that entire post.

How long is it going to take you that I am never wrong?


1. Franklin Roosevelt came from *a very wealthy family*, so one may puzzle at the vituperation he leveled at similar folks. Perhaps that very background is the reason, as with the politician George McGovern, *he never learned how business worked, or how to earn money. *

2. His mother Sara reported: *"Money was never discussed at home.*...All his books and toys were provided for him. We never subjected the boy to a lot of don'ts." 
"BEFORE THE TRUMPET: Young Franklin Roosevelt, 1882-1905,"  by Geoffrey C. Ward, p.125-126 


a. Then again...how could they teach him about finance, after all, *his father, James, inherited his fortune...and almost lost it by way of poor investments. *

b. His mother's father, Warren Delano, made his money *selling opium illegally* to Chinese addicts. *When he retired to legitimate business, he didn't do much better than Franklin's father.* Delano went back to the Opium trade, which is why Sara spent early years in China. 
Ward, Op. Cit., p. 71.



3. Franklin had a high opinion of himself....he was certain he could make his mark in business, as well. 
Let's see how he did:

"...*.he pursued futile schemes* to drill oil in Wyoming, buy ships to cross the Atlantic, and sell stamps that were premoistened....tried to corner the live lobster market...lost $26,000 before bailing out.....he assumed that airplanes were only a passing fad, and he invested in a line of airships, called dirigibles,....tried buying and selling German marks, planting thousands of trees, making cash with vending machines,....lost money in his resort for polio patients in Warm Springs, Georgia- and then, to top that off, he lost more money  farming the land nearby." 
"A First Class Temperament: The Emergence of Franklin Roosevelt, 1905-1928," 
 by Geoffrey C. Ward, p.  658, 756, 768-769, 793; Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal," p.24-25


a. "Roosevelt knows nothing about finance, but* he doesn't know he doesn't know.*" Franklin Lane, Woodrow Wilson's Sec'y of the Interior
The Final Case Against Franklin Delano Obama - The Last Resistance



 This, while the scion of another Dutch family did considerably better: Cornelius Vanderbilt, and other poor men, sometimes immigrants, took the lead in oil, steel and railroads.

*Such was the provenance of Franklin Roosevelt's hatred of the successful. *

Perhaps he even said 'You didn't build that.'



Now.....really.....don't you realize how lucky you are that I'm here to educate you????


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2016)

You didn't know that FDR came from a rich family?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Moonglow said:


> You didn't know that FDR came from a rich family?




Let's try again.


1. Franklin Roosevelt came from *a very wealthy family*, so one may puzzle at the vituperation he leveled at similar folks. Perhaps that very background is the reason, as with the politician George McGovern, *he never learned how business worked, or how to earn money. *

2. His mother Sara reported: *"Money was never discussed at home.*...All his books and toys were provided for him. We never subjected the boy to a lot of don'ts." 
"BEFORE THE TRUMPET: Young Franklin Roosevelt, 1882-1905," by Geoffrey C. Ward, p.125-126 


a. Then again...how could they teach him about finance, after all, *his father, James, inherited his fortune...and almost lost it by way of poor investments. *

b. His mother's father, Warren Delano, made his money *selling opium illegally* to Chinese addicts. *When he retired to legitimate business, he didn't do much better than Franklin's father.* Delano went back to the Opium trade, which is why Sara spent early years in China. 
Ward, Op. Cit., p. 71.



3. Franklin had a high opinion of himself....he was certain he could make his mark in business, as well. 
Let's see how he did:

"...*.he pursued futile schemes* to drill oil in Wyoming, buy ships to cross the Atlantic, and sell stamps that were premoistened....tried to corner the live lobster market...lost $26,000 before bailing out.....he assumed that airplanes were only a passing fad, and he invested in a line of airships, called dirigibles,....tried buying and selling German marks, planting thousands of trees, making cash with vending machines,....lost money in his resort for polio patients in Warm Springs, Georgia- and then, to top that off, he lost more money farming the land nearby." 
"A First Class Temperament: The Emergence of Franklin Roosevelt, 1905-1928," 
by Geoffrey C. Ward, p. 658, 756, 768-769, 793; Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal," p.24-25


a. "Roosevelt knows nothing about finance, but* he doesn't know he doesn't know.*" Franklin Lane, Woodrow Wilson's Sec'y of the Interior
The Final Case Against Franklin Delano Obama - The Last Resistance



This, while the scion of another Dutch family did considerably better: Cornelius Vanderbilt, and other poor men, sometimes immigrants, took the lead in oil, steel and railroads.

*Such was the provenance of Franklin Roosevelt's hatred of the successful. *

Perhaps he even said 'You didn't build that.'


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > *FDR hated capitalists
> ...


So you attribute greatness to income and assets..I see where your envy lies...


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > You didn't know that FDR came from a rich family?
> ...


You are the one that made the incorrect statement that, "everything in that statement is a lie"..Or did you lie about that?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Moonglow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...





This is the best you can do???

I mean......really.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


It is your mistake and not mine, you're such an elitist I thought you'd like to know so your humility gland can kick in..


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

See....now I'm gonna have to reveal the true depth of your ignorance.

You wrote this absurdity:

"He did not hate capitalism, but he did have a distaste for corporate capitalism.."

1. I just proved that he hated capitalism and capitalists.

2. He LOVED corporatism.
Loved it, you moron.

3. He modeled his New Deal on Mussolini's economic program....corporatism.
 It is a fact that none of the New Dealers were constitutionalists. Roosevelt's economist, Rexford Tugwell said: "Any people who must be governed according to the written codes of an instrument which defines the spheres of individual and group, state and federal actions must expect to suffer from the constant maladjustment of progress. A life' which changes and a constitution for governance which does not must always raise questions which are difficult for solution." 
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution,"p.63


4. Tugwell was *opposed to any private business not controlled by the government. *General Hugh Johnson was working with Tugwell on a bill to create the NRA, and gave Francis Perkins the *book by Rafaello Viglione, "The Corporate State," in which the neat Italian system of dictatorship *for the benefit of the people was glowingly described." 
Francis Perkins, "The Roosevelt I Knew."  
*The NRA was copied from Mussolini's corporative system*. p.47

a. Perkins questioned whether Johnson 'really understood the democratic process..." New Dealers had no problem with the fascist nature of their plans.

*b. " Fascism did not acquire an evil name in Washington
until Hitler became a menace to·the Soviet Union." 
Manly, Op. Cit., p. 48



I wish you had an education, so I wouldn't be able to shred you this easily.*


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 6, 2016)

Hitler became a menace to the USSR when they attacked, before hand they were allies and had been since Germany helped the Bolsheviks into power by returning Lenin...


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Moonglow said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...





Plllleeeeeezzzzeee.....try to use words you can actually define.
Unless, of course, that would leave you mute.


e·lit·ist
əˈlēdəst,āˈlēdəst/
_noun_

*1*.
a person who believes that a system or society should be ruled or dominated by an elite.Google

No, you ninny.....I believe that society should be ruled or dominated by .......

.....ME.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

Moonglow said:


> Hitler became a menace to the USSR when they attacked, before hand they were allies and had been since Germany helped the Bolsheviks into power by returning Lenin...




Always nice to see an attentive student repeat lessons that I've taught him.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 6, 2016)

OK....let's get back to today's lesson: *FDR did everything........EVERYTHING......he could to support, facilitate, advance, Joseph Stalin and Soviet Communism.*


Suddenly......he found that *Stalin imprisoned thousands of American soldiers......but ignored pleas from FDR to give them back!!!!!!*


OMG!!!!!

Talk about unrequited love!!!!!




10. Starting to get the picture?
* FDR had been warned about the terrible mistake he was making. The fool ignored the warnings.*


In a letter to FDR, dated J*anuary 29, 1943, Ambassador William Bullitt warned Roosevelt *about what would happen if he continued pursuing the policies of appeasement toward Stalin that formed the foundation of the American war strategy. He pleaded with FDR not to 'permit our war to prevent Nazi domination of Europe to be turned into a war to establish Soviet domination of Europe.' He predicted the Soviet annexation of half of Europe; George Kennan identified that letter as the earliest warning of what would be the result of FDR's policies.  "For the President Personal & Secret: Correspondence Between Franklin D. Roosevelt and William C. Bullitt,"  Orville H. Bullitt, p. 575-590

*FDR replied: *
"Bill, I don't dispute your facts, they are accurate, I don't dispute the logic of your reasoning.* I have just had a hunch that Stalin is not that kind of a man.* Harry [Hopkins, Stalin's spy] says he's not and that* he doesn't want anything *in the world but security for his country, and I think that if I give him everything I possibly can and ask nothing from him in return, noblesse oblige, he won't try to annex anything and will work with me for a world of democracy and peace."  
William C. Bullitt, "How We Won The War and Lost The Peace," Life Magazine, August 30, 1948, p. 94



a. George Kennan’s view of Roosevelt’s performance during the war is considerably harsher than Harriman’s. After commenting bitterly on the *“inexcusable body of ignorance *about the Russian Communist movement, about the history of its diplomacy, about what had happened in the purges, and about what had been going on in Poland and the Baltic States,” Kennan turns more directly to FDR alone:


'I also have in mind FDRs evident conviction that Stalin, while perhaps a somewhat
difficult customer, was only, after all, a person like any other person; that the reason
we hadn’t been able to get along with him in the past was that we had never really had anyone with the proper personality and the proper qualities of sympathy and imagination to deal with him, that he had been snubbed all along by the arrogant conservatives of the Western capitals; and that* if only he could be exposed to the persuasive charms of someone like FDR himself,* ideological preconceptions would melt and Russia’s cooperation with the West could be easily arranged.

*For these assumptions there were no grounds whatsover; and they were of a puerility that was unworthy of a statesman of FDRs stature?'*
http://www.mmisi.org/ma/30_02/nisbet.pdf



Yet....today....there are still fools who bow to Franklin Roosevelt's altar.

None even recall the thousands of Americans that Franklin Roosevelt abandoned to slow, torturous deaths in the Gulags.


----------



## regent (Jul 6, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> TheOldSchool said:
> 
> 
> > A google search result of "greatest U.S. Presidents"
> ...


Did FDR go to government schools for his education?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

regent said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > TheOldSchool said:
> ...




You did, didn't you.


Now, to the point.....the impjort of your post is that, once again.....the truth hurts.

I know you'd love to be able to deny anything.....

....any single thing....

....in my posts...


....but you can't.
I know so much more than you, and I am not burdened by the biases that you work under, so that, once again.....you'd love to be able to shield Roosevelt.....


....but you cannot.



My posts say much about Roosevelt....
...your post says volumes about you.


----------



## regent (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


FDR doesn't need much shielding from posters, the people of FDR's period voted for him four times, that's four, no one else comes close? The historians that write our history books and lecture in the universities have never placed FDR lower than  third or fifth greatest-you pick. The people that lived during that period and the historians who studied that period, agree on FDR, some posters do not.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 7, 2016)

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


_Did you know that he funneled resources into the states that kept voting for him, while ignoring ones that didn't?_


----------



## Camp (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> OK....let's get back to today's lesson: *FDR did everything........EVERYTHING......he could to support, facilitate, advance, Joseph Stalin and Soviet Communism.*
> 
> 
> Suddenly......he found that *Stalin imprisoned thousands of American soldiers......but ignored pleas from FDR to give them back!!!!!!*
> ...



FDR was not in office when the war ended and prisoner exchanges and transfers were supposed to take place. He was deceased. That scandal lays squarely with Truman and Eisenhower. The anti-FDR fanatic often blames FDR for things that happened after his death.


----------



## jillian (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > FDR cuddled up to Uncle Joe AFTER his Uncle starved 6MM people, including 3MM children to death in the Ukraine
> ...



because people only post to you to make fun of you. no one except your fellow wingers are interested in your cut and pastes.


----------



## jillian (Jul 7, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



like the GOP congress taking its sweet time to give NYC money for Sandy? or 9/11 first responders?


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 7, 2016)

jillian said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


_Did we suddenly stop talking about FDR? Pretty sure that's not only deflecting, but your claim isn't even that it didn't happen, just that it was slow._


----------



## jillian (Jul 7, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...



I'm pointing out the hypocrisy of ranting about FDR.

or were you not clear on that?


----------



## Camp (Jul 7, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Which state or states did he ignore? A list of projects for each individual state is readily available. Name the state or states and I will look them up and check to see if you are correct or just trash talking.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




1. "FDR doesn't need much shielding from posters,..."
Yet, here you are in a vapid attempt to do just that.

2. Nowhere do I claim that FDR wasn't elected four times, nor that Leftist historians and academics...whose careers are based and rated on their proclamation that expanding the federal government is the basis for their opinion of Roosevelt...and every other Leftist politician (read 'Democrat.')

3.What I do claim....and *in effect, you admit..*..is that he obsequiously followed all of Joseph Stalin's wishes.....demands....and cared not the costs in American blood and treasure....

....and....specifically.....he humbly accepted Stalin's imprisonment, and, essentially, the slaughter of American soldiers.




So....every time you attempt an 'I don't care what you say' post......

.....*you are admitting that you care deeply.*


In fact....you've given me the impetus for yet another revealing thread about your demigod.


Stay tuned.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > OK....let's get back to today's lesson: *FDR did everything........EVERYTHING......he could to support, facilitate, advance, Joseph Stalin and Soviet Communism.*
> ...




Liar.

*March 3, 1945, FDR cables Stalin to request 'urgently' for American teams to evacuate American prisoners of war 'liberated' by the Red Army*


*March 5, 1945, Stalin replied: Nyet.* 
_"...concerning the question of prisoners of war....on the territory of Poland and other places liberated by the Red Army, there are no groups of American prisoners of war...."_ 
"My Dear Mr. Stalin: The Complete Correspondence of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph V. Stalin," by Susan Butler, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. p. 299



Stalin told the British the same thing about 20,000-30,000 British ex-prisoners. "The Iron Cage," by Nigel Cawthorne, p. 5


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 7, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> LOL- the amount of historical revisionism by those who despise FDR for leading America to victory in World War 2, for establishing Social Security and the GI Bill and for establishing the Depositor Insurance Act is funny- in a very sad desperate way.


It's not revision, it's facts and you're not entitled to your own. FDR was a fucking scumbag,  a despicable fucking scumbag,  that's what the facts tell us. That he's your hero tells a lot about you


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

jillian said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...




"....because people only post to you to make fun of you. no one except your fellow wingers are interested in your cut and pastes."

Let's cut to the chase:
While everyone knows you are a fool, let me give you the opportunity to show otherwise:

Can you find anything in my posts that isn't true, accurate, and correct?

ANYTHING??????


If not....you serve as verification for my every contention.






Waiting


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

jillian said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




Can you find anything in my posts that isn't true, accurate, and correct?

ANYTHING??????


If not....you serve as verification for my every contention.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

jillian said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...





Can you find anything in my posts that isn't true, accurate, and correct?

ANYTHING??????


If not....you serve as verification for my every contention.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

Camp said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




Pumpkin was, of course, correct.


You....a lying Roosevelt boot-licker.

Let me prove it.

Economist Jim Powell, in “FDR’s Folly,” notes that *a disproportionate amount of FDR’s relief and public works spending “went not to the poorest states such as the South, but to western states were people were better off , apparently  because there were ‘swing’ states which could yield FDR more votes in the next election.”



In your face, boooyyyyyyeeeeeee!!!!*


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 7, 2016)

jillian said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...


_There's no hypocrisy here. FDR extended the great depression, and ignored states that didn't support him during a national crisis. "Republican" Congress was slow in delivering aid to ONE state. There's no parallel here, just you deflecting in an attempt to defend the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party._


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 7, 2016)

Can any FDR worshipper explain how and why he openly embraced Stalin right after Stalin murdered 6 million of his own people?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> LOL- the amount of historical revisionism by those who despise FDR for leading America to victory in World War 2, for establishing Social Security and the GI Bill and for establishing the Depositor Insurance Act is funny- in a very sad desperate way.





Gave you this chance yesterday...
Can you find anything in any of my post in this thread, to which you have voluntarily subscribed, that isn't true?


Lot of pressure here...because if you can't do any better than 'is not, issss nootttttttt!!," well, then, you have inadvertently supported everything I've posted.



And by you silence, we learn that, no.....you can't find a single thing that I've posted that isn't true, accurate, and correct.

See....you did serve your purpose in life.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...





"..._the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."_

I like that!


Very catchy....and very true.


It fits with Coulter's description of that religion.....

From the Amazon review of _Godless_, by Coulter…

Though* liberalism rejects the idea of God and reviles people of faith, it bears all the attributes of a religion.*
In _Godless_, Coulter throws open the doors of the Church of Liberalism, showing us its sacraments (abortion), its holy writ (_Roe v. Wade_), its martyrs (from Soviet spy Alger Hiss to cop-killer Mumia Abu-Jamal), its clergy (public school teachers), its churches (government schools, where prayer is prohibited but condoms are free), its doctrine of infallibility (as manifest in the "absolute moral authority" of spokesmen from Cindy Sheehan to Max Cleland), and its cosmology (in which mankind is an inconsequential accident).

Then, of course, there's the liberal creation myth: Charles Darwin's theory of evolution.

For liberals, evolution is the touchstone that separates the enlightened from the benighted.

And....Franklin Delano Roosevelt, "..._the Socialist Savior of the Democratic Party."_


----------



## Camp (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


The west, including the US refused to repatriate Russians that were under the west's control from liberated POW camps. Discussions were just beginning and FDR died only a month after the letters you quote. How FDR would have acted or reacted is purely speculation.


----------



## Camp (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


Yet you can not give an example of one of these states.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





I do so appreciate that you didn't debt that you are a Roosevelt boot-liker.


Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





There is no speculation in stating that Roosevelt walked away from thousands of American soldiers' lives when Stalin refused to return them.

Is there.


And after all that Roosevelt did for his inamorata.


O Romeo, Romeo, wherefore art thou Romeo?
Deny thy father and refuse thy name.
Or if thou wilt not, be but sworn my love
And I’ll no longer be a ......

....socialist.


----------



## Camp (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


You conveniently leave out the fact that thousands (2,687) American servicemen held in German POW camps and liberated by the Russian were repatriated during the time frame of the letters you speak of. You also fail to recognize that Moscow was claiming only 17 sick Americans were not included in the accounting of those being held.
It was Truman who decided not to make the repatriation issue a priority (April 23, 1945) and believed the stalling was tempory and could be worked out at a later date. The atomic bomb was months away from testing and Russia entering the war with Japan held priority. The only reliable figure for the number of Americans being held was 884 that the Russians acknowledged and were arranging for release.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




There is no speculation in stating that Roosevelt walked away from* thousands of American soldiers' lives when Stalin refused to return them.*

Is there.



True or not.


----------



## Camp (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Not true. You are promoting another conspiracy theory and trying to present it as factual history. A process of repatriation was in progress and hit a snag after thousands were repatriated. What you addressed was an intel report of eight Americans unlisted that had been liberated in Poland. The Russians admitted there were actually 17 who had not been listed because they were in Russian military hospitals. The conspiracy theory was further advanced with a British report of "5.000". With the return of 2,687, plus the 884 awaiting release, that added up to 2,571. The conspiracy theorist rounded the approximately 1,500 missing from the guestimate in the British report. Somewhere along the conspiracy that got rounded off to 2,000 and later, that turned into 20,000.
Fact remains that in the middle of the repatriation process while the war was still being fought, FDR died and at the close of the war he was not a factor. He was dead. If American servicemen were abandoned it was not FDR that abandoned them.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 7, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




Liar.

Disgusting, low-life Roosevelt gutter snipe.


Despite the total victory in Europe by Allied forces, *thousands and thousands of US soldiers -- perhaps as many as 20,000 -- were never repatriated from prisoner of war (POW) camps, prisons and forced labor and concentration camps.*

These American soldiers were being held in Nazi prison camps, along with other Allied POWs and some Nazi captives, when they were *overrun by the Red Army. Thus, hundreds of thousands of Allied POWs who had been held by the Nazis, as well as millions of Western European citizens, or Displaced Persons, came under Red Army control. *Indeed, this number increased because General Dwight D. Eisenhower, the Supreme Allied Commander in Europe, decided to stop the US and British drive eastward into Germany, in order to wait for Soviet forces driving West, so that US and Soviet forces could meet in Berlin.

The Soviet rationale for not repatriating Allied soldiers and citizens, however, was motivated by more complex and more repugnant reasons than credits along. In the memoirs of former Secretary of State under President Truman, James F. Byrnes, there appears an illuminating conversation the Secretary had with Molotov, the Soviet Commissar of Foreign Affairs. In September, 1945, several weeks after Japan's surrender, Byrnes recounted that while in London:


Mr. Molotov came to see me, on instructions from Moscow... [Molotov] wanted to complain of the way in which the surrender terms [with Japan] were being carried out. He complained particularly about the way the Japanese Army was being demobilized. It was dangerous, he said, merely to disarm the Japanese and send them home; they should be held as prisoners of war. We should do what the Red Army was doing with the Japanese it had taken in Manchuria--make them work...No one can say accurately how many Japanese prisoners have been taken to the Soviet Union.


In mid-1947, the best guess was that approximately 500,000 were still there.
Our 20,000 Missing POW's of WWII


Whoever Stalin captured.....

....he had no intention of ever releasing.

He could do this because Franklin Roosevelt couldn't have cared less.


----------



## Camp (Jul 7, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Your entire post is based on events after the death of FDR. I am not the liar here, you are. Read your post and your link you dunce. Your own crap refutes your stupid claims.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 7, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > LOL- the amount of historical revisionism by those who despise FDR for leading America to victory in World War 2, for establishing Social Security and the GI Bill and for establishing the Depositor Insurance Act is funny- in a very sad desperate way.
> ...



How much more ignorant can the crazy right wing be, than this ^^^ comment?

Character assassination is noted as a no-no in the bible, and the assassination of the character of those long, or not so long, dead is to be a bully on steroids.  You people disgust me!


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 7, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...


_You don't know if I follow the Bible's teachings or not. You also provided nothing to disprove my statement. Are you here to debate or whine? You can start by explaining how compulsory unionism, locking good and service prices high, and a massive wave of lawsuits against businesses actually improves unemployment. That or you can attempt to disprove any of PoliticalChic's statements._


----------



## whitehall (Jul 7, 2016)

The incoherent worship of FDR stems from the liberal media. As a matter of fact there was no other information available to Americans except FDR propaganda for the better part of two decades and longer. You almost gotta laugh that it was the media that ruined the Nixon administration over a 3rd rate burglary when FDR got away with ordering Americans arrested and placed in concentration camps without benefit of due process. The dirty little secret is that any affront to the Constitution is possible if the media condones it.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 8, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




Caught you lying again....

"Your entire post is based on events after the death of FDR."


Did Roosevelt send this cable to his pal postmortem????????

*March 3, 1945, FDR cables Stalin to request 'urgently' for American teams to evacuate American prisoners of war 'liberated' by the Red Army*


*March 5, 1945, Stalin replied: Nyet.* 
_"...concerning the question of prisoners of war....on the territory of Poland and other places liberated by the Red Army, there are no groups of American prisoners of war...."_ 
"My Dear Mr. Stalin: The Complete Correspondence of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph V. Stalin," by Susan Butler, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. p. 299



Stalin told the British the same thing about 20,000-30,000 British ex-prisoners. "The Iron Cage," by Nigel Cawthorne, p. 5



Write soon, you lying gutter rat.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 8, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...




She is absolutely correct, you moron.


1929....noted as the start of the Great Depression.
*But....it wasn't.*

"Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929. It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.... . If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that. But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years." Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed

FDR ran on a platform of *balancing the budget, and cutting spending. *
Really. He promised.


Of the 40-50 economic downturns.....none lasted even five years....until Roosevelt made one last a decade.



Know what a 'decade' is????????


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 8, 2016)

whitehall said:


> The incoherent worship of FDR stems from the liberal media. As a matter of fact there was no other information available to Americans except FDR propaganda for the better part of two decades and longer. You almost gotta laugh that it was the media that ruined the Nixon administration over a 3rd rate burglary when FDR got away with ordering Americans arrested and placed in concentration camps without benefit of due process. The dirty little secret is that any affront to the Constitution is possible if the media condones it.




Some academicians are ready to write the truth abut Roosevelt....

In an insightful analysis, John A. Garraty compared Roosevelt’s New Deal with aspects of the Third Reich: a strong leader; an ideology stressing the nation, the people and the land; state control of economic and social affairs; and the quality and quantity of government propaganda. Garraty, “The New Deal,  National Socialism, and the Great Depression,” American Historical Review, vol. 78 (1973) p. 907ff.
Garraty reminds that to compare is not the same as to equate. Yet, many still find Garraty’s analysis too hot to handle.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 8, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...



I'm sorry, the party you have addressed has left the building, lies of omission, commission as well as half-truths and foolish efforts to rewrite history creates allergic globulars of bullshit in electronic forms on threads and comments associated with you and other nitwits.

Please try your party again, once you have been inoculated with ions of electricity to both sides of your head, effectively slowly the propagation of these globulars so as to not infect the biddable, as are those who bought the bullshit that the depression began Once Black Tuesday, October 29, 1929.

FDR has no playbook, no guidelines when he took office, on Black Tuesday the sky filled with brokers and investors who left tall building without the use of elevators or staircases and even efforts by President Hoover to fix what happened and what happened in the months and years following the crash did not prevent the apocalypse.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 8, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



"....lies of omission, commission as well as half-truths and foolish efforts to rewrite history...."

1929....noted as the start of the Great Depression.
*But....it wasn't.*

"Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929. It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.... . If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that. But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years." Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed

FDR ran on a platform of *balancing the budget, and cutting spending. *
Really. He promised.


Of the 40-50 economic downturns.....none lasted even five years....until Roosevelt made one last a decade.




Gee....you forgot to list any lies, half-truths, or efforts to re-write history.

Must mean that either there are no lies, half-truths, or efforts to re-write history.....

i.e., you're lying...


...or...you should rush off to be tested for early onset Alzheimer's Disease.



Let's hope it is simply the former.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 8, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


_So, we call you out to disprove what we said, or tell us what we're wrong about... and you do the equivalent of putting your hands on your ears and shouting "LALALA I CAN'T HEAR YOU!". Are you here to debate or not?_


----------



## Camp (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


How can you debate folks who claim the Great Depression did not begin in 1929 or blame FDR for events that occurred after his death? PoliticalChic goes beyond conspiracy theories and revisionism. She is in the world of ridiculousness and delusion. When poorly informed people attempt to support her dopey theories it just becomes a waste of time refuting the nonsense over and over.


----------



## Syriusly (Jul 8, 2016)

Camp said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



She is obsessed with attacking FDR.

She just can't stand that FDR led America to victory in World War 2, and out of the Depression and was responsible for Americans having Social Security, the GI Bill and Bank Depositors insurance.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 8, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


_We literally just explained how his policies created and extended the Great Depression. You're just repeating your Liberal propaganda, and not backing up your claim. _

_Explain to me how compulsory unionism, forced higher wages, locking good and service prices high, tripling taxes, and a massive wave of business lawsuits helps the economy. If you're not going to prove the policies actually SOMEHOW helped, then you should stop making the absurd claim that he actually lead us out of the Great Depression._


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 8, 2016)

Camp said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


_I cited actual policies and their effects. Are you claiming that he didn't create the NRA/NIRA?_


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




a statement of supposed fact was made;  It is their job to prove that Black Tuesday was a product of FDR's lack of leadership and/or inability to control events which took place in the decade before he took office.


----------



## Camp (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...





Pumpkin Row said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


The NRA New Deal law was great. It put millions of people to work. Before the Title 1 part of NIRA was stricken down by SCOTUS it had already run it course and put 23 million workers under the protection of codes that made their jobs safer.
Citizens all over America continue to reap the benefits of NRA programs like the WPA. After 80 years America is still using hospitals, schools, public buildings, roads, bridges, airports, etc. built by FDR's NRA programs.


----------



## Syriusly (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...



You believe that Franklin D. Roosevelt- who came into office on March 4, 1933- 'created' the Great Depression? The Great Depression that started in 1929?

Do you think that FDR had a time machine? That would be almost as delusional.

So sad that you are pissed off  that FDR led America to victory in World War 2, and out of the Depression and was responsible for Americans having Social Security, the GI Bill and Bank Depositors insurance.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 8, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...



The question I have, Do those people who believe FDR was responsible for the Great Depression really believe what they post?  Are they all challenged by reality, i.e. psychotic?  Or are they professional liars, paid by a secret cabal in the mold of the Ministry of Truth ("1984")?


----------



## Syriusly (Jul 8, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...



I think that they are rabid idealogues who despise that a liberal like FDR was not only as successful as he was, but was as popular as we was.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 8, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...


_I said that he turned the recession into a depression, then extended it. I know that to make me look wrong, you have to misquote me, but at least try a bit harder._


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 8, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


_The fact that you're still ignoring my question means you can't refute the policies I mentioned that he implemented, nor the effects. I also said he turned the recession into a Depression._


----------



## regent (Jul 8, 2016)

So FDR created the Great Depression and Hoover pulled the country out of it; why can't America's historians understand that simple conservative fact?


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 8, 2016)

regent said:


> So FDR created the Great Depression and Hoover pulled the country out of it; why can't America's historians understand that simple conservative fact?


_Actually, the war pulled us out. There was a massive surge in jobs producing weapons and machine components during the war._


----------



## regent (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > So FDR created the Great Depression and Hoover pulled the country out of it; why can't America's historians understand that simple conservative fact?
> ...


Just more evidence FDR did not spend enough on the New Deal and other programs. It was pure Keynes, and apparently that's all we use now.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 8, 2016)

regent said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


_A president cannot spend their way out of a Depression, only the Private Sector can fix the economy. All a president can do is remove regulations or watch. We wouldn't have even had a Depression, let alone one that lasted so long if FDR hadn't regulated businesses into oblivion. Compulsory Unionism, tripled taxes, prices locked high, waves and waves of lawsuits, locked high wages, and even more regulations I haven't mentioned, prevented the economy from recovering. FDR provided jobs, sure, but government jobs aren't self sustaining, they come from tax dollars, and they don't expand to keep of with demand. FDR damaged the economy even further, then prevented recovery with his policies, while spending far more than he needed. If he had done nothing, the recession wouldn't have become a depression, and it would have lasted 2-4 years._


----------



## Camp (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


So how do you explain the steady growth of industry and reduced unemployment from 1933 to 1939 before the economy surged with war production? And all this was done in spite of the chain of natural disasters known as the Dust Bowl Storms that wreaked havoc during that period of years.


----------



## Syriusly (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...



Let me quote you:

_We literally just explained how his policies created and extended the Great Depression.
_
You claimed President Roosevelt created the Great Depression- which began 4 years before he became president.

Which is why I am laughing at you.


----------



## Syriusly (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > So FDR created the Great Depression and Hoover pulled the country out of it; why can't America's historians understand that simple conservative fact?
> ...



So you are saying that President Roosevelt's program of massive government spending did eventually end the Great Depression.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 8, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...



I haven't ignored your post, I state what I believe to be true.  That being you're either a liar or challenged by reality.  You've failed to answer that question, or to rebute it with evidence that your are sane or honest.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 9, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...


_Yes, he did. He made the Recession into a Depression. I highly doubt you're laughing, since you can't refute the way his policies effected the economy._


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 9, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...


_Which part makes me a liar? Did he or did he not create the NRA/NIRA? How did the NRA/NIRA's business regulations help the economy, when all the functions of the policies made it more risky and costly to hire employees, and kept businesses from competing with each other? You have nothing, and that's why you just keep making false accusations and personal attacks. _


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 9, 2016)

Camp said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


_The economy always repairs itself naturally, a president would have to mess up majorly, or intentionally destroy it in order to keep it from recovering at all, and I don't think they have that kind of power. There's also the fact that the NIRA, while doing massive amounts of damage, was declared unconstitutional in 1935, further allowing the economy to recover on its own, despite Franklin Roosevelt's intentional incompetence. _


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 9, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




No.


----------



## Camp (Jul 9, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


NIRA did not do massive amounts of damage and only a portion of it was stricken down by the court, Title 1 specifically. By the time that portion was halted by the court, four million jobs had been created and over 23 million workers had benefited from Title 1. It made business more competitive and prevented large businesses in specific industries from putting smaller ones out of business. The law outlawed child labor, set standards for pay and overtime and installed safety and health codes. Other portions of NIRA were kept and reinforced by Congress. 

Here is an objective account on the topic.

u-s-history.com/pages/h1663.html


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Camp said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...




Debate???????


There is no debate, you lying fool.

I simply provide the truth, and you reply "is not....isss  noootttttttt!!! Waaaaa!!"


1929....noted as the start of the Great Depression.
*But....it wasn't.*

"Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929. It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.... . If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that. But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years." Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed

FDR ran on a platform of *balancing the budget, and cutting spending. *
Really. He promised.


Of the 40-50 economic downturns.....none lasted even five years....until Roosevelt made one last a decade.




Find anything not true, correct and indisputable???

Of course you didn't.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...






1. "She is obsessed with attacking FDR."

I am simply tasked with providing the truth.

And I do....as you prove every time I demand you provide any errors in my posts....

.....and you can't.



2. "She just can't stand that FDR led America to victory in World War 2..."
I leave you with nothing but the attempt to lie.
Let's prove it again....find any such post by moi.

Waiting.




Still waiting.




Gotcha' again, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...




"a statement of supposed fact was made; It is their job to prove that Black Tuesday was a product of FDR's lack of leadership and/or inability to control events which took place in the decade before he took office."

Bet you can't find any post of mine that says "Black Tuesday was a product of FDR's lack of leadership and/or inability to control events..."


Soooooo simple to prove you a liar.


And, of course.....a simpleton.


You recognize that, don't you?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Camp said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




"....put millions of people to work."

Who did???

Roosevelt???????

Here is an interesting visual: imagine a triple line of the unemployed, three across, consisting of those unemployed under Hoover, in 1931. The line would have gone *from Los Angeles, across the country, to the border of Maine.*

What effect did Roosevelt have on the line?

Well, eight years later, in 1939, the length of the line would have gone further, from the Maine border, south to Boston, then on to New York City, then to Philadelphia, on to Washington, D.C.- and finally, into Virginia.
Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal"


Think Folsom was wrong?

Check it out at the US Bureau of the Census, 'Historical Statistics of the United States: Colonial Times to 1970, I-126 and Unemployment Statistics during the Great Depression




"_ “We have tried spending money. We are spending more than we have ever spent before and it does not work. And I have just one interest, and if I am wrong…somebody else can have my job. I want to see this country prosperous. I want to see people get a job. I want to see people get enough to eat. We have never made good on our promises…I say after eight years of this administration we have just as much unemployment as when we started…And an enormous debt to boot!”_
 Morgenthau Diary, May 9, 1939, Franklin Roosevelt Presidential Library



FDR created a depression that lasted over twice as long as any previous economic downturn.

Those are the facts.


----------



## Moonglow (Jul 9, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


Yet GNP was half in 1930 what it was in 1927..


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...




He sure did. He took a recession and magnified it into the 'Great Depression.'

To cure it all he had to do was keep his promises that he pledged when running.

Ask someone smarter than you why he did that to America.


Facts:

1929....noted as the start of the Great Depression.
*But....it wasn't.*

*"Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929.* It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.... . If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that. But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years." Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed

FDR ran on a platform of *balancing the budget, and cutting spending. *
Really. He promised.


Of the 40-50 economic downturns.....none lasted even five years....until Roosevelt made one last a decade.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> Syriusly said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...




I've asked you to show any of the facts that I've provided aren't true....

...and all you can do is you specialty: hot air.


Bet everyone who knows you recognizes that.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...





Still can't find any errors?

Excellent.


You serve as proof that I am never wrong.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...





"....a liberal like FDR ..."

Absolutely true!

And, the hallmark of Liberals.....he hated the Constitution.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> So FDR created the Great Depression and Hoover pulled the country out of it; why can't America's historians understand that simple conservative fact?




"So FDR created the Great Depression and Hoover pulled the country out of it;...'


The fact than no one on this side made any such claim reveals both that you are a lying low-life, and that you are lacking in any way, facts or truth to deny what we have actually said.


....there is actually a necessity for lying.....if one is a Liberal. 
Without lying, a Liberal would be forced to simply admit at their views might be wrong, or dangerous to those who fall under its control, or that winning is all that matters, no matter the results of winning.

Or, that Franklin Roosevelt was a great President.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




That must explain the necessity of Obama chalking up $19 trillion in debt, too, huh?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Camp said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...





So.....you're giving up trying to deny this:

1929....noted as the start of the Great Depression.
*But....it wasn't.*

"Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929. It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.... . If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that. But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years." Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed

FDR ran on a platform of *balancing the budget, and cutting spending. *
Really. He promised.


Of the 40-50 economic downturns.....none lasted even five years....until Roosevelt made one last a decade.



That means I win again, huh?


----------



## Flanders (Jul 9, 2016)

*To PoliticalChic: Great Thread. I want to add a few thoughts.

The year 1938 was the worst year of the Great Depressions. That was six years after FDR was in office. Were it not for gearing up for WW II there is no telling how long the GD would have lasted.

It is difficult to talk about FDR without examining how he manipulated WW II in order to save Soviet Communism. Note that pertinent facts are spliced into my analysis of the Pearl Harbor Conspiracy Theory. *

   The following is my interpretation and nothing more.

The Pearl Harbor Conspiracy Theory must be examined with the politics and events that led to America’s entry into the war in Europe.  Once again, my comments are my interpretation of a theory.

   1.  The American public wanted no part of the war in Europe. FDR, spurred on by Churchill, was determined to get the U.S. into that war which began in 1939.  Churchill’s agenda was to keep Germany from becoming a world power; thereby, threatening the British Empire and its interests.  The Empire was already in serious trouble at the time; especially in India where the Raj was under attack by independence-minded Indians like Gandhi (1869 - 1948).  There was also a strong faction inside India who wanted to enter the war on Germany’s side.

   2.  Japan was Germany’s ally.  The biggest single mistake Hitler made was in declaring war on the United States not long after Pearl Harbor.  I believe that both Germany and Japan were operating under the delusion that the U.S. could not fight a two ocean war.

   3.  Japan attacked the United States, yet 90% of this country’s war effort was directed towards the European War and saving Communism in the Soviet Union.  Suspicious at the very least.  One would think that FDR would have wanted to squash Japan out of existence as quickly as possible by putting all available resources into the Pacific War.  Instead, he chose to concentrate on Europe. The Pacific War dragged on for four years as a result when it could have been brought to successful conclusion in one year.

   4.  Had Hitler not declared war on the U.S., FDR would have been forced to concentrate the war effort on Japan.  Hitler’s miscalculation was compounded here.  After Japan had been beaten, the American public would still have been against helping Communism survive in the Soviet Union.

   Americans could see no good reason for entering the war in Europe. Polls taken in the pre-WWII era showed that 80 percent of the American people wanted no part of a European war.  As late as June 23, 1941, then-Senator Truman remarked:

If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and if Russia is winning we ought to help Germany, and that way let them kill as many as possible. Harry Truman​ 
   Senator Harry S. Truman was a vehement opponent of America getting involved in a second European War.  The man who would later become president understood the American people because he was one of them. To hear today’s liberals talk about WWII, young Americans have been conned into believing that Americans could not wait to go to war in Europe.

   NOTE:  Fascism and Communism are equally abhorrent political systems to most Americans.  Before the world learned of the Holocaust, it would not have mattered one iota which side won in Europe.  Had the Holocaust never happened it would be easier today to show Fascism and Communism as both sides of the same coin.  Because the Holocaust did happen, Fascism is the more evil of the two, but not by much.  American Socialists/Communists claim sainthood under false pretenses to this day because of the Holocaust.

   5.  The British had broken the Japanese Naval Code before Dec. 1941. FDR’s defenders claim that he was not told that the Japanese Naval Code had been broken prior to Dec.  7, 1941.  For anyone to believe that FDR did not know the attack was imminent ignores the kind of president FDR was.  Nothing went on in his Administrations that he didn’t know about.  That man was the most manipulative, devious, president who ever lived in the White House.  Can anyone realistically believe that breaking the Japanese Naval Code was kept from him? Defending such a position boggles the mind considering the political environment of the time.

   6.  There were no aircraft carriers in Pearl Harbor on the day of the attack. The warships that were there were obsolete for the most part.  FDR did not want to give the Japanese Navy that big of an edge by putting this country’s aircraft carriers in harm’s way.

   7. The Japanese ambassador to Washington was kept waiting until after the attack began. Hence, Dec. 7 became a day of infamy rather than a declaration of war before the attack started.

   The one component of the Pearl Harbor Conspiracy Theory that is never, or seldom, speculated about is the suicide of James V. Forrestal.

   Forrestal’s brief biography, taken from an encyclopedia, is interesting in relation to the attack on Pearl Harbor:

“Forrestal, James Vincent (1892-1949), American banker and government official, born in Beacon, New York, and educated at Dartmouth College and Princeton University.  In 1916 he joined the New York City investment firm of Dillon, Reed, and Company.  He became president of the firm in 1938.  Two years later Forrestal was appointed undersecretary of the navy and served in that post until 1944, when he became secretary of the navy.  He was one of the chief planners of the unification of the three armed services in a single executive department of the federal government.  In 1947, when unification was effected by congressional enactment, Forrestal became the first secretary of defense of the U.S.  He resigned the post because of ill health early in 1949.”​ 
   The next quote was taken from a chronology of events in 1949 and is not connected to Forrestal’s biography.

“The U.S. Defense Department is created August 10 by a retitling of the War Department under terms of the National Security Act of 1947.  The first secretary of defense James V. Forrestal resigned in March with symptoms of nervous exhaustion and depression, entered Bethesda Naval Hospital, and jumped from a window there May 22, dying at age 57.”​ 
   Note that Forrestal’s promotion to secretary of the navy in 1944 shows that he was one of FDR’s fair-haired boys.  FDR did not move anyone up the ladder he did not trust completely.  If there is any truth to the Pearl Harbor Conspiracy Theory, Forrestal, as under secretary of the navy at the time of the Pearl Harbor attack, must have known about it even if he disagreed with FDR’s ultimate decision.  If he didn’t know about it in 1941, he may have acquired top secret information after he became secretary of the navy in ‘44, or after he became secretary of defense in 1947, that allowed him to put it all together. 

   Here are two purely speculative questions, if ever answered,  would either prove that FDR knew, or the answers could clear up the Forrestal suicide in relation to Pearl Harbor. 

   1.  In light of his loyalty to FDR, and subsequently FDR’s Pearl Harbor decision, was Forrestal’s depression brought on when he finally came to understand where FDR’s Socialists/Communists intended to take the country?  _(The U.N. was a fact of life in 1949._)

   2.  Was Forrestal a man of such conscience he had to commit suicide because he could no longer live with the secret of Pearl Harbor?

   Nor could Forrestal blow the whistle and harm the country. An internal conflict of that magnitude would break the strongest man of conscience.

   One other possibility is that New Deal Socialists/Communists murdered Forrestal because he was on the verge of telling all. Anything that would destroy FDR’s ongoing deification process would also tarnish Eleanor Roosevelt, and from there question the then-infant United Nations.  Socialists would not let that happen then or now.

The Wall Nobody Talks About​


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Syriusly said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Syriusly said:
> ...




No one said that, but you.
And you're a known liar.


Find someone with better comprehension than you have.....any third grader will do....


1929....noted as the start of the Great Depression.
*But....it wasn't.*

*"Unemployment in 1930 averaged a mildly recessionary 8.9 percent, up from 3.2 percent in 1929. *It shot up rapidly until peaking out at more than 25 percent in 1933.... . If this crash had been like previous ones, the hard times would have ended in two or three years at the most, and likely sooner than that. But unprecedented political bungling instead prolonged the misery for over 10 years." Great Myths of the Great Depression | Lawrence W. Reed


FDR ran on a platform of *balancing the budget, and cutting spending. *
Really. He promised.
See if you can figure out why he wanted the crisis to continue.


Of the 40-50 economic downturns.....none lasted even five years....until Roosevelt made one last a decade.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Flanders said:


> *To PoliticalChic: Great Thread. I want to add a few thoughts.
> 
> The year 1938 was the worst year of the Great Depressions. That was six years after FDR was in office. Were it not for gearing up for WW II there is no telling how long the GD would have lasted.
> 
> ...





Wow!

Lots in there that should have its own thread!!!



For me.....FDR wanted the economic crisis to continue, for several reasons.

I hope that readers will see that that is exactly what he did.....and begin to wonder why.



Hope to see more of your posts, Flanders.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Flanders said:


> *To PoliticalChic: Great Thread. I want to add a few thoughts.
> 
> The year 1938 was the worst year of the Great Depressions. That was six years after FDR was in office. Were it not for gearing up for WW II there is no telling how long the GD would have lasted.
> 
> ...






"*It is difficult to talk about FDR without examining how he manipulated WW II in order to save Soviet Communism."


Wow!!!!


That's a home run, right there!!!


And it relates to the question I posed in post #110.



The boot-lickers will never admit how the two points are related.*


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 9, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...



You're wasting your time trying to tell the left their hero FDR was a massive failure. Read the book FDR's Folly....it explains it in perfect detail


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 9, 2016)

SassyIrishLass said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...


_I have, it's a really good book~_

_I've noticed these guys are just repeating themselves, they have nothing of substance to debate with._


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 9, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...



They're leftists, w/o their media masters constantly indoctrinating them they run out of talking points. Good for you on reading the book and yes it's a really good book on FDR and his massive failure


----------



## regent (Jul 9, 2016)

What a waste if time trying to convince a few USMB members to hate FDR. First the American people rated the candidates with the election process, the people elected FDR four times, a record that may stand as long as the nation.
After the president leaves office the historians then rate the ex-presidents. They recently rated FDR number one, the best. He may not remain the best as we continually elect new presidents. How come liberals don't attack Lincoln?


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> What a waste if time trying to convince a few USMB members to hate FDR. First the American people rated the candidates with the election process, the people elected FDR four times, a record that may stand as long as the nation.
> After the president leaves office the historians then rate the ex-presidents. They recently rated FDR number one, the best. He may not remain the best as we continually elect new presidents. How come liberals don't attack Lincoln?









Same old fallacy.


----------



## Unkotare (Jul 9, 2016)

SassyIrishLass said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > SassyIrishLass said:
> ...





The scumbag was more than just a failure, he was aggressively un-American.


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> What a waste if time trying to convince a few USMB members to hate FDR. First the American people rated the candidates with the election process, the people elected FDR four times, a record that may stand as long as the nation.
> After the president leaves office the historians then rate the ex-presidents. They recently rated FDR number one, the best. He may not remain the best as we continually elect new presidents. How come liberals don't attack Lincoln?


_He's not the best, the vast majority of any civilization is ignorant, and most people today only know what the government education system told them. People think that FDR lead the nation out of the great depression, and we just showed you that he not only turned the recession into a depression to start with, but also extended it with policies that did the opposite of what he claimed they did. If you think this is wrong, then explain how the policies I mentioned would help the economy. Otherwise, you have no ground to stand on._


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> What a waste if time trying to convince a few USMB members to hate FDR. First the American people rated the candidates with the election process, the people elected FDR four times, a record that may stand as long as the nation.
> After the president leaves office the historians then rate the ex-presidents. They recently rated FDR number one, the best. He may not remain the best as we continually elect new presidents. How come liberals don't attack Lincoln?




"What a waste if time trying to convince a few USMB members to hate FDR."

No, you dunce.

I'm simply offering the truth, and a chance to break free of the sort of indoctrination that you have neither the strength nor the courage to attempt to shuffle off.



Watch me prove it:

In dozens of posts, you have yet to find a single example where I've been wrong, inaccurate, or untrue.

What does that say about you?
What does that say about me?


----------



## Tehon (Jul 9, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > What a waste if time trying to convince a few USMB members to hate FDR. First the American people rated the candidates with the election process, the people elected FDR four times, a record that may stand as long as the nation.
> ...


What prolonged the great depression was FDR's reverting back to the fiscally conservative policy of balancing the budget in 1937 which set back the economic gains which had been made.


----------



## regent (Jul 9, 2016)

Tehon said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


That seems to be the most correct answer. Most historians seem to accept that explanation.


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 9, 2016)

FDR was a socialist jackass and this nation would have been better off if his brain had bled out 10 years before it did


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 9, 2016)

Tehon said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


_He did absolutely nothing conservative, his policies were socialist the way he regulated businesses and vastly expanded the government. Something tells me you didn't even go check his policies, you just wanted to find some way to blame Conservatives, even if you had to lie to do so. _


----------



## Pumpkin Row (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


_Leave it to a Liberal to pass up an explanation for lies. You must love the Liberal Media and Hillary._


----------



## regent (Jul 9, 2016)

SassyIrishLass said:


> FDR was a socialist jackass and this nation would have been better off if his brain had bled out 10 years before it did


When all else fails, throw in some name calling.


----------



## SassyIrishLass (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > FDR was a socialist jackass and this nation would have been better off if his brain had bled out 10 years before it did
> ...



You'll get over it...and if you don't I really don't give a damn. You and your little feller friend are clueless on what FDR was all about. That is obvious....by the way a 14 y/o schooled ya


----------



## regent (Jul 9, 2016)

SassyIrishLass said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > SassyIrishLass said:
> ...


At least he seems to read history and doesn't create it to fit his thesis.


----------



## Tehon (Jul 9, 2016)

Pumpkin Row said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


FDR was a capitalist with many ties to wall street bankers and his policies were Keynesian which is economic theory rooted in capitalism. In 1937 FDR shifted his policy away from Keynesian economic theory, which was working, toward a conservative fiscal policy of neo-liberal austerity, which was proven a failure.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Tehon said:


> Pumpkin Row said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...




You couldn't be more wrong.

You could try....but you wouldn't be successful.


----------



## Camp (Jul 9, 2016)

regent said:


> SassyIrishLass said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


This thread follows the regular PoliticalChic pattern or promoting misinformation via cherry picking and lies through omission.  Declaring the four years leading up to FDR's first inauguration were a recession and not a full-fledged depression based on unemployment numbers is of course, ridiculous and goes against accepted history. So the cherry picked "fact" is that a single factor used to determine recessions and depressions is used to promote her "documented, sourced fact" to claim she is always right, is this cherry picked "fact". What gets omitted is another little fact. When FDR was inaugurated five thousand (5,000) banks had already been forced into closure. Imagine if today we were faced with thousands of banks going bankrupt and out of business. Would we call it a "recession"? Of course not. We would call that period a depression the way historians have recognized it as being for over 80 years. Look up 1929 recession. Good luck. You will end up seeing pages of links to the Great Depression with the same timeline and  analysis that the Great Depression began with the stock market crash in 1929.

As usual, the OP makes ridiculous claims, such as FDR being responsible for abandoning American servicemen to Stalin after WWII. This is based on a couple of letters made a month before FDR died and BEFORE the war had ended. When this was challenged and refuted, PoliticalChic reverted to another of her disinformation methods. She simply ignored the challenged and answered with some name calling and insults and reposted the same post that had been challenged. In other words, she evaded answering the challenge that her post had relied on discussions and events that occurred after FDR had died.


Anti New DEAL sentiments come from those who are opposed to government funding to boost the economy. It supports a trickle down economic theory that concentrates on corporate welfare, but more specifially, support for the MIT, the military industral complex. You think the government is not funding the economy? FDR sent the funds straight to projects that built infrastructure and lower or middle income workers. The MIT funnels funds to corportate and industry and benifits mostly upper income workers and those with stocks and owership of the MIT. FDR's concept of funding the economy via government work projects is still being used. It is just coming from a back door conduit called the MIT.


----------



## HenryBHough (Jul 9, 2016)

Had FDR lived World War II would still be a work in progress.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Camp said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > SassyIrishLass said:
> ...




"....promoting misinformation via cherry picking and lies through omission..."

What is this....the dozenth time I've given you the opportunity to find any thing I've posted that isn't true, accurate and correct....


...and the best you've ever been able to do is cry "is not, isssss noooottttttt!!!! Waaaa waaaa....."

It becomes tiresome.


Roosevelt chose the pathological murderer Joseph Stalin as his dance partner....then...when it was revealed that thousands of American soldiers were being held prisoner in the gulags.....

...Roosevelt 'requested' that they be returned.

Stalin laughed in his face, revealing how he had used Roosevelt....

Hence the title of the thread.


Thanks so much for your ineptitude....which helped prove everything I've posted.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

If any would like to see a quote of Roosevelt's that both proves what a fool he was....

....and that will bring tears to the eyes of those who love this country.....

....here it is:

“I know you will not mind my being brutally frank,” wrote Roosevelt to Churchill early in their alliance, “when I tell you that I can personally handle Stalin better than either your Foreign Office or my State Department. Stalin hates the guts of all your people. He thinks he likes me better, and I hope he will continue to.”

Roosevelt was being boastful, of course, but in the very act of boasting being also fatuous and credulous, to say the least. He knew nothing really about European, much less Soviet, affairs."
http://www.mmisi.org/ma/30_02/nisbet.pdf



Seems to be the very same megalomania exhibited by the current Democrat President:
"The White House takes pride in the fact that Obama’s PDB is “not briefed to him” – because, they say, he is “among the most sophisticated consumers of intelligence on the planet.” That hubris brings to mind this revealing quote from a September 2008 New York Times profile of Obama:

“I think that I’m a better speechwriter than my speechwriters,” Mr. Obama told Patrick Gaspard, his political director, at the start of the 2008 campaign, according to The New Yorker. “I know more about policies on any particular issue than my policy directors. And I’ll tell you right now that I’m going to think I’m a better political director than my political director.”

So it should come as no surprise that apparently Barack Obama thinks he’s a better intelligence briefer than his intelligence briefers."
Obama: I’m a better intelligence briefer than my intelligence briefers - AEI



Imagine, there are still half-heads who support both of these individuals.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

HenryBHough said:


> Had FDR lived World War II would still be a work in progress.





But, in Paris, they'd be speaking Russian rather than Arabic.


----------



## Tehon (Jul 9, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > Pumpkin Row said:
> ...


This is your work of fiction promoted earlier in this thread to advance your partisan agenda.


> a. FDR hated successful entrepreneurs, because he could not find any way to be successful in business. And.....future capitalists had rejected him in college.



But you couldn't be more wrong. This is the reality of FDR's business dealings that you attempt to distort. He is a capitalist of some success.

Franklin D. Roosevelt was, at one time or another during the 1920s, a vice president of the Fidelity & Deposit Company (120 Broadway); the president of an industry trade association, the American Construction Council (28 West 44th Street); a partner in Roosevelt & O'Connor (120 Broadway); a partner in Marvin, Hooker & Roosevelt (52 Wall Street); the president of United European Investors, Ltd. (7 Pine Street); a director of International Germanic Trust, Inc. (in the Standard Oil Building at 26 Broadway); a director of Consolidated Automatic Merchandising Corporation, a paper organization; a trustee of Georgia Warm Springs Foundation (120 Broadway); a director of American Investigation Corporation (37-39 Pine Street); a director of Sanitary Postage Service Corporation (285 Madison Avenue); the chairman of the General Trust Company (15 Broad Street); a director of Photomaton (551 Fifth Avenue); a director of Mantacal Oil Corporation (Rock Springs, Wyoming); and an incorporator of the Federal International Investment Trust. That's a pretty fair list of directorships. It surely earns FDR the title of Wall Streeter par excellence. Most who work on "the Street" never achieve, and probably never even dream about achieving, a record of 11 corporate directorships, two law partnerships, and the presidency of a major trade association.
CHAPTER 1


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 9, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...





You left this out:

*a. "....he pursued futile schemes to drill oil in Wyoming, buy ships to cross the Atlantic, and sell stamps that were premoistened....tried to corner the live lobster market...lost $26,000 before bailing out.....he assumed that airplanes were only a passing fad, and he invested in a line of airships, called dirigibles,....tried buying and selling German marks, planting thousands of trees, making cash with vending machines,....lost money in his resort for polio patients in Warm Springs, Georgia- and then, to top that off, he lost more money  farming the land nearby." *
*"A First Class Temperament: The Emergence of Franklin Roosevelt, 1905-1928," *
* by Geoffrey C. Ward, p.  658, 756, 768-769, 793; Folsom, "New Deal or Raw Deal," p.24-25*


*b. "Roosevelt knows nothing about finance, but he doesn't know he doesn't know." Franklin Lane, Woodrow Wilson's Sec'y of the Interior*
*The Final Case Against Franklin Delano Obama - The Last Resistance*


*c. FDR became a failed lawyer (without a degree) in 1907*
*Two presidents, Theodore Roosevelt (1901-1909), and his cousin, Franklin D. Roosevelt (1933-1945), both attended Columbia law school, both withdrew, and both were posthumously awarded degrees in 2008.https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/answer-sheet/wp/2015/02/12/which-u-s-presidents-didnt-earn-a-college-degree-two-of-them-are-on-mount-rushmore/*

*Never learned to respect the Constitution, it seems.*
*Neither of them did.*





*Time and again we see Democrat/Liberal politicians who are either failures in business....FDR.....or who know nothing about enterprise, creating a political milieu that results in a poor economy.....*

*Such as this:*
*" In a stunning Tuesday report, Gallup CEO and Chairman Jim Clifton revealed that “for the first time in 35 years, American business deaths now outnumber business births.”Clifton says for the past six years since 2008, employer business startups have fallen below the business failure rate, spurring what he calls “an underground earthquake” that only stands to worsen as lagging U.S. Census data becomes available.
“Let’s get one thing clear: This economy is never truly coming back unless we reverse the birth and death trends of American businesses,” writes Clifton."   
Economic Death Spiral: More American Businesses Dying Than Starting - Breitbart
*


----------



## Tehon (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


*You left this out:*

What I left out was all of your spin, the names of the companies are all there in my post, presented in a factual manner. 

FDR was a capitalist who represented wall street interests.His NRA was adapted from the Swope Plan. Gererad Swope was the president of General Electric Company. Glass-Steagall  was proposed by Winthrop Aldrich (Chase Bank) and James Perkins (National City Bank), who wanted to weaken Morgan Bank.  

This was his modus operandi. He wrote this shortly after becoming the VP Fidelity and Deposit Company of Maryland in 1921. 

I am going to take advantage of our old friendship and ask you if you can help me out any [sic] in an effort to get fidelity and contract bonds from the powers that be in Brooklyn.
 Franklin D. Roosevelt to Congressman J. A. Maher, March 2, 1922.

These are not the acts of someone who hates successful entrepreneurs, these are the acts of a full fledged capitalist.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...




Your list was a total fabrication.

It was provided by the congenital liar, Franklin Delano Roosevelt, in a puff piece book edited by his son.


Now....for truth....which is my stock in trade:

1. "A few months before his marriage, Franklin began law school at Columbia University. He attended for two years, never graduated, and displayed neither an aptitude nor a passion for the law. *He did pass the bar, though, and worked for a few years at the New York City law firm of Carter, Ledyard, and Milburn. In 1910, however, fellow Democrats from upstate asked Roosevelt to run for political office. *He quickly agreed. Although historians are unsure of FDR's *precise motives for entering politics, *a few reasons seem central. First, FDR truly disliked being a lawyer. Second, he enjoyed meeting new challenges and new people, both of which were integral to political life. Third, politics offered him the opportunity to be a leader, which appealed to his sense of self and conformed to his understanding of his role in the world. Finally, FDR's immense admiration for former President Theodore Roosevelt spurred him to try his hand at politics." Franklin D. Roosevelt: Life Before the Presidency—Miller Center


2. "Franklin studied law at Columbia University Law School and passed the bar exam in 1907, though *he didn't receive a degree. For the next three years, he practiced corporate law *in New York, living the typical upper-class life. But he found law practice boring and restrictive. He set his sights on greater accomplishments". http://www.biography.com/people/franklin-d-roosevelt-9463381#early-life


3. "FDR resumed his studies at Columbia University Law School, which he had begun in the fall of 1904. *He never completed the courses needed to receive an LL.B. degree, *but passed the bar examination at the end of three years and *began a law practice in New York City. In 1910*, FDR won a seat in the New York State Senate."  
Franklin D. Roosevelt (1882-1945)


4. "Roosevelt attended law school at Columbia University and *worked for several years as a clerk* in a Wall Street law firm. In 1910, he entered politics, ...."
Franklin D. Roosevelt - U.S. Presidents - HISTORY.com



Now....where do you see references to a sparking career in business...marked with successful endeavors?????

Where????


No where...."*worked for several years as a clerk"*....then became, excuse the expression, a politician.
His talent....his only talent....was smiling and shaking hands.


Roosevelt was a poor student, a failure in business, and a mistake as a politician.

God help America, when there are so many easily fooled like you.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...





"These are not the acts of someone who hates successful entrepreneurs, these are the acts of a full fledged capitalist."

Really?

Let's see what he said before he attempted to destroy them:

.*FDR hated capitalists. A personal hatred....petulance....and not based on ideology!*

*1. Franklin Roosevelt had a visceral animosity toward businessmen, entrepreneurs, successful capitalists. And he had a way with words, in describing them. "unscrupulousmoney changers*..." *the greed and shortsightedness of bankers* and _*businessmen*_," "..rulers of the exchange of mankind's goods have failed through their own *stubbornness and their own incompetence*" "we apply social values more noble than mere monetary profit." "there must be an end to a conduct in banking and in business which too often has given to a sacred trust the likeness of *callous and selfish wrongdoing."

*

2.  John Maynard Keynes, in a letter published in the NYTimes, December 31, 1933, warned “ even wise and necessary Reform may, in some respects, impede and complicate Recovery. For it will upset the confidence of the business world and weaken their existing motives to action.” *Even Keynes saw the danger in treating the nation’s capitalists as an enemy, as “the unscrupulous money changers,” as FDR called them in his first Inaugural.



Wise up.
His aim was to 'get even' with the successful, just as every communist, socialist, Liberal aims to do....

*


----------



## Tehon (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



*Now....where do you see references to a sparking career in business...marked with successful endeavors?????

Where????
*
My intent is not to portray FDR as a master of business, it is merely to show that he was a capitalist "of some success" who represented wall street interests. Once we can get past your falsely created narrative of FDR as someone who hated business we can then begin to dissect the rest of your bs. You start with a false premise which naturally leads you to false conclusions.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...




FDR "was a capitalist "of some success" who represented wall street interests.z'

He was no such thing, as I have proven via his own words.


1. Further....until he was confronted with a possible war....he drummed up hatred for the successful, for entrepreneurs, for any businesses not part of government cartels, a la Mussolini's fascist program.
His aim was Mussolini's corporatism.....not a free economy in any shape, manner nor form.
And certainly not under the Constitution.


Of course a command and control economy would never be as efficient as a free market.
Then he had to suck up to them....

2. On May 26, 1940 his Fireside Chat signaled a new relationship with business: he would insure their profits, and assuage* their fears that he would nationalize their factories.*

a. “…we are calling upon the resources, the efficiency and the ingenuity of the American manufacturers of war material of all kinds -- airplanes and tanks and guns and ships, and all the hundreds of products that go into this material. The Government of the United States itself manufactures few of the implements of war. Private industry will continue to be the source of most of this material, and private industry will have to be speeded up to produce it at the rate and efficiency called for by the needs of the times….Private industry will have the responsibility of providing the best, speediest and most efficient mass production of which it is capable.” On National Defense - May 26, 1940


And all the while.....throwing kisses to Joseph Stalin.


His aim, his desire, his fondest hope, was to be allowed into this club: Stalin, Hitler, Mussolini....the Dictators Club.



3. "Once we can get past your falsely created narrative of FDR as someone who hated business..."

Nothing I post is false in any way.
Get used to it: I am never wrong.


----------



## Tehon (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


*His aim was Mussolini's corporatism.....not a free economy in any shape, manner nor form.*

But it wasn't his aim, it was Gerard Swopes aim and it supports my position that FDR was representing capitalist interests.

Gerard Swope - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

*Swope Plan[edit]*
In September 1931, Swope presented a proposal for recovery, the Swope Plan. Under the plan, the Federal Trade Commission would supervise trade associations established for each industry. Trade associations would cover every company with at least 50 employees. Associations would regulate output and set prices. Workers would receive life insurance, pensions, and unemployment insurance paid for in part by employers. The Chamber of Commerce and other conservative groups provided enthusiastic support.[5]

President Herbert Hoover, who strongly supported voluntary trade associations, denounced the plan for being compulsory, inefficient, and monopolistic.[6]

In an oral history interview, Leon H. Keyserling said the New Deal's National Industrial Recovery Act "started as a trade association act. The original draft of the act grew out of the so-called Gerard Swope plan for Recovery."[7] When asked in November 1933 about an updated Swope Plan, President Roosevelt said, "Mr. Swope's plan is a very interesting theoretical suggestion in regard to some ultimate development of N.R.A"”[8]


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...




1. ".... Mussolini praised the New Deal as “boldly . . . interventionist in the field of economics,” and Roosevelt complimented Mussolini for his “honest purpose of restoring Italy” and acknowledged that he kept “in fairly close touch with that admirable Italian gentleman.”
 Also, Hugh Johnson, head of the National Recovery Administration, was known to carry a copy of Raffaello Viglione’s pro-Mussolini book, _The Corporate State,_ with him, presented a copy to Labor Secretary Frances Perkins, and, on retirement, paid tribute to the Italian dictator." 
Fascism: The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics | Library of Economics and Liberty

2. " The undistributed profits tax enacted in 1936 was the first attempt
to strangle business by controlling the allocation of investment capital, as advocated by Rex Tugwell (he had written about this idea in 1933)....designed to force corporations to pay out all of their earnings in dividends, which would be subject to individual income tax. This would not allow accumulation of capital for expansion, so corporations would have to go to the government for credit, and would prevent corporations from saving capital for a future depression/recession, and would then allow a pretext for the government to take over the whole system.  What followed was the Roosevelt depression of 1937. 
Manly, "The Twenty Year Revolution,"p. 60.


Taking over private business by regulations that throttle same. How novel.


3. ...., in 1933, the New Deal was often compared with Fascism was that with the help of a massive propaganda campaign, Italy had transitioned from a liberal free-market system to a state-run corporatist one. And corporatism was considered by elitists and intellectuals as the perfect response to the collapse of the liberal free-market economy, as was the national self-sufficiency of the Stalinist Soviet Union. The National Recovery Administration was comparable to Mussolini’s corporatism as both had state control without actual expropriation of private property.

Mussolini wrote a book review of Roosevelt’s “Looking Forward,” in which he said “…[as] Roosevelt here calls his readers to battle, is reminiscent of the ways and means by which Fascism awakened the Italian people.” Popolo d’Italia, July 7, 1933.
In 1934, Mussolini wrote a review of “New Frontiers,” by FDR’s Sec’y of Agriculture, later Vice-President, Henry Wallace: “Wallace’s answer to what America wants is as follows: anything but a return tyo the free-market, i.e., anarchistic economy. Where is America headed? This book leaves no doubt that it is on the road to corporatism, the economic system of the current century.” Marco Sedda, Il politico, vol. 64, p. 263.
Comparisons of the New Deal with totalitarian ideologies were provided from all sides. A Republican senator described the NRA as having gone “too far in the Russian direction,” and a Democrat accused FDR of trying “to transplant Hitlerism to every corner of this country.” Schivelbusch, “Three New Deals,” p. 27.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

1. General George Patton saw the inevitability of a conflict with the Russians.

"It is a conflict that Patton believes will be fought soon. *The Russians are moving to forcibly spread communism throughout the world,* and Patton knows it. "They are a scurvy race and simply savages," he writes of the Russians in his journal. "We could beat the hell out of them."
"Patton," By Martin Blumenson, Kevin M. Hymel, p. 84



2. Five day after V-E Day, the AP filed a startling news report from SHAEF: "Nearly half of the estimated 200,000 British and 76,000 American prisoners of war still in Germany are believed to be within the Russian zone of occupation and Supreme Headquarters has twice requested a meeting or arrangement to arrange their return."
Senate Minority POW/MIA Report, 39."SHAEF Asks Russians About Freed PW's", AP Dispatch, ADVANCE HEADQUARTERS, Reims, France, May 12, 1945

a. On May 19, 1945, Eisenhower signed a cable stating "Numbers of US prisoners estimated in Russian control 25,000"


3. Americans in Soviet custody were "in effect being held hostage"; "we may find a reluctance to return them all..." The realization began to dawn that they may never come home at all.
Major R.W. Barker, 'Report on Conference With Russian Officials Relative to Repatriation of Prisoners of War, May 23, 1945, See Senate Minority POW/MIA Report, 41.

At the time, before he learned the truth, Truman was still in the Roosevelt mode of appeasing Stalin.


See why General Patton was not a fav with either Eisenhower nor Roosevelt?
He was right.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



PC, are you now or have you ever been a member of the John Birch Society?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...




Meaning that, as usual, you cannot find any error in my posts.

You never will.....just as I will never find an intelligent thought in your posts.


So...your post effectively agrees that

1. Roosevelt was closely associated with Mussolini and Fascism, basing his entire New Deal on same.

2. And all hose who idolize FDR, effectively idolize Mussolini and Fascism.
Raise your paw.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



*You didn't answer the question:*

ARE YOU NOW OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN A MEMBER OF THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY?


----------



## Tehon (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Of course FDR's programs looked similar to Mussolini's, they were being advanced behind he scenes by the same players, the corporations and the banks. After WWI capitalism found itself in a bit of a crisis in Europe. Socialist movements were on the rise in Europe, communism found its way in Russia, the capitalists needed to stem the tide. So in Europe the capitalists supported the fascists who violently repressed the socialist movements in their countries.
 After the crash that lead to the great depression capitalism again found itself in crisis, though in America the people were only demoralized, they weren't ready to revolt like in Europe. So the capitalists turned to the same methods they used in Italy to appease the masses while still retaining control of the ship. Minus the violent repression of course. That is why the NRA looks similar to Mussolini's corporations. Capitalists are behind all of it.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...



"Of course FDR's programs looked similar to Mussolini's,..."

Good to see you retreat from that nonsense that FDR was in favor of capitalism, capitalists, free market, or business.

The man was an anti-Constitution pro-dictatorship megalomaniac.

But 'similar to Mussolini's' gets you the same grade as Roosevelt got in school....C+



The  propaganda of the New Deal (“malefactors of great wealth”) to the contrary, FDR simply endeavored to re-create the corporatism of the last war. The New Dealers invited one industry after another to write the codes under which they would be regulated.  Even more aggressive, the National Recovery Administration forced industries to fix prices and in other ways to collude with one another: the NRA approved 557 basic and 189 supplementary codes, covering almost 95% of all industrial workers.
The intention was for big business to get bigger, and the little guy to be squeezed out: for example, the owners of the big chain movie houses wrote the codes that almost ran the independents out of business (even though 13,571 of the 18,321 movie theatres were independently owned). This in the name of ‘efficiency’ and ‘progress.’
New Deal bureaucrats studied Mussolini’s corporatism closely. From “Fortune” magazine: ‘*The Corporate state is to Mussolini what the New Deal is to Roosevelt.*’(July 1934)


2. Another early policy given high priority by the Nazi government was the organizing of all German businesses into cartels. The argument was that—in contrast to the disorderliness and egoism of free market capitalism—centralization and state control would increase efficiency and a sense of German unity. In July of 1933, membership in a cartel became compulsory for businesses, and by early 1934 the cartel structure was re-organized and placed firmly under the direction of the German government.  Gemeinnutz geht vor Eigennutz – Stephen Hicks, Ph.D.


The shameful six include Fascism, socialism, communism, Liberalism, Progressivism, and Nazism.

Franklin Roosevelt fit all six.



Be sure to ask what the opposite would look like.


----------



## Tehon (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Not retreating, my position is the same. FDR was a capitalist who was advancing the capitalist agenda at the time. The swopes plan was a capitalist supported plan. That the capitalist agenda has changed with the changing times is without question, we are now in a period of undoing what FDR did via neoliberal policies, but in his time he was advancing the cause of capitalism.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...






"ARE YOU NOW OR HAVE YOU EVER BEEN A MEMBER OF THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY?"
Before being a smartass, it is wise to first ensure one is smart. Otherwise one is merely being an ass.
Someone should have informed you.

As for your fatuous query....
I am one of a kind.

If you ever gain an education, I've certainly given you enough of my posts to make your own judgement.



Now a query for you.....
...don't you ever engage in self-realization, and consider what it means that you have never been able to find a single error in any of my thousands of posts?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...






"Not retreating, my position is the same. FDR was a capitalist..."

In that case your grade is now 'F.'

Repeat the course.


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



I never doubted you're one of a kind, so was the unabomber, McVeigh, Rudolph, Zimmerman and Oswald.  But that does not answer the question.

*Are you now or have you ever been a member of the John Birch Society?*


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...



Clean off your specs, old timer....you missed this:
..don't you ever engage in self-realization, and consider what it means that you have never been able to find a single error in any of my thousands of posts?


----------



## Wry Catcher (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Wry Catcher said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Are you dating Rabbi (BE aware, he and warrior had a thing going)


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Wry Catcher said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Wry Catcher said:
> ...





Gee.....just like a three year old, you'll do anything not to answer the question
..don't you ever engage in self-realization, and consider what it means that you have never been able to find a single error in any of my thousands of posts?




Hope I didn't insult three year olds!


----------



## Tehon (Jul 10, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> The  propaganda of the New Deal (“malefactors of great wealth”) to the contrary, FDR simply endeavored to re-create the corporatism of the last war. The New Dealers invited one industry after another to write the codes under which they would be regulated.  Even more aggressive, the National Recovery Administration forced industries to fix prices and in other ways to collude with one another: the NRA approved 557 basic and 189 supplementary codes, covering almost 95% of all industrial workers.
> The intention was for big business to get bigger, and the little guy to be squeezed out: for example, the owners of the big chain movie houses wrote the codes that almost ran the independents out of business (even though 13,571 of the 18,321 movie theatres were independently owned). This in the name of ‘efficiency’ and ‘progress.’
> New Deal bureaucrats studied Mussolini’s corporatism closely. From “Fortune” magazine: ‘*The Corporate state is to Mussolini what the New Deal is to Roosevelt.*’(July 1934)


You know that we are saying the same the same thing here, right..... that FDR was advancing the capitalist agenda. It is kind of you to support my position.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The  propaganda of the New Deal (“malefactors of great wealth”) to the contrary, FDR simply endeavored to re-create the corporatism of the last war. The New Dealers invited one industry after another to write the codes under which they would be regulated.  Even more aggressive, the National Recovery Administration forced industries to fix prices and in other ways to collude with one another: the NRA approved 557 basic and 189 supplementary codes, covering almost 95% of all industrial workers.
> ...




You can dance around it all you like, but you have proven yourself incapable of incorporating facts to counter your biases.

You must be a government school grad, huh?


----------



## regent (Jul 10, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > The  propaganda of the New Deal (“malefactors of great wealth”) to the contrary, FDR simply endeavored to re-create the corporatism of the last war. The New Dealers invited one industry after another to write the codes under which they would be regulated.  Even more aggressive, the National Recovery Administration forced industries to fix prices and in other ways to collude with one another: the NRA approved 557 basic and 189 supplementary codes, covering almost 95% of all industrial workers.
> ...


Of course, FDR was  advancing the capitalistic agenda, it was essential that business make a profit and the NRA was an attempt to make that need come true. It didn't work because the capitalists involved could not make it work. So on to another idea as FDR promised he would do.


----------



## Tehon (Jul 10, 2016)

regent said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


I thought it didn't work because it was deemed unconstitutional.

I'm not a free marketeer but I have to question the value of allowing industry to collude in setting their own prices.


----------



## regent (Jul 11, 2016)

Tehon said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...


America was desperate for a solution and as FDR said he would experiment, and that's what he did. In any case our answer today seems to be Keynes, not balancing the budget, nor loaning money to business so it could continue manufacturing the same product that sat on warehouse shelves.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 11, 2016)

Moonglow said:


> You didn't know that FDR came from a rich family?



The only thing that makes sense is that Moonglow is a masochist  who had fallen in love with instantaneous spankings administered by PC


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 11, 2016)

jillian said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...



Yet FDR still aided and abetted a known genocidal lunatic in his Uncle Joe.

Why?


----------



## Tehon (Jul 11, 2016)

regent said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


Keynes was the answer for FDR, Mussolini and Hitler and his theory still holds true today. Unfortunately the neoliberals have been in control since Reagan.

BTW Keynes only advocated running deficits in times of economic stagnation, otherwise he advocated balanced budgets.


----------



## Camp (Jul 11, 2016)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Moonglow said:
> 
> 
> > You didn't know that FDR came from a rich family?
> ...


PC does not spank anyone. In this thread, she has evaded answering numerous challenges by simply not answering the refutes, hurling insults and re-posting the post she has been challenged about and refuted. This while she reminds everyone how much smarter she is than everyone else, bla, bla, bla.
In the end, she has been caught lying on two of her major points of her conspiracy theory. FDR did not abandon the troops to Russia and Stalin as she claims. FDR was deceased when that occurred. Her own links and quotes contained in her post confirm that. And any retard can ascertain that the claim that the Great Depression didn't begin in 1929, four years in advance of the FDR Presidency is a big lie.


----------



## Camp (Jul 11, 2016)

CrusaderFrank said:


> jillian said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


To defeat the Nazi war machine and manipulate Stalin into sacrificing millions of USSR troops instead of American troops. American casualties, hundreds of thousands. USSR casualties, millions, perhaps as many as ten million.


----------



## Tehon (Jul 11, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


biennio rosso is the name of the widespread unrest in Italy that lead to the rise of Mussolini. The "two red years" in english, 1919 and 1920 culminating in the workers taking control of industrial factories. Mussolini and his blackshirts got their start attacking leftists, funded by capitalists. Fascism is not a leftist ideology, it is a capitalist counter revolution.

Italy - The Fascist era | history - geography

Mussolini’s movement was initially unsuccessful, but Fascists soon began to agitate in the streets and against the left. In April 1919 Fascists and nationalists burned down the offices of the national Socialist daily, _L’Avanti!_, in Milan. Four people were killed, and the paper shut down for several days. This was the first demonstration of the ability of the Fascists to attack Socialist institutions. The offices of _L’Avanti!_ were attacked twice more between 1920 and 1922. Organized militias began to attract support across Italy in an anti-Bolshevik crusade that united various social and political sectors and organizations. Local Fascist groups were soon founded in Emilia, Tuscany, and Puglia and by autumn 1920 were busy not only breaking up strikes but also dismantling Socialist and Catholic labour unions and peasants’ cooperatives and—often with police collusion—overthrowing newly elected local councils. Fascist squads, dressed in black-shirted uniforms and often financed by landowners or industrialists, used systematic violence to destroy these organizations. Thousands of people were beaten, killed, or forced to drink castor oil and run out of town. Hundreds of union offices, employment centres, and party newspapers were looted or burnt down. In October 1920, after the election of a left administration in Bologna, Fascists invaded the council chamber, causing mayhem and nine deaths. The council was suspended by the government. Later, Socialist and Catholic deputies were run out of parliament or had their houses destroyed. The_biennio nero_ (“two black years”; 1921–22) destroyed opposition to the Fascists. Union organizations were crushed. The Federterra shrank from some one million members to fewer than 6,000 in less than five years. Unable to defend basic democratic rights or to prevent the criminal activities of a private militia that operated openly and nationwide, the state had lost all credibility.


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 11, 2016)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > jillian said:
> ...



Google Stalin and Kulaks, then we can talk


----------



## CrusaderFrank (Jul 11, 2016)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...



PC has your shrunken heads on her belt.


----------



## Camp (Jul 11, 2016)

CrusaderFrank said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > CrusaderFrank said:
> ...


You are delusional. Only a small handful of members here still support PoliticalChics conspiracy theory anti-FDR rants. Far more mock her and every one of the conspiracy theory threads ends with her being unable to answer challenges and refutations. Conspiracy theories are not recognized as real or accurate histories. Sorry to break it to you.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

regent said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




"... FDR said he would experiment, and that's what he did. In any case our answer today seems to be Keynes, not balancing the budget,..."

Of course, you're lying....just as FDR did.

Let me prove it with his own words.


1. The basis of FDR's 1932 campaign to win the presidency from Herbert Hoover was his emphatic promise to the suffering American people, that he would balance the budget. Of course, he also promised that he would use the government to create jobs, and that they "had a right to a comfortable living."
FDR’s Commonwealth Club Address

2.The part about balancing the budget had a certain resonance as President Harding had veered sharply away from federal spending and solved as big a recession in about one year. Certainly Franklin *Roosevelt knew this, as he hammered away at Hoover's spending. October 19, 1932, he nailed Hoover, observing that in recent years federal expenses had increased by $1 billion "and that I may add, is the most reckless and extravagant past that I have been able to discover in the statistical record of any peacetime Government anywhere, any time." *Franklin D. Roosevelt: Campaign Address on the Federal Budget at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

a. *Roosevelt went further! The cause: "It arises from one cause only and that is the unbalanced budget *at he continued failure of this administration to take effective steps to balance it!  If that budget had been fully and honestly balanced in 1930, some of the 1931 troubles would have been avoided. Even if it had been balanced in 1931, much of the extreme dip in 1932 would have been obviated. Every financial man in the country knows why this is true."                            Franklin D. Roosevelt: Campaign Address on the Federal Budget at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

b. And this: "...  carrying out the plain precept of our Party, which is to reduce the cost of current Federal Government operations by 25 percent." Ibid.



Did I just ram your words back down your lying throat, or what??????


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...





"Fascism is not a leftist ideology, it is a capitalist counter revolution."

You've been deprived of an education, eh?

I can help.

Let's begin with definitions.
Nazism, communism, socialism..Liberalism, Progressivism,.and fascism....

1. Which stem from the works of Karl Marx?
2. Which is a form of command and control big government?
3. Which has no problem with genocide, actual or figurative, as an accepted procedure on its political enemies?
4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?
5. Which oppresses and/or slaughters its own citizens as pro forma (including depriving them of a living)....?
6. Which represents totalitarian governance?
7. Which believes that mandating/dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives is their prerogative?
8. Which aims for an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life

9. Which restricts free speech and thought?

10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism






How about pointing out which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?
Right....none of 'em.
Only right wing philosophies...i.e., conservatism.


In your face, you dolt.....


----------



## Tehon (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Tehon said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Conservatism is the fear of change, and the biggest fear after WWI was that socialist revolutions would overthrow capitalism as Marx had predicted. Capitalists gave rise to fascism and as such they are responsible for all the blood that was spilled in the twentieth century. Capitalists are responsible for repression and iron fisted government, it is all rooted in conservatism, the fear of change.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> CrusaderFrank said:
> 
> 
> > Moonglow said:
> ...



"PC does not spank anyone. In this thread, .... she has been caught lying on two of her major points of her conspiracy theory. FDR did not abandon the troops to Russia and Stalin as she claims."

Well, I've done more than spank you.....I've atomized you!
Proving that you are a low-life, lying sleaze has been both simple, and a bonus.




Now....watch me do it again:
The following.....abandoning thousands of American soldiers just to stay in Stalin's favor was more than typical of Franklin Roosevelt.



"On May 12, 1945, five days after V-E Day, the AP filed a startling news report from Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF): “Nearly half of the *estimated 200,000 British and 76,000 American prisoners of war still in Germany are believed to be within the Russian zone *of occupation and Supreme Headquarters has twice requested a meeting or an arrangement to arrange their return.”

Not two months earlier, as we’ve seen, Stalin had belligerently insisted to the now-deceased FDR that there were only seventeen Americans left in the Red zone, and that these last few American boys were safely en route to Odessa.

Behind the scenes, on *May 19, 1945, Supreme Commander Eisenhower himself signed a cable stating, “Numbers of US prisoners estimated in Russian control 25,000.”*

What happened?* The Senate report goes on to assemble the relevant record of subsequent statements, memos, tallies and the like to arrive at its bottom line: between 12,500 and 20,000 U.S. servicemen were left behind after World.*




I can’t think of anything that puts a more American face on this uniquely twentieth-century *record of perfidy [by Roosevelt and his administration]* than *the betrayal of our own fighting fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons, Americans *of successive generations beginning back before the so-called Greatest Generation, all the way up to the baby boomers. Along with their long-suffering families, they would become *the uniquely American sacrifice to the conspiracy of silence that improbably held the Free World and the Un-Free World together, partners in crime, over the course of the twentieth century. Sacrifices, all, to American betrayal."*
Diana West, "American Betrayal," chapter 11
The Death of the Grown-Up | Diana West > Home - Memorial




All of which must be laid at the feet of Franklin Roosevelt and his supporters.


You've served your purpose, that of proving that I never lie.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...




You seem to have missed this:
Let's begin with definitions.
Nazism, communism, socialism..Liberalism, Progressivism,.and fascism....

1. Which stem from the works of Karl Marx?
2. Which is a form of command and control big government?
3. Which has no problem with genocide, actual or figurative, as an accepted procedure on its political enemies?
4. Which is based on the collective over the individual?
5. Which oppresses and/or slaughters its own citizens as pro forma (including depriving them of a living)....?
6. Which represents totalitarian governance?
7. Which believes that mandating/dictating every aspect of their citizen's lives is their prerogative?
8. Which aims for an all-encompassing state that centralizes power to perfect human nature by controlling every aspect of life

9. Which restricts free speech and thought?

10. Which can be summed up in Hegel's “The state says … you must obey …. The state has rights against the individual; its members have obligations, among them that of obeying without protest”



And, of course, they all are do...they are all consubstantial.

Nazism

Communism

Socialism

Fascism

Progressivism

Liberalism






How about pointing out which of them are defenders of religious, political, and economic freedom, and recognize the individual as the most important element of society?
Right....none of 'em.
Only right wing philosophies...i.e., conservatism.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Tehon said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...




"Conservatism is the fear of change, blah blah blah....."

I hear you crying out for an education,.....that which has been denied to you up to now.

Have no fear.....I am here to save the day!


Take notes:

1)  Conservatives believe that there are moral truths, right and wrong, and that these truths are permanent. The result of infracting these truths will be atrocities and social disaster. Liberals believe in a privatization of morality so complete that no code of conduct is generally accepted, practically to the point of ‘do what you can get away with’. These beliefs are aimed at the gratification of appetites and exhibit anarchistic impulses.


*2)  *Conservatives believe that custom and tradition result in individuals living in peace. Law is custom and precedent.  Liberals are destroyers of custom and convention. To a conservative, change should be gradual, as the new society is often inferior to the old. We build on the ideas and experience of our ancestors. *The species is wiser than the individual (Burke). *


3)  Liberals are impulsive, and imprudent. They believe in quick changes, and risk new abuses worse than the ‘evils’ that they would sweep away, since remedies are usually not simple. Plato said that prudence is the mark of the statesman.  There should be a balance between permanence and change, while liberals see ‘progress’ as some mythical direction for society.


4)  Conservatives believe in the principle of variety, while liberal perspectives result in a narrowing uniformity. Conservatives believe in choice of healthcare, education, religion, and various other areas. Under conservative principles, there will be differences in class, material condition and other inequalities. Equality will be of opportunity, not necessarily of result. The only uniformity will be before the law. Society will not be perfect. Consider the results of the rule of ideologues of the last century.


5)  Freedom and property are linked. Private property results in a more stable and productive society. Private property and retaining the fruits of one’s labor has been proven successful from the Puritan’s Bradford, to the Stakhanovite Revolution!


6)  Conservatives believe in voluntary community and charity, based on duties to each other, with the assumption that each person must do whatever he could to avoid requiring assistance, as opposed to involuntary collectivism, as in “let the government do it..”  Burke's understanding that the "little platoon" - family, neighborhood, professional organizations etc - is the "first principle" of society has been consistently identified as providing the necessary inspiration for conservativism. And explains why conservatives give more to charity than liberals.


7)  Conservatives view people as both good and bad, and for this reason believe on restraints on power, as in checks and balances, while liberals see power as a force for good, as long as the power is in their hands.


8)  Liberals and Conservatives differ in the way to proceed.  For Conservatives, data informs policy. (“More Guns, Less Crime” and “Mass murderers apparently can’t read, since they are constantly shooting up ‘gun-free zones.’”- Coulter)   We use Conservative principles to the best of our ability, but when confronting new and original venues, we believe in testing, and analysis of the results of the tests. For liberals, feeling passes for knowing; it is based on emotion often to the exclusion of thinking.


9)  Conservatives view results differently from Liberals. Liberals respond to success and material wealth with envy and hostility, encourage class warfare and an attempt to obviate any chance that it might happen again. The exception is when it is a Liberal with the wealth. Conservatives see success as the validation and culmination of the application of Conservative principles, most prominently Liberty.


10) Since Liberals see their view as a higher calling that that of Conservatives, they mistakenly believe that it is entirely appropriate for then to use, not logic, facts,  nor accepted debating techniques, but ad hominem attacks on the physical appearance, personal history, or imaginary mental defects. Notice how the Liberal replaces intellect with emotion. This is, no doubt, based on a medieval concept of recognizing witches and demons. In fact, Liberals attempt to deal with opponents in similar fashion: recall Clarence Thomas’ “High Tech Lynching.”


----------



## regent (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > Tehon said:
> ...


1.  So are all depression/recessions caused by the same economic factors?
2.  Do all of the economic factors that cause a depression/recession have to  in the same quantity?
3.  How does a balanced budget cure a depression/recession?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




You are both a congenital liar and a glacially slow learner.


One more time....let Roosevelt teach you the lesson:

1. The basis of FDR's 1932 campaign to win the presidency from Herbert Hoover was *his emphatic promise *to the suffering American people, that* he would balance the budget.* Of course, he also promised that he would use the government to create jobs, and that they "had a right to a comfortable living."
FDR’s Commonwealth Club Address

2.The part about balancing the budget had a certain resonance as President Harding had veered sharply away from federal spending and solved as big a recession in about one year. Certainly Franklin *Roosevelt knew this, as he hammered away at Hoover's spending. October 19, 1932, he nailed Hoover, observing that in recent years federal expenses had increased by $1 billion "and that I may add, is the most reckless and extravagant past that I have been able to discover in the statistical record of any peacetime Government anywhere, any time." *Franklin D. Roosevelt: Campaign Address on the Federal Budget at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

a. *Roosevelt went further! The cause: "It arises from one cause only and that is the unbalanced budget *at he continued failure of this administration to take effective steps to balance it! If that budget had been fully and honestly balanced in 1930, some of the 1931 troubles would have been avoided. Even if it had been balanced in 1931, much of the extreme dip in 1932 would have been obviated. Every financial man in the country knows why this is true." Franklin D. Roosevelt: Campaign Address on the Federal Budget at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

b. And this: "... carrying out the plain precept of our Party, which is to reduce the cost of current Federal Government operations by 25 percent." Ibid.


----------



## regent (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


It was a simple question: How does balancing the budget cure a depression?


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


You will not get an original or intellectual answer. All this conspiracy theorist is able to do is throw some insults and name calling followed by a cut and paste deflection that is used to evade answering precise and specific questions. Her threads are scams and hackeries.
 I'm still waiting to hear how FDR forced Truman and Eisenhower to abandon those GI's to Stalin after he had been dead and buried.  She keeps posting the same cut and paste that shows discussions going on about the topic after FDR had died. But somehow it was the dead guy who is behind the conspiracy theory.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...




Why don't you question the man who claimed same as the solution...

His name was Franklin Delano Roosevelt.


Watch me prove it:

1. The basis of FDR's 1932 campaign to win the presidency from Herbert Hoover was *his emphatic promise *to the suffering American people, that* he would balance the budget.* Of course, he also promised that he would use the government to create jobs, and that they "had a right to a comfortable living."
FDR’s Commonwealth Club Address

2.The part about balancing the budget had a certain resonance as President Harding had veered sharply away from federal spending and solved as big a recession in about one year. Certainly Franklin *Roosevelt knew this, as he hammered away at Hoover's spending. October 19, 1932, he nailed Hoover, observing that in recent years federal expenses had increased by $1 billion "and that I may add, is the most reckless and extravagant past that I have been able to discover in the statistical record of any peacetime Government anywhere, any time." *Franklin D. Roosevelt: Campaign Address on the Federal Budget at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

a. *Roosevelt went further! The cause: "It arises from one cause only and that is the unbalanced budget *at he continued failure of this administration to take effective steps to balance it! If that budget had been fully and honestly balanced in 1930, some of the 1931 troubles would have been avoided. Even if it had been balanced in 1931, much of the extreme dip in 1932 would have been obviated. Every financial man in the country knows why this is true." Franklin D. Roosevelt: Campaign Address on the Federal Budget at Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania

b. And this: "... carrying out the plain precept of our Party, which is to reduce the cost of current Federal Government operations by 25 percent." Ibid.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...




I just rubbed your face in it earlier....
...proved you to be a lying cur, and corrected you the way curs are often corrected.

So...why are you back?


----------



## regent (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


Still trying to find out how balancing the budget cures a depression/depression, and not what FDR said.
Do you know or not? Does anyone, or can we now strike the whole balanced budget thing? That seems to leave us with Keynes as our only answer at this time.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

regent said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




Three times....still pretending you don't understand.


Now...let's get back to Roosevelt.

Why did he lie?

Why do you lie?

Since history showed that he could have done exactly what he promised, what Harding showed as efficacious......
....why did Roosevelt make certain that the recession would become a Depression...and last twice as long as any previous downturn?

Why?


Or...
Why did he lie?

Why do you lie?


In you, a lack of character.

In Roosevelt.....an ulterior motive.


Right?


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > regent said:
> ...


No, you didn't. You just keep posting the same cut and paste that I refuted. The one that has discussions for the repatriation of POWs between the USSR and the US after FDR had died. Your conspiracy theory is that FDR was responsible for everything, even after he died. Your own link refutes your claims you dope.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




What does 'cut and paste' mean, you moron?

Exact quotes from those who know.

This:
The following.....abandoning thousands of American soldiers just to stay in Stalin's favor was more than typical of Franklin Roosevelt.



"On May 12, 1945, five days after V-E Day, the AP filed a startling news report from Supreme Headquarters Allied Expeditionary Force (SHAEF): “Nearly half of the *estimated 200,000 British and 76,000 American prisoners of war still in Germany are believed to be within the Russian zone *of occupation and Supreme Headquarters has twice requested a meeting or an arrangement to arrange their return.”

Not two months earlier, as we’ve seen, Stalin had belligerently insisted to the now-deceased FDR that there were only seventeen Americans left in the Red zone, and that these last few American boys were safely en route to Odessa.

Behind the scenes, on *May 19, 1945, Supreme Commander Eisenhower himself signed a cable stating, “Numbers of US prisoners estimated in Russian control 25,000.”*

What happened?* The Senate report goes on to assemble the relevant record of subsequent statements, memos, tallies and the like to arrive at its bottom line: between 12,500 and 20,000 U.S. servicemen were left behind after World.*




I can’t think of anything that puts a more American face on this uniquely twentieth-century*record of perfidy [by Roosevelt and his administration]* than *the betrayal of our own fighting fathers, brothers, husbands, and sons, Americans *of successive generations beginning back before the so-called Greatest Generation, all the way up to the baby boomers. Along with their long-suffering families, they would become *the uniquely American sacrifice to the conspiracy of silence that improbably held the Free World and the Un-Free World together, partners in crime, over the course of the twentieth century. Sacrifices, all, to American betrayal."*
Diana West, "American Betrayal," chapter 11
The Death of the Grown-Up | Diana West > Home - Memorial




All of which must be laid at the feet of Franklin Roosevelt and his supporters.


Screeching 'cut and paste' is not a denial of the facts.


This fact as well: you remain a low-life sleaze.


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> regent said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


FDR inherited a full fledged Depression. You keep calling it a recession and claim he caused the recession to become a depression. Anyone can google Great Depression and see when it started. Your stupid theory relies on people believing your nonsense about the period of  1929 from the time of the Wall Street Crash through 1933 after 5,000 banks had crashed was a recession.  Historical accounts don't agree with you. History doesn't agree with. Your conspiracy theory is a fail.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





"Your conspiracy theory is that FDR was responsible for everything, even after he died. Your own link refutes your claims you dope."


Let's see.....


FDR caused the problem....

...and his administration contunued it after he died.


Before his death:
*March 3, 1945, FDR cables Stalin to request 'urgently' for American teams to evacuate American prisoners of war 'liberated' by the Red Army*

Before his death:
*March 5, 1945, Stalin replied: Nyet.* 
_"...concerning the question of prisoners of war....on the territory of Poland and other places liberated by the Red Army, there are no groups of American prisoners of war...."_ 
"My Dear Mr. Stalin: The Complete Correspondence of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph V. Stalin," by Susan Butler, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. p. 299



Stalin told the British the same thing about 20,000-30,000 British ex-prisoners. "The Iron Cage," by Nigel Cawthorne, p. 5



I notice I've forced you to stop lying about the numbers of American soldiers he abandoned to Stalin's gulags.
It's not 17.....is it.

Excellent.


And I will do the same with ever lie you attempt.


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


Do you even read or comprehend your cut and paste? Do you realize that FDR had been for a month before your "startling news"? You are cutting and pasting about things that happened after FDR had died.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





"Do you realize that FDR had been for a month before your "startling news"? You are cutting and pasting about things that happened after FDR had died."

FDR caused the problem....

...and his administration contunued it after he died.


Before his death:
*March 3, 1945, FDR cables Stalin to request 'urgently' for American teams to evacuate American prisoners of war 'liberated' by the Red Army*

Before his death:
*March 5, 1945, Stalin replied: Nyet.* 
_"...concerning the question of prisoners of war....on the territory of Poland and other places liberated by the Red Army, there are no groups of American prisoners of war...."_ 
"My Dear Mr. Stalin: The Complete Correspondence of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph V. Stalin," by Susan Butler, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. p. 299



Stalin told the British the same thing about 20,000-30,000 British ex-prisoners. "The Iron Cage," by Nigel Cawthorne, p. 5



I notice I've forced you to stop lying about the numbers of American soldiers he abandoned to Stalin's gulags.
It's not 17.....is it.


His responsibility did not end with his death.
The policies continued.


In 1992 President Bush got Yeltsin to admit that FDR's pal Stalin kept thousands of Americans prison.

Admit it.


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...



Oh, so now you are changing your story. It was not FDR that abandoned those men in your conspiracy theory, he caused the problem, and it wasn't the Truman administration, Truman was still ruled by FDR from the grave. And Eisenhower as the head of the authority holding repatriation discussions was also ruled by FDR from the grave and was afraid to argue with the dead corpse of FDR about leaving behind his soldiers.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...





Stop lying.

Before his death:
*March 3, 1945, FDR cables Stalin to request 'urgently' for American teams to evacuate American prisoners of war 'liberated' by the Red Army*

Before his death:
*March 5, 1945, Stalin replied: Nyet.* 
_"...concerning the question of prisoners of war....on the territory of Poland and other places liberated by the Red Army, there are no groups of American prisoners of war...."_ 
"My Dear Mr. Stalin: The Complete Correspondence of Franklin D. Roosevelt and Joseph V. Stalin," by Susan Butler, Arthur M. Schlesinger, Jr. p. 299



Stalin told the British the same thing about 20,000-30,000 British ex-prisoners. "The Iron Cage," by Nigel Cawthorne, p. 5



I notice I've forced you to stop lying about the numbers of American soldiers he abandoned to Stalin's gulags.
It's not 17.....is it.


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> In 1992 President Bush got Yeltsin to admit that FDR's pal Stalin kept thousands of Americans prison.
> .


Prove it. Provide a news account of Yeltsin admitting in 1992 that Stalin kept thousands of Americans. That would have been front page news. 
I know exactly what Yeltsin was talking about and when he made the comment that you are lying about.


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> [
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Liar. I never said that. The 17 I mentioned were in the correspondence you referenced and referred to prisoners not registered to be released in Odessa because they were held in military hospitals in Poland.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > In 1992 President Bush got Yeltsin to admit that FDR's pal Stalin kept thousands of Americans prison.
> ...




If I prove it.....will you admit that you lie every day in an attempt to shield Roosevelt from well-deserved contumely?


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > [
> ...





".... The 17 I mentioned ...."

Case closed.


----------



## mamooth (Jul 12, 2016)

The source of all FDR-hatred comes from the way FDR squashed the Nazis.

Scratch an FDR-hater, find a Nazi-symp. There's no need to investigate further. Butthurt Nazis just aren't worth the effort.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

mamooth said:


> The source of all FDR-hatred comes from the way FDR squashed the Nazis.
> 
> Scratch an FDR-hater, find a Nazi-symp. There's no need to investigate further. Butthurt Nazis just aren't worth the effort.




Nazis and communists are doctrinal cousins.

They both aim for the very same things Franklin Roosevelt and you aim for.

You know that.....don't you?





 FDR-hatred comes from a love of America.

Bet you know that, too.


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

PoliticalChic said:


> Camp said:
> 
> 
> > PoliticalChic said:
> ...


You told a blatant lie claiming Yeltsin admitted Stalin kept thousands of Americans. Prove it or crawl back under your rock.


----------



## PoliticalChic (Jul 12, 2016)

Camp said:


> PoliticalChic said:
> 
> 
> > Camp said:
> ...




I never lie...and it seems you recognize it.

'Else you'd take me up on this deal:


If I prove it.....will you admit that you lie every day in an attempt to shield Roosevelt from well-deserved contumely?


You can run, but you can't hide.
So saith the Brown Bomber.


----------



## Camp (Jul 12, 2016)

You are a pathological liar. Your conspiracy theories are rooted in lies. Now you are trying to evade proving you did not lie. It is very specific. You said Yeltsin told Bush that Stalin kept thousands of Americans after WWII. Prove it. You can't because you know you told a big fat lie in desperation to make your conspiracy theory appear to have some credibility.


----------

